Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Nissan Sentra Real World MPG

2

Comments

  • Not at all. I am using US gallons (3.785 liters per gallon)
  • jk289jk289 Posts: 2
    I just got my car this tuesday and I have been getting pretty disappointing results. When I first got it and checked the mpg it said 17.... ever since then i have been super sensitive with the gas pedal and brakes but the number has only risen up to 20.5. It also says that my average speed is 20 something.... which does not seem accurate at all. i use moderate a/c but that should not bring down the numbers that drastically, if that were the source of the low numbers. is something wrong with my car?
  • sentra08sentra08 Posts: 17
    my car is currently at almost 4000 miles. lately, my driving has been about 50-50 city-highway. i have been averaging 32.4 mpg. i am super pleased with that. when i get on the highway, it always jumps up quite a bit, generally to around 34-35 mpg. better than advertised. so im not sure why others have been getting disappointing results. i suppose one key thing is to make sure that your tires are properly inflated and you stay up on your maintenance schedule. other than that, not entirely sure. im pleased so far.
  • My last week's average is 35.2 MPG (US gallons), 50% city and 50% highway, 80 mile daily commute with average speeds around 35 MPH. I have a 2007 Sentra 2.0. S with CVT, currently with 28k miles.
  • anycallanycall Posts: 10
    I have 08 Sentra SL. Best MPG I've seen on freeway was just over 35. On one trip I averaged between 75-80mph that was 150 miles long and my second trip I went mostly 65mph set on cruise control and got silmilar reading. On the other hand, the MPG on city isn't so good. I average 24mpg in the cith driving without gunnning at the stop lights or hard breaking.
  • tranmitranmi Posts: 12
    I just bought my 08 Sentra two weeks ago. After 600 miles on the clock, my average is ~ 28-30 MPG (70% highway and 30% city) with full A/C on.
  • longo2longo2 Posts: 347
    It's hard to keep the RPM's down in city driving with this powertrain. The CVT's wind up way too fast for the normal stop and go conditions in City driving.
    With my Scangauge checking the MPG's twice every second, it's surprising to note that mileage sucks even at slow speeds around town.

    Car experts say it only takes about 40 horse power to move a car down the road once you get up to cruising speed..then the mpg's finally go up, but around town the car is always pulling it's full weight under engine load.

    The CVT tries to keep the engine rev'ed even while your foot comes off the gas, slip it into neutral and you will see what I mean.

    However, just about all forums have sites like this where some owners are hopping mad about the new cars' MPG's and others keep taunting them with huge MPG numbers from the same car.

    Test the car on the highway under ideal condions, (a tail wind is always nice, a head wind will kill you) get that mpg number, and don't even bother with the city mpg's, everybodys suck.

    The "X-Prize" race, contest winner for the best 100 mpg car will make all our 2008's the new gas guzzlers no matter what.

    2007 is absolutely the worst time to be buying any new car, no matter what the sticker on the window says the mpg's are . :cry:
  • rennie4rennie4 Posts: 52
    Did u reset the trip computer? If there are alot of miles on the car before u got it. it can be hard to raise the mpg
  • rennie4rennie4 Posts: 52
    during take off the cvt really does over rev for the firs 10mph but after that if you have a light foot it should fall really low. the first thing i do when i take off is push really easy to keep the rpm from going above 2k. Then i push slightly harder when i feel the rpm about to drop usually around 10 mph with a light foot. Then i continue to accelerate a rpm usually around 1500 rpm. I can accelerate my cvt equipped car from 10-35 mph at just 1200 rpm the whole time. Thats where the cvt saves gas. Most people drive cvt too hard making the cvt stay in sport mode instead of economy mode!
  • Trying not to exceed 2000 rpm is easy, most of the time.

    I drive 50% city and 50% highway and 34-37 MPG is my typical weekly average.
  • On the Hondas, it's possible to turn off the automatic A/C in the Defrost position. Is this possible on the Sentra?
    BTW - We have '08 Civic and '08 Sentra. Love 'em both. Sentra - 34mpg, 50/50 city/highway. Civic - 28 city,32 highway avg. Got 38 in the hills of PA: 85 mph downhill, as low as 55 going up.
    TIA
    Alan
  • This car is designed for highway driving. I do about 70-30 city/highway and I average about 20mpg. The couple of trips I took that were all highway I averaged 40mpg. That is day and night and it needs to be fixed and they need to disclose that to potential buyers. I am glad I have a two year lease instead of longer or having actually bought it. I got it back in Jan 08 and have 4500 miles on it.
  • Go easy on the starts from a dead stop. Try not to get RPM above 2000. It takes some practice. As noted earlier in this forum, once you get to 15-20mph you can give it a little more gas and accelerate faster.
    I'm looking forward to a whole tank of driving on the highway and 40 mpg. I drive 50/50 city/highway (rush hour) and get 34 mpg. My wife gets 28. Heavier foot? Go figure...
  • crh3crh3 Posts: 5
    Cars in AZ usually gets higher mpg than CA. One reason is the altitude(so the air is thinner), and the other is probably the gasoline.

