Nissan Versa

lola10503

Does anybody have any information on the height of the driver's seat? I'm very interested in this car, but I've only ever drove in one other Nissan and the seat was very low. I'm just wondering if this is specific to Nissan or if it was just that car. I know Toyota's generally have a high driving position, and I like to sit up high.

Thanks.

sniffles

Here's some info about the Versa's inside Key Dimensions and Specifications but they don't really give any driver's seat height. I hope this helps you some.

http://autoblog.com/2006/01/16/detroit-auto-show-wrapup-nissan-versa-introductio- n-photos-and-f/

I think it's great that the Versa comes standard with tire pressure monitoring and a big 13.2 gallon fuel tank (not a wimpy 10.8 gallon on the Fit and a 11.1 gallon on the Yaris).

Sniffles

backy

Thanks for the specs. I am hoping the Versa has a height-adjustable driver's seat. I found out that the Fit does not, which eliminates that car for me even though I like the car otherwise.

I was quite impressed by what I saw of the Versa at the Chicago Auto Show. I was particularly impressed by the dash, in black. It looked like a much more expensive car. The rear seat looked very roomy, and there was still decent storage space behind the rear seat. With a standard 6-speed tranny and available CVT, it looks like a nice package for the money. The only thing I don't like about it is the sharp point on the top rear of the rear doors--it doesn't match the flowing lines of the rest of the car IMO. There's also the reliability question. But it's on my list and I will look forward to driving it this summer.

carzzz

just want to know where you get the spec of the fuel tank?

sniffles

Go to the Nissan USA site listed below and at the top click on "Next Steps" and than on the drop down menu select "Design your Versa" as you design your Versa look over on the left side of the web page and you'll click on "View all standard features" and you'll see the fuel tank listed. Have fun! It seems to have a lot of standard features at a reasonable price.

http://www.nissanusa.com/content/0,,action-NVersa_topicId-1_pageId-123147,00.htm- l?Site=Google&Creative=Unknown&Area=versa&CMP=KNC-Google

Sniffles

geneseedepot

Why has nissan moved the fuel tank door from the driver's side to the passenger side? Both the new Sentra and the Versa have this. I thought Ford was the only oddball that put the tank door on the passenger side.

gogogodzilla

VW and other European cars usually have the gas on the passenger side as well.

I really don't see how it matters.

:confuse:

alpha01

Most Subarus also have the gas tank filler on the passenger side as well. Its no big deal.

~alpha

razalon

My Z had it on the passenger side also.

csandste

My Malibu Maxx and several other GM cars have passenger side fueling. It's always opposite of the side where the exhaust is.

coupedncal

I just returned from UK where i sat in a Micra. Seems similar to Versa though a little more curvy. I can't imagine they will spend money on two separate models when they can easily cross sell these cars.

PS: Micra also comes with a small diesel engine .. sweet !!

gwido

Like the Micra, the Versa is built on Nissan’s “B” platform, but I think it is an updated version of that platform. The Versa is bigger than the Micra. The guys at Nissan probably thought that the Micra would be too small for North American buyers taste...

Also, the Versa is already sold in other markets (Mexico, Japan, China and others) where it is known as the Tiida, so it is not more expensive to bring the Versa here than the Micra.

twain

At this point, I'm favoring the Versa over the Yaris and Fit. It's bigger, has more power and has a CVT option. And if that 38mpg combined with the CVT is true, that's impressive.

bricknord

The passenger side is the correct side. There are two reasons for this. One, since we drive on the right side of the road, if and when you run out of fuel, you are likely to pull over to the berm on the right. When someone adds fuel from a can, they are standing off the road, away from traffic. This is safer than filling from a can on the drivers side, exposing you to traffic on a narrow road. I just saw this actually the other day on a local highway. A lady was out of gas, and was standing on the left filling her car, and every car going by was almost killing her. Ask police about this. Many are hit each year standing on the left side of a stopped car. Anyway, the second reason a passenger side fill makes more sense is that when you stop to get gas, you typically pull fairly close to the pump on whichever side the fill is on. If it is on the drivers side, and you pull close, you risk opening your door into the inevitable metal pole or obstacle, denting your car. If you pull up to the pump on the right, your chance of opening your door into an obstacle is far less. This also occurs when the wind catches the door on a gusty day, etc.

