CVT vs Selespeed

To: "INTERNET:[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Subject: CVT vs Selespeed
From: Keith Walker <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2002 04:37:08 -0500
Content-disposition: inline
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Reply-to: Keith Walker <[email protected]>
Sender: [email protected]

>>  I think Alfa should
just ditch the Selespeed and put CVT in. It's lighter (over 80lbs lighter)
, more responsive, has LESS hydraulic plumbing (less things to go wrong)
and you can program "gear ratios" into the computer. <<

But the CVT can take less torque, is far more expensive, less efficient
and heavier

All the best

Keith

--
to be removed from alfa, see /bin/digest-subs.cgi
or email "unsubscribe alfa" to [email protected]

Follow-Ups:
- Re: CVT vs Selespeed
  - From: Scott Fisher <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: 3 vs 4
Next by Date: RE: dropping a cylinder
Previous by thread: 3 vs 4
Next by thread: Re: CVT vs Selespeed
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Home | Archive | Main Index | Thread Index