    Speed also matters, 55-65 gives much better mpg than 75-80mph.
  • crh3crh3 Posts: 5
    Just finished a road trip on my new 2009 Sentra. Now the car has 1600 miles on it.

    The trip on I5 in CA central valley gives me 30-31mpg highway, which is disappointing, but still understandable. I was driving at 75-80mph most of the time, with AC on. The outside temp is 95-105F.

    For part of the trip when I can drive at 65-70mph w/o AC on, I can get about 35-7 mpg from the trip computer. Not sure if it can be improved after first oil change.
  • crh3crh3 Posts: 5
    btw, the aerodynamics of the Sentra and Altima are really not that great. The 0.35 drag coefficient is almost the highest among all the current generation cars. It's also almost the tallest among all the cars.
  • Hi everyone. The following is a letter I sent to Nissan Canada in regard to the terrible mileage I'm getting from my 2009 Sentra. Read on and respond if you like.

    MPG(Imperial Gallon) comparison chart Nissan Sentra – years 2007-2009 with 2.0L engine with CVT

    Edmunds.com consumer reviews (Knowing the mpg mentioned was US gallon I did the math and converted into Imperial Gallons for this comparison. 1 Imperial gallon = 1.2 US gallons. All mpg mentioned below will be mpg based on the Imperial gallon). There are hundreds of consumer reviews in regards to the Sentra with the 2.0L engine and with CVT. This is a compilation and average of both good reviews and bad reviews in regards to mpg only.

    Good consumer reviews

    Consumers were averaging 54.12 kms per imperial gallon city driving and 69.48 kms per gallon highway. The math on that is 33.63 mpg(Imperial gallon) city and 43.17 mpg(Imperial gallon) highway.
    These Sentra’s have a 55l tank. The math on the good mileage using a 50/50 average of city/highway would give the car a 13.6km per liter fuel consumption or 38.4mpg which equates to 748kms per tank.

    Bad Consumer Reviews

    Consumers were averaging 40.5 kms per Imperial Gallon city driving and 48.3 kms per gallon highway. The math on that is 25.2 mpg(Imperial gallon) city and 30.01 mpg(Imperial gallon) highway.
    These Sentra’s have a 55l tank. The math on the bad mileage using a 50/50 average of city/highway would give the car a 9.78km per liter fuel consumption or 27.65mpg which equates to 537.9kms per tank.

    Good vs bad

    As I pointed out above, the good mileage vehicles average 748kms per tank, the bad mileage vehicles average 537.9kms per tank. That’s a difference of 210.1kms per tank or 3.82kms per liter, every liter on average. That’s a 28.1% fuel efficiency difference.

    From reading the reviews I’m getting a sense that approx 15 to 20% of the Sentra’s out there are having bad mileage issues. Sure you can factor in driving habits for mileage performance, however 80% are experiencing good mileage and I’m sure there are lead foot drivers and real road conditions for them as well.

    My 2009 Sentra 2.0 with CVT Mileage

    My wife and I both drive this car. Our driving consists of approx 50% highway and 50% city . We are very pleased with this car except for the gas mileage. My sister owns a 2008 Sentra and we also own a 1999 Sentra which we love and get decent mileage from. Our mileage we are getting from the 2009 sentra is as follows: 40.16kms per imperial gallon = 25.23 mpg. That averages to 8.85kms/L or 486.75kms per tank. Nissan Canada website estimates 43.5mpg average(15.04kms/L or 847kms per tank/50/50city/hwy)

    As I mentioned my sister own a 2008 Sentra 2.0s with CVT. She averages 650kms to the tank in her real world driving. She also drives approx 50% city and 50% highway. The math on her fuel performance is 11.82 kms average per litre of fuel. That equates to 53.66kms per Imperial gallon or 33.34 miles per Imperial gallon.
    Her mileage and what I read from consumer reviews on the 2.0L engine Sentra’s are almost identical.
    The same holds true for what I’m getting on my 2009 Sentra 2.0L engine with CVT. The bad consumer reviews are averaging 25.2mpg and I’m averaging 25.23mpg on mine.
    A side note, our 1999 Sentra gives us 48.1kms/gallon or 29.9 miles per Imperial Gallon. It is 10 years old and has 150,000 kms on it. We do the exact same driving using the 2 cars.

