Efficiency, yes. The second part is a little misguided though. The different gears in a transmission allow the vehicle to move at your desired speed while keeping the engineโs speed low, thus reducing fuel consumption.
Power to fuel consumption isnโt really a thing afaik. Naturally, a slower spinning engine will use less fuel.
Which is where CVTs excel. Maybe I'm old school, but if you have something too powerful for a CVT belt to handle, fuel efficiency is not your top priority. Maybe I sound like an old fart going "nobody needs FIVE gears when three is plenty!" but imo the only vehicles that have any business having 10 or more ratios are the ones that regularly pull a few dozen tons of cargo. We should have stopped at six. More than that and a CVT is what you need.
I have a 26 year old car with a 5 speed manual. I can't say I'm sure any of these new 10 speed auto cars will still be running in a quarter century with a quarter million miles on the clock.
i am very rationally afraid of cars. like why the fuck would 500 billion boxes on four wheels that weigh like two tons in average become our main method of transportation
There are few things in the world more satisfying than a real heavy duty tranny. I mean the kind that can take you from zero to blasting you back in your seat with more horsepower than you've ever experienced, and then do it again and again.