holy crap @ 5:17 in 1989 this vehicle at 7251 dollars adjusted for inflation in 2022 would be worth just shy of 20 grand today!

@@battosaijenkins946 That's about what a well equipped 2022 Mitsubishi Mirage would go for. It's in about the same league as the Justy.

@@battosaijenkins946 for $20k you can buy used Cadillac that was always factory serviced and basically in like-new condition -- and you don't have the shame of being a peasant driving a crappy econobox.

​@@battosaijenkins946 for $20,000 you can buy a brand new Toyota Corolla

Owned 5 cars with CVTs and it never gets better. Hoping the next has a basic auto transmission.

@@barron204 owned 4 cars dating back to a 1996. All autos. Keep CVT tech to motor sports like my snowmobile!

Nissan’s given CVTs a bad name. Had them in an Audi and a Dodge and they were both fine, family member had a Nissan though and the CVT went after 59k

@@Poopsticle_256 if that Dodge was a Caliber, you had a Jatco CVT just like any Nissan.

@@themanthemyththebanger Huh, never knew that, still didn’t have any problems until 130k, odd.

Yep. That 1.2 fuel injected 3 cylinder Mitsubishi uses on the Mirage makes 78 HP and performance isn't that much better than this old Justy.

I was in my early 20's when this came out and in college in Colorado. Subaru tested these extensively in the Front Range and gave several to us kids for testing and data collection. It was remarkable how smooth these were, but were complete garbage for longevity. We managed to burn up the ecvt's in several of our test mules. Subaru never told us if they fixed the overheating issues, but fast-forward 30 years and Subaru's cvt's are still overheating pieces of garbage. lol

Doesn't shock me, most modern CVTs are crap.

The Honda Fit from all generations behaves like this too, holding the revs to deliver efficient drive. The US missed out on the CVT In many cars

@@christopherjohnston6343 Missed out? They aren't reliable which is the first priority above anything.

@@haroldbeauchamp3770 only a few years after this, automatics were actually getting pretty good, and by the late 90s, and certainly by the early 2000s, automatics could outperform humans and get you better performance and better gas mileage. CVT just isn't needed anymore when you got 10-speed automatics in Camaros.

//" If only they knew the horrors of reliability on those things when they made this."// It's not a problem inherent to the CVT design. Some made them good, others less so.

If by "CVTs" you mean Nissans, then yes I would agree

For it's time, yes. But these days, CVTs are an eyesore for enthusiasts for their lack of performance and poor reliability. I once owned a 2014 Mitsubishi Lancer ES with a CVT. It was pretty reliable for a time, but after almost 150k miles as the first owner, the transmission was starting to croak, and I didn't want to spend almost $9k to rebuild or replace it when I was almost done with the loan, so I traded for a 2016 Kia Forte Koup SX turbo with an ordinary auto. Maybe that CVT was ok, but I still have reservations for buying one today...

​@@LoyalmoonieProductions plenty of reliable CVTs as well

Yet, they seem to have as many or more problems with CVT's than other manufacturers like Honda that started using them much later.

Their CVTs are made by JATCO, the same company that makes Nissan's horrible transmissions. Lots of bad reviews on Subaru CVTs, too, yet they seem to not be as much in the public eye.

​@@sc3034 Fake news. Jatco has never made a CVT for Subaru. Jatco made some traditional automatics for them at some point but that's it

CVT was available twenty years before that, in the European DAF Variomatic; although back then the belts were rubber, and the cones pulled rather than pushed them - even simpler, but far less efficient.

Harley Davidson also had CVT's in the '60s

Economy cars are where CVTs belong, and where they should stay.

​@@tedschmitt178That's where you're wrong

Why do you like them

​@@tientrinh943why not?

Yes.

Yep.

Yup its supposed to be smooth, that's what they are for and work very well for that purpose. The reason for the fake gear shift is to make the transmission respond quicker to throttle changes but then it behaves like a traditional automatic transmission, which people are used to....

That is how Nissan CVTs were before, but people complained about the droning sound, or thought it was slipping. So they added fake shifts for that "sporty" feeling. The trend was actually started by Toyota and Honda. Nissan tried to fight the good fight but caved in cause people are stupid.

@@yessitsme6884 my Caliber has said Nissan CVT , I don't mind it at all

People complain about the 8 speed and 10 speed automatics now too

Original Nissan CVTs were like this before people complained and they changed it.

