that was just dumb. I think CVT was the key word in this. Hondamatic no doubt is not included, and if you want to talk about the best transmission, just pick any geared manual. They are far superior to the Hondamatic for that part.

Yamaha or AC on the CVT once again, just like the majority of people here said.

 

CVT stands for Continuously Variable Transmission. The hondamatic is a Mechanical cvt, while the others in the industry are belt driven CVTs. So the Hondamatic IS most definately INCLUDED.

 

that was a nice smart remark, but I think everyone here knows exactly what he was asking with this question and where it was going, and it had nothing at all to do with anything other than belt drives. Sure you can't pick his brain for written truth on it, but its pretty obvious, regardless of how it was worded.

No, the hondamatic is not included. The key word in the original statement was Polaris and others following their lead, and its pretty obvious that this is about the evolution of the belt driven transmission.
Say what you want, slam me if you want, in the end you still know you are wrong.

 

The simple fact is that it is a cvt, belt drive or not. Some cars with cvts use a mechanical system; are you telling me they arent cvts but thier belt driven counterparts are? Since the hondamatic is hondas answer to the 400-500cc class transmission and the fact that these machines are considerations for buyers in that class there is not reason not to include the Hondamatic since its obviously an option for buyers just as the belt drives are from other manufacturers. Polaris was the first atv with cvt, and honda took it a different way. There is nothing in the primary post saying that honda should not be included as it addresses the "cvt design" and not belt drives specifically. Like I said its an option for buyers and its a cvt so it should be compared with the rest.

I didnt slam you but your rude reply would give me plenty of reason to now if I so desired. Since you've already professed your dislike of me for absolutely no reason then I really dont see how anything I say will have an impact on you other than to actually give you a reason to dislike me. So I'm content to keep the personal BS to myself.

 

CVT=Continuously Variable Transmission, meaning infinite gear ratios between a maximum and minimum ratio. I'd have to agree that the Hondamatic fits this definition.

Andy, you usually have good posts, but you seem to be getting a bit personal here with comments like, "That was just dumb." I obviously didn't believe that it just meant belt drives, and I'd bet that others aware of the Hondamatic consider it an automatic as well. I understand your point, but there is simply honest disagreement here or misunderstanding. It does not, however, warrant the tone of your posts.
I've been wrong before or have misunderstood posts before, so I can take it if I'm proven wrong. Just keep it rational.

 

thanx maddog, sorry for making a big disscusion tho .

 

Andy......you are correct about the intent of my question relative to CVT. I was meaning belt drive trannies and I was not interested in the Honda because it is an entirely different animal and is NOT infinately variable because it has gears.

I do, however, want to thank you all for your opinions and evaluations. I bought a Polaris this past summer because I liked the design, features and price of my Sportsman 400........but also because I had a previous 1988 Polaris that I absolutely drove the snot out of without a single problem. I've been out of ATVing for about 13 years and back then it seemed as if Polaris were the only ones using the CVT set-up. I found it interesting that now almost all the manufacturers are using some variation of the CVT on the higher-end utility machines and was curious how the Polaris design held up along the way.

It seems as if the answer is that others have improved upon it but the "original" ,if you will, is still basically sound, reliable and not antiquated??? Anyone care to comment on that???

Also.......aren't we talking here about variations on snowmobile trannies??? If so......are the Arctic Cat and Polaris trannies direct decendants of their snowmobile trannies???

Bob

 

Obviously you arent very familiar with the hondamatic. It is a true mechanical CVT and does NOT have gears. Do some research.

 

never said a honda wasn't a cvt, I said that the hondamatic wasn't included in what this guy was asking about. Though it wasn't worded that way, he was asking of a comparison of belt drives, and most everyone who replied had common sense enough to understand that. I was in no arguement on this or that of what or what does not make up a cvt. Read everything again if you want to waste the time and you will see.

What ticked me off was that you quoted me and then the INCLUDED part looked like a snotty way of putting it. Maybe I jumped the gun, but that happens here. All the time. I may have been out of place on the first post about that being dumb, but look at it, short and simple and it looks a lot like one of those Honda Rules! or Kawi Rules! or whatever posts that people throw in that adds nothing to the discussion.

Seeing that Backinthesaddleagain replied here and explained his intent (which he didn't even have to, but thankfully did), I guess the point was proven. As far as turning this around to where I said the hondamatic was not a CVT, no thats just wrong. I've never said that. That looked like you trying to turn it around on me to save grace for being wrong in the first place.

but who gives a flying crap anyway? is any of this making or losing money for any of us?

But worst of all is you slamming the guy on the last post. Do some research?? he's asking a question with no harm intended and because you misunderstood it and talked smack and were wrong, you try a parting shot on him. He did nothing to you. Man, almost 5000 posts on here. Hope they were better than that. I probably wouldn't have said this much until I looked at that last one again.

 

He stated that he meant belt drives, but he did not understand that the hondamatic is a true cvt. Therefore, any comparison of cvts he made would, in his mind, not include the honda anyway. I told him to research because he proceeded to state something completely untrue about a fundamental part of the hondamatic. He was wrong and needs to see a few posts or articles to explain to him how it works since he seems to have the wrong idea.

I can accept it when I misunderstand a post, but not when the reasons why I am wrong are incorrect as in this thread by stating that the honda was a completely different item and had no similarity or comparison to other cvts. By definition of cvt its automatically comparable to any other cvt. It is a true mechanical cvt with no gears, 2 ranges, ESP control, and is not nearly as vulnerable to water as belt drives are.

I feel I have made some excellent contributions on these forums, and I have had my share of lackluster posts as well. When I first joined up you were tops in post count with a couple thousand yourself. The forums have grown a great deal and you were MIA for quite a while, otherwise you'd be far in front of me. In any case, I'm confident that my good posts have far outweighed the others.