ecac SG Wrong. A manual Colt Version R has higher FC then the CVT version. CVT version can maintain 1900RPM at 100KM/H Manual abt 2500 at 100KM/H
Troy437 SG My Bro-in-law drives a manaul Lancer while I drive an auto. His is 8 months old and mine is 2 months old. His FC is 12 km per litre, mine is 10 km per litre. But for my car there is quite a bit of waiting time for ppl while engine is idling, and its air con on all e way when driving from 11 to 8 pm.
alleggerita SG You are the one who's wrong I think? Haha..they are talking about the Lancer here..so why are you talking about the Colt? LOL..
n0x SG NO you are the one having comprehension problem.... obviously he is attacking the quoted statement and not the topic
ditzy SG My ex colleague drove an auto lancer, about a year old, fc about 11-12, best rare occasions he got 13. Yes, with cvt.
imprezaWRXSTi22B SG i tot all manuals have higher rpm at 100km/h vs autos? so all autos have better fc?
skywalker73 SG That depends... lower RPM does not necessarily means lower FC... cuz auto or CVT cars inherently suffer from more transmission losses compared to manuals.
lancer_79 SG Wrong. A manual lancer has higher FC then the CVT version. CVT version can maintain 2200RPM at 100KM/H Manual abt 2800RPM at 100KM/H
snorezzz SG CVT engine suks man, no power one.. ppl who drive b4 the old lancer (98' model) will notice the diff from the new one
n0x SG pls dun blind lead the blind pls... cvt describes the type of transmission... not the engine... and cvt doesnt mean no power... pls go read up more b4 making any comments based on ur individual warp judgement