    A Trend Immersing

    As you can see there is an alarming trend that has surfaced. It seems that approx 15 to 20% of your 2007-2009 sentra’s burn 28.1% more fuel on average than the other 80% of all Sentra’s. This is not an isolated phenomenon. I based this on hundreds of consumer reviews and my real world experience with my own car.

    Doing the Right Thing

    As a Nissan Canada customer and especially a repeat customer, I urge you to look into this problem. There are just too many instances of identical bad mileage problems to simply dismiss this as an isolated incident. I love the car, I just am not pleased with the mileage. There must be a setting or computer glitch in these poor mileage cars that would explain the mileage problem. There should certainly be a fix on the part of Nissan Canada and Nissan in general in the form of a recall or some other means by Nissan to rectify this alarming trend that affects up to 20% of all 2007-2009 Sentra’s out there.

    Asking the Question

    As a loyal customer I ask this question. What is Nissan Canada going to do for me as a customer that will place my mileage consumption for my 2009 Sentra in line with the other 80% of Sentra’s out there that are getting reasonable mileage from the exact same make model and trim Sentra I have? Remember, my concern is the same as what thousands of people are experiencing out in the real world every day.

    Thank you for your time and understanding. I wait urgently for your response on this disturbing issue.
  • longo2longo2 Posts: 347
    Disturbing mpg figures, but the problem is not with your Sentra but with Nissans inflated mpg numbers. I bought a new 2007 Nissan Versa 1.8 with CVT and it's a gas hog too. You simply cannot believe the original mpg numbers from the company. Nor can you believe the inflated mpg numbers that some Fanboy owners are claiming to get.

    The incredible mpgs in Nissans propaganda rate it up to 47 mpg (Imp) on the highway...what a crock of crapola. My Versa driven like an old Granny might get 34 mpg tops on the highway....that's about 27 mpg U.S. Our old 1997 Buick Park Ave on a bad day will do better than that!

    I bought the Versa hoping to get great mpg numbers too, and hoped to meet or beat the window sticker numbers or worse case, 10% less than the window sticker, but not 25% less! If we have a few stop and gos' on the tank or have head winds on the highway...we are getting about 23 mpg (U.S.)

    So after 3 years of being angry and stewing about it, bought a VW Jetta TDI and I'm now getting a nice steady 50+ mpg on the freeway, when I have to back off and drive 60 mph I can pop a 60 mpg number pretty easy.

    What Nissan Ca. will likely do is remind you of the 'fine print' on their fuel consumption numbers..."your mileage might vary"
  • Well, my 2007 Sentra now has 67k miles and my mileage is 34.1 (US) and 41 (Imp).
    My commute is 44 miles each way. It is winter here in Vancouver and temperatures are around 35 at night and 40 to 45 in the day.

    My driving is 50% highway and 50% city. I always drive a few clicks over the limit (about 65 MPH). I don't baby the car at all. Although it is not really cold like in the east or north of the country I plug in the car for about an hour every morning (on a timer) and use only 0W-30 full synthetic oil.

    In summer mileage is around 36 (US gallons) and 43 (imp gallons). I don't know why anybody is calculating with imperial gallons as they have not sold gasoline per gallon in decades. It is sold by the liter.

    I have driven 3 different Versas over the last 3 years (loaners when my car gets serviced and during one collision repair (deer)). Mileage was always between 35 and 37 MPG.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,722
    Just leased a 2.0 S. I was impressed with how low the revs were during the test drive, and I had no problem keeping them low since I typically drive with a light foot on the gas. I figured with revs like 1800 RPMs at 60 mph, fuel economy should be very good. So I got the car (got a great deal on the lease). On the way home, on suburban streets and freeways, I averaged 38.5 mpg if the computer can be believed. I noticed when the computer was in real-time mode, I was getting 40s-50s mpg when cruising around 40 mph on level ground, and RPMs were super low, around 1200. So I think it's very possible to get high FE in this car. I'll report again when I have driven it a bit.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,722
    Just filled up the tank on my 2.0S for the first time. Got 32.4 mpg on the tank, by computer. I don't know how full the dealer filled it, so I can't go by the pump this time. I was happy with the mpg, since it was all in-town, a mix of city and suburban driving and urban freeway driving. I used a light foot most of the time. The car is so quiet at cruise!

