Jeep Patriot Forums banner
Cancel
Create thread New Garage Forums

5sp vs CVT and fuel mileage

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
E

Esetter

· Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
I have searched and looked at a lot of old threads on Patriot mileage and one thing that I find interesting is the apparent highway mileage "gain" with the 5sp tranny. The reason this so surprising is the gearing on the 5sp vs the CVTs. For the 2.4 engine At 70 mph, the manual in 5th gear is over 2500rpm while the CVTs (FD1) vehicles appear to be closer to 2200 rpm.

The EPA ratings, as well as the anecdotal evidence here is that the 5speeds are indeed noticeably more efficient at highway speeds on the Patriot. The EPA rating for a 4x4 Patriot, 2.4L, FD1, CVT is 25mpg. Same vehicle with 5 speed is 28mpg.

I suspect that despite the higher engine speed, the engine is as efficient at ~2,700rpm as it is at ~2,200rpm and/or the CVT has a lot of "losses".

These "thoughts" came about as I just bought an 09 Patriot (Rocky Mountain) 4x4 with a 5spd on Saturday. I bought it in SLC and drove it home to Denver and filled up twice. I got 35mpg on the first fill up and 33mpg on the second (hand calcs). I was taking it easy for sure, but I spent the majority of the time between 65-72mph. I just have never heard of any 4x4 Patriots with CVTs getting anywhere near this mileage.

Anybody know why the theoretically highly efficient CVTs appear to get lower mileage on this particular vehicle?
 
#2 ·
Although I should reset the computer to remark to this, I can state that my *revs-to-speed* association for my FDII tranny and the 2.4L mill is 2900 rpm in drive at 110 kmh. Using the EVIC display which is a guesstimate at best hovers at the 10.5 L/100km marker. Typical mileage is 60 kms per day with a 50/50 mix highway/city driving.
 
Discussion starter · #5 ·
I wondered about the converter lockup myself.
The weight difference is less than 100lbs so that can't explain 3mpg on the highway.

It's funny because in the Patriot brochure it talks a lot about the higher efficiency of a CVT. While thats true in theory, is all you have to do is look at the mileage ratings to see this particular CVT is actually quite a bit less effecient than the 5 speed. Gotta love marketing!

Also when you look at most other modern vehicles the difference between the mileage ratings of the manual vs conventional automatics is quite small or non-existent.

I guess I am surprised by the lack of popularity in 5 speed Patriots given what I feel is a pretty significant difference in mileage. I am also surprised why the CVT isn't closer to the 5 speed in the Patriot.
 
#8 ·
I guess I am surprised by the lack of popularity in 5 speed Patriots given what I feel is a pretty significant difference in mileage. I am also surprised why the CVT isn't closer to the 5 speed in the Patriot.

Think the poor shift quality of the 5sp has something to do with it's unpopularity. I've got a stick and one of my kids has a CVT. Wish I'd gone CVT.

I've been driving sticks since age 14 (my brother's Austin Healy), and the Pat is clearly the worst I've ever shifted, including VW's, Simcas and an old Benz 4on the tree. Mine is like an old milk truck - need a Google search to find 5th.

Hope yours is better, but wait until the 1st cold morning in Denver and I'll bet you wish you'd have gone CVT (or Honda).
 
#9 ·
Volare said:
The only reason the 5 speed isn't popular is because Jeep didn't build them in any numbers in other than the base model. Try finding a 4x4 5 speed Sport-E anywhere in the US right now...
Click to expand...
Found one! It's in my driveway! 25E sport package... :smiley_thumbs_up:
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#10 ·
Harbor said:
I've been driving sticks since age 14 (my brother's Austin Healy), and the Pat is clearly the worst I've ever shifted, including VW's, Simcas and an old Benz 4on the tree. Mine is like an old milk truck - need a Google search to find 5th.
Click to expand...
The only two autos I have owned that were/are automatics was my very first car my 1966 Mustang and my 2007 Patriot.

I have no issues with my CVT whatsoever. Took a little getting used to but my clutch foot is basking in its new found semi-retirement. I say semi-retirement, because once in a while I do enjoy driving someone else's standard transmission.
 