I bet the Subaru can't go as fast in reverse as going forward like the Dafs could

Was she cute

@Scott Munczenski people truly want big American rear-wheel drive V8 sedans and coupés (not SUVs or "crossovers" or pickup trucks full of ridiculous netflix star trek tech which they buy only because of online influencers), in addition to some additional simple-to-operate body-on-frame rear wheel drive V8 body styles That said, another type of vehicle people want to buy - typically as a secondary vehicle - are uncomplicated, proficient and relatively compact vehicles that require very little maintenance or money to be spent on them during or after purchase.

@Scott Munczenski the Volvo 740 is a smaller 4 cylinder sedan that i have personal experience with and very much liked, and for the record i do not care for SUVs much either, nor crossovers or modern pickup trucks.

definitely droney hahah. Their newer ones don't drone much at all unless you drive with a very light throttle.

Droney. And at 3k rpm? Yikes! 4k sounds like torture.

It's really not 'quick' for 1989. For 1982, yes, but by the late 80s, this was on the slower end of cars, and by the early 90s, this would be a very slow car.

Well, the Camry is a hybrid....a technology that wasn't on any car buyer's horizons in the 80s. Which is why I consider the original Prius a future classic because it was a game changer for the entire industry.

That's how Nissan's CVTs acted until people who couldn't wrap their heads around how a CVT works all complained about "droning" acceleration sound. Among those people were a lot of the automotive press. My 2010 and 2014 Nissan cubes have none of that fake shift nonsense, and the driving experience is better for it. Very smooth and, for something shaped like a brick, fuel-efficient.

My 2017 lancer has fake shift but it only works in manual mode (they knew it would be kind of a gimick but fun to use so they threw in paddle shifters). In its normal mode (when transmission is in Drive) it drives like a CVT should, very smooth.

I disagree. I much prefer my 14 Accord over our old 2009 Civic Hybrid regarding the transmission shift points

My grandfather's 2008 civic with the manual transmission got 43mpg going 80 mph to his mother's house

@@michaelvaus Honda Civic's have always been known for very good fuel economy, though the first generation was the most amazing, getting around 50s even without a catalytic converter.

Sadly, it wouldn't. Everyone wants a gigantic vehicle with lots of gadgets. Small doesn't sell well in the US and thats why we see so few choices available.

@@arevee9429 I have to agree. So much for the college 🙄 crowd. It would have been a neat run about though.

I prefer small simple cars. We have only Sparks (almost gone) and Mirages, now (Nissan, please don’t Nissan Them Up!). VW, Honda, Toyota, Subaru.. need true entry level cars, again.

@@djkenny1202 I agree. I still like the last the Toyota Yaris (Toyota and Mazda based versions).

@@dohc1067 ia was Great! I almost bought a 17 manual one end of year for $13,500. Instead I bought a 15 XB manual (needed more space for kids in back seat) with only 31k miles for even less $. But yeah, they were pretty great fun simple enough cars for under 17k.

35 years ago it was all mechanical mostly. There may have been a few electronic components but they probably really didn’t do a whole lot

Believe it or not, I still consider the Justy's ECVT as the best CVT I ever tested.

Rust was a major issue with older Subies

They were on sale from 88 to 94, not many are still around though.

Adjusted for inflation the Subaru Impreza is almost exactly the same price as the Justy was.

The muffler was also stainless steel. Lasted me 10 years, just about when I got a recall to replace it. What a great car!

Found myself wondering this and now want to search out an answer. The programmed-in "creep" you speak of is why I often put my CVT Nissan in neutral at long lights and drive-thru lines.

You can't have an (older) motorweek without mentioning the gauges cluster.

I have no problem with the CVT in my Crosstrek Sport

@@MyerShift7 if you put on that many miles in 7 years, my hat's off to you. My Nissan turns 13 at the end of this year and probably won't be to 180k by then. Like you, though, I've been a stickler for maintenance. Fluid changes every 30k. I figure a lot of CVTs die early deaths due to neglectful owners, just like the transmissions in a lot of the three- and four-speed torque converter Fords and Chryslers of my youth.

I bet it has something to do with how the EPA tested them at that particular moment in history. A little earlier in that decade there were some pretty unrealistic ratings. Consumers complained alot.

Subaru's never know to be fuel efficient vehicles.

That's true to some extent, but my point is This Subaru has a little 3 cylinder motor and it's only getting 35 highway? Well's the 1989 geo metro gets 50+ plus highway mpg and it's also a 3 cylinder too, That's what's making my head scratch 🤔

@@Mystery07988 so I checked and you're right. Metro EPA rating was 43/52. Quite a difference.

I was surprised too. My justy gets mid 40s on the highway

I find the 3-cylinder Fords to be no less smooth than many 4-cylinder engines and I think they sound cool - kind of like a mini inline-six. :)