Anyway, in the real world, the passenger side fill makes more sense. Unforunately, long ago, mainly the domestic cars did it the other way, and other manufacturers followed, so people became used to that regardless of the fact it made less sense.

A couple of manufacturers are still thinking a little and do the passenger side. My Subaru Loyale, VW Golf, and Geo Tracker are all on the PS.

sandman46

Just found out about this car tonight. Looks like it could be a great replacement for my Sentra in a couple of years. Nissan's reliability is right up there with the other japanese brands. The wife drives a Mazda 3s and this would be a great complement car for hers. I commute about 9 miles each way to work, so the high gas mileage is indeed impressive. The smaller size is a moot point for me...this car just looks cool! Think I prefer the hatch though.
If it will have a power pack, automatic, decent stereo & some nice wheel & tire packages...this could definitely work. Have been leaning towards a '08 Civic EX as the next ride, but Civic's tend to get pricey in the EX range. The Versa may just fit the bill, as I'm not to impressed with either the Fit or the Yaris.
The wife is starting to talk about the new Jetta again though. Deep down, I know she wants me to take the 3 and let her get the '06 Jetta with the auto tranny & leatherette seats. That could also work, as the 2.3 liter 3s is a blast to drive actually. The seamless power and shifting make the somewhat poorer EPA numbers more palatable for me as a daily driver. Wish she'd just make up her mind already. But she still has about 45 more chances to keep changing her mind...I gave her 50 chances...lol!

The Sandman

thatsmycall

38mpg is for cvt unit. On the range animation, the miles stop at 560 for a tank which would suggest 42.42mpg hwy. I'm convinced some cvt set ups can give better mileage. But what the sticker really reads- we'll see.

I like the looks better than the Fit in pictures. Room for long legged divers or good crash test could seal the deal.

thatsmycall

The Nissan Tiida is as delightful to lounge in as any small Audi or BMW, only much more spacious. The handling is decent, and the exterior is tightly finished. However, the trade-off is a jiggly ride and a somewhat noisy cabin. For the price, we can't really ask for more. Props to Nissan for having the guts to lend us the car for more than a week. We found manufacturing flaws in many other brands, expensive ones included, on the first day itself. But the Tiida is built flawlessly, and this bodes well for its long-term durability.

http://www.drivearabia.com/nissan/nissantiida.html

Claimed official ADR81/01 fuel consumption is a competitive 7.6lt/100km for the six-speed manual and 7.8lt/100km for the auto.>>>this is no 38 = 30.1mpg

http://carpoint.ninemsn.com.au/car-review/ce7961.aspx
http://www.sciencemadesimple.net/conversions.html

stickguy

Does anyone know when the Versa will be in the showroom? And the hatch is coming out first, right?

stickguy

Says early summer for the hatch, so not too long now.

Just speced one out on the Nissan site. Seems like a good deal.

A loaded SL hatch, every option except sport package (just cladding and stuff), was $16,750 MSRP.

that includes alloys, ABS, fancy stereo with sub, moonroof, ABS/SAB, steering wheel audio controls, Bluetooth, smart key, power everything, and a few other things I can't recall.

Makes the Caliber seem overpriced!

Oh no, the wheels are turning!

backy

Wow, that is a very reasonable price given all that content. It means a Versa with a little less content (kill the subwoofer, even moonroof and alloys) should be available for around $15k. The Nissan rep at the Chicago Auto Show said "well equipped for $14k". Seems he was close.

stickguy

that price also includes XM radio and a radio aux jack.

backy

I just priced out what I consider to be a well-equipped Versa: S model with 6-speed tranny, ABS, side bags/curtains, power package, remote locking, A/C, CD stereo: $13,805 including destination charge, which is less than a comparably-equipped Fit (well, no 6-speed or remote locking on the Fit), Accent (no 6-speed but with alloys), or Rio5 (no 6-speed but with alloys) and I think less than the Yaris sedan (but I didn't check that). They should sell a lot of them if that price holds up come summer.

ross14

Where are Versa's available? Huge interior space, but C/D feels a narrow front drivers seat, & encroaching door projections, diminish the living room feeling. True?