#11 ·
Simply, the 5-speed transmission is mechanically more efficient than the CVT. Generally, manual transmissions use about 10-15% of the engine's power while automatics in the 25-30% range. Measuring the power at the wheels on a chassis dyno has proven this for all manufacturers. The MK transmission choices seem to have a wider spread than other vehicles, so maybe closer to 10% for our manual and closer to 30% for the CVT. Less available power at the wheels, means more fuel needed to maintain any given speed. So despite the 3000rpm @ 70mph for 5-spd, it still gets better FE than the CVT @ 2100.
 
#12 ·
I suspect the reason may be that on hills the CVT will increase its RPMs, where the manual would not unless you downshift. Frequently at lower speeds or on a winding/hilly road I will bump my CVT up a notch to lower the engine speed, but not so much as to lug it. She'll perk along fine at 1700. Over 50MPH that doesn't work because there is no higher 'gear', so if you're driving turnpike speeds, a CVT is going to rev on the hills where a 5-spd will stay where it is. This is when a 4cyl really misses the torque.
 
Discussion starter · #13 ·
Harbor said:
Think the poor shift quality of the 5sp has something to do with it's unpopularity. I've got a stick and one of my kids has a CVT. Wish I'd gone CVT.
Click to expand...
Sorry to hear that. I drove two Patriots with 5speeds and they both shifted fine, a little tight, but that seems kinda normal with brand new vehicles. I've also owned and driven a whole lot of manual transimission vehicles over the years and I found the Patriots I drove to be far from the worst, certainly not the best, but far from the worst.
 
#14 ·
My KJ CRD got about 26 MPG when it was bone stock. When I added some very heavy 32" MT/Rs, lift, armor and about 400#s of bumpers the MPG dropped to 18 MPG.

When I changed the gears from the stock 3.73 to 4.10, the MPG went to 21 MPG even though the engine revs higher.
 
#16 ·
The lack of manuals is because US citizens are too lazy. Of vehicles sold in the US that offer a choice of manual vs. auto, the manuals represent only about 10%. Even of sports cars, manuals are rarely the majority of the vehicle model.

Harbor, this manual is as good as any other FWD manual vehicle, which is to say, not great, but just fine.

Ignatz, your theory about hills is not useful. The EPA test has no hills and the CVT should be closer to the manual in the city because the engine speed is always optimized ;) due to the infinite gearing within the range.

It's all about transmission mechanical efficiency, or mechanical losses.
 
#17 ·
APT said:
The lack of manuals is because US citizens are too lazy. Of vehicles sold in the US that offer a choice of manual vs. auto, the manuals represent only about 10%. Even of sports cars, manuals are rarely the majority of the vehicle model.
Click to expand...
This is getting off topic but although what you say is probably partially true, and I am not sure if this applies for all vehicles/manufacturers, but I am fairly certain it costs the manufacturer more to produce a manual transmission vehicle. Yet, they sell it for less so they can have the cheap "base" model price for marketing purposes... There is much more incentive for the manufacture to produce much more volume of the automatic version which they can then mark up an extra $1000 or so even though thier actual costs are even less than the manual. When I bought my car (yesterday :pepper:), there were no manuals even on the lot.
 
#18 ·
I have a CVT in my Ford Freestyle also. Ford told me at the time that the CVT was worth 10-15% better mileage vs a conventional 4 - 6 speed automatic transmission. The CVT uses a "belt and pulley" system that is ancient and reliable, commonly used in the conveyor and manufacturing equipment drive industry. However, all automatic and CVT transmissions have "slippage" and create "heat" (which is unused energy) and therefore will get worst mileage than a manual transmission in most cases when driven properly. And it looks like that 15% mpg loss figure is about right for the Patriot (2 - 3 mpg less with the CVT).
 
#20 ·
With my stock wheels i average about 26 city and 29-30 highway usually. With the 20's on it drops to about 22/26 respectively. During one tank while driving down to mississippi, I actually pulled in 32.8 mpg, but that was cruising in 5th gear for an entire tank of gas without stopping at all. Meanwhile, still had the Escort at that point and on the same stretch that one pulled down 39mpg. If i could do all my driving at once and never hit any lights or slow down just imagine how much gas i could save:)
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
About this Discussion
31 Replies
23 Participants
Last post:
Coppertrailer
Jeep Patriot Forums
posts
678K
members
55K
Since
2006
Join our community to discuss the Jeep Patriot & Jeep Compass. Find answers to all your Jeep Patriot technical questions.
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Jeep Patriot General Discussion Engine and Drivetrain Newbie Check-In Suspension and Tires Electrical and Audio