    When I switch to instantaneous mode, I can see the sweet spot for the car is around 55 mph; there the car does close to 50 mpg on level ground.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,722
    edited May 2010
    Got 32.6 mpg on the second tank per the computer, very close to the first tank, still all in-city driving with mix of freeway and city streets. Manual calculation was 31.0 mpg, but I filled at a different station than the last fillup. If I can average 32-33 mpg consistently for in-town driving I'll be very happy with that. For comparison, I averaged about 30 mpg in-town on a 1997 Sentra 5-speed with a 1.6L, 115 hp engine. So I'm doing better with an automatic car that's more powerful and a lot bigger and heavier.
  • dfmikedfmike Posts: 1
    I bought a 2008 Sentra SE-R SpecV new to replace a '95 Taurus I used to drive (which got around 22mpg combined, maybe 23 if I was careful). It is rated at 21/29. On long trips I have averaged around 30-31, but my weekly average at home is more like 28 (my commute is probably 2/3 highway speed, 70ish for me). I do write down my mileage and gallons at fuel stops, and over the 33,000 miles I've put on the car so far, I've averaged exactly 28mpg. The car's calculator is usually 1mpg optimistic, either that or the pump is slightly overestimating how many gallons it is giving me...

    My first set of tires (Conti Sport 2's) only lasted 27,000 miles thanks to some enthusiastic driving. Not that I mind much, since the fuel savings just about covered it... Basically I'm having a lot more fun in a car the same size and weight, but handles far better, has 60 more hp, and still gets 25% better mpg.
  • kph2757kph2757 Posts: 1
    Don't know if anyone has experienced this but I have a 2008 Sentra and get better city mileage than I do hwy. If I avg 35-50 mph hitting lights, stop signs, etc I get around 35mpg. On the hwy if I stay right at 70 mph I get between 32-33 mpg. If I go faster than 70 my mpg go down drastically. Please reply if you have this problem.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,722
    I have noticed on my 2010 w/CVT the suburban mpg e.g. around 40-45 mph with few stops is VERY good, mid-to-upper 30s. The longest highway trip I've taken was 100 miles, 50 each way, and that was at speeds only up to 65 mph, and I got about 37 mpg on that. I could see the mpg going down above 70 mph, as that would be consistent with every other car I've owned. The sweet spot for most cars I've driven seems to be around 50-60 mph. So I don't consider the mpg going down above 70 a "problem". Fortunately for me, there is no road within 1000 miles of me where above 70 is legal. :)
  • agilberagilber Posts: 4
    I'm getting about the same in my 2008. You'd think that the CVT would adjust a little better on the highway - not run at 1800 rpm on flat roads.
  • virus002virus002 Posts: 4
    Its not the cars problem. It's your driving that is affecting the MPG past 70, Vehichles are at their optimum fuel efficiency in the 55-60mph range.

    For example if I wanted to push my 05 Nissan to the extreme in MPG numbers (40mpg Hwy 38mpg city) i'd use hypermiling techniques. Sure I'd anger every other driver out there with slow starts from stoplights and slow merging on the highway but I'd save enough on gas to make it through 4$ a gallon.

    Currently I'm sitting at about 30mpg combined without doing hypermiling.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,722
    Just filled up the 2010 2.0S CVT, and on my last tank-and-a-half (I put in 6.6 gallons earlier, couldn't pass up a great price) I averaged 35.0 mpg by computer, and 33 mpg by calculation (but I filled at two different stations this time). This is significantly better than any other tank to date, even though I used the AC about half the time and didn't use it hardly at all on the first two tankfuls. I did do more miles on urban freeways this time--probably 80-85% this time around. All the freeways in my town have a maximum speed of 65 mph, although yesterday I went for a 50-mile trip and got up to 70 for awhile because I was outside of town.

    About half-way through this run, I was at about 37 mpg. Then use of AC, more city streets, and more stop-and-go (construction etc.) took their toll. I'm happy though with 35 mpg, given the EPA for highway driving is 34 and I was driving mostly in town.

    The car is very sensitive mpg-wise to pedal pressure. Keep a light touch on the pedal, and you can get very good fuel economy. But use all 140 horses, and the mpg meter will sag pretty fast. That is what I saw the few times I decided to see what kind of pep the car has.
  • agilberagilber Posts: 4
    I'd like to correct my last post. My 2008 runs at 2200 rpm at 70 mph on flat roads. On hills I can understand 2200 rpm but I don't even hit 2200 rpm starting from a dead stop. That's why I get better mileage in city (not much stop and go) driving.
    Driving like there's an egg on the gas pedal helps alot!
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,722
    That's interesting. My 2.0 CVT runs at about 2000 rpm at 70 mph, on flat roads. I wonder what could account for the difference, i.e. was there some change made between 2008 and 2010?
2
Sign In or Register to comment.