backy

I haven't been able to sit in a Versa yet but I'll say this: I think C/D (and other mags) like to nit-pick if they can't find anything substantially wrong with a car. After all, they had to justify putting the Fit in 1st, didn't they? I've seen the Versa's interior close-up and one thing that impressed me was the downright luxurious padding on the door armrests. Contrast that with most small cars (e.g. Fit, Accent, Rio) that have no padding on the doors, just some hard plastic, and I would rather take the bigger but softer armrests on the Versa than the little hard armrests on the Fit et. al. any day. One thing the review did say is that the Versa feels like a "real car". I agree--it seems much more substantial than the Fit. The Fit is of high quality seems "thin". I won't know how confining the seats and footwells of the Versa are until I can sit in one (due "this summer"), but I am not very broad so I am not worried there. At least the Versa has a dead pedal and (according to the Nissan rep I talked to) a seat height adjuster, which the Fit lacks.

stickguy

I read that article. If they are right, and the seats are on the small side (with a short cushion) it would probably take it off my list, since seats are a big deal too my. I also have bigish feet, so that could be a problem if the pedals are jammed up in the footwell.

True about the nit picking. IIRC from sitting in a Fit at the car show, it had no armrest at all for the front seats (in the middle). I couldn't stand having my right arm just hanging in space with no where to rest it, especially when using the shifter.

Still, it was a pretty good look at what to expect from the 2 cars, and overall the Versa presented itself well for an every day car.

Mileage though wasn't great. how could something this size not even average 30MPG (I think it got 28) or this trip? The Fit and Yaris got 35-38, which is what I would expect if I was going to drive something this small.

I think my 4 cyl 5 speed Accord would have gotten 30MPG in that test run!

Also, the Versa was at least geared better than some of these buzz bombs. THe Fit was geared lower than my Miata, so it must be a screamer on the highway.

anotherscott

Good points about passenger-side gas cap advantages, bricknord. On the other hand, if you self-serve your gas, you have to walk further to get to the other side, and you will likely be walking out of range of any overhang so you'll get wet in the rain. And most people need to fill up in the rain now and then, while few people run out of gas on parkways.

My old Mustang had it dead center in the rear. I think everyone figured that made sense until Pintos started bursting into flames in rear impact collisions...

anotherscott

Backy, are you sure the Fit doesn't have adjustable height driver's seat? A review of the 2005 Jazz (basically same car) said it did.

From the pictures I've seen, I prefer the look of the Versa, inside and out. But I'm leaning toward the Fit. For one thing, I'm a musician and sometimes need to carry around a lot of gear, and while the Nissan is larger and I think has more interior volume on paper, I think the Honda's flexible seats would give it more cargo capacity in practice, and be easier to load stuff in and out of. Also, in terms of reliability, I'd rather buy a car that they've been building in Japan for 5 years than a first year model built in Mexico. And I just saw that according to a Car and Driver test, the Fit has better acceleration despite a smaller engine, and better fuel economy to boot. But I guess you never really know until you see and drive the things.

backy

I am not 100% sure but here is what I know:

* I sat in two Fits, a base model and a Sport model, at auto shows in February and March. Neither had a height-adjustable driver's seat.

* I have poured over the specs on the Fit provided by Honda. Normally, a desirable feature like a height-adjustable driver's seat is something that is mentioned by the marketeers. No mention of such a feature.

* Car companies put different features in cars slated for different countries. For example, the Prius sent to North America does not have a height-adjustable driver's seat, but the Prius sent to Europe does.

So it's very possible the Jazz has a height-adjustable driver's seat but the Fit does not. But I have hope. I remember back in '01 when the newly-redesigned Civic didn't have a height adjuster on the driver's seat. By '02 it did.

Actually the Versa has been around awhile, as the Tilda. I know the Fit's cargo flexibility is superior, but cargo flexibility is not as important to me as some other things like driver comfort, ride comfort (lots of bad roads where I live), rear seat room, and price. I don't need the fastest car (I already know I'll be giving up some oomph from my present car no matter which of these little cars I buy) and I don't drive enough that a few mpg will make a big difference. But I still like the Fit a lot and hope that when I actually drive it I like how it "sits".

nwng

nobody's here is bothered by the fact that a relatively new design still has a two level floor when the rear seats are folded? This is such a no no when you want to utilize the cargo area and I thought most manufacturers had gotten rid of that design

backy

It's not ideal, but I don't plan on sleeping back there so it's not a knockout item for me. At least the seatbacks lie flat. In some designs, there is no step-up but the seatbacks don't lie flat. The Fit has perhaps the ideal rear-seat-folding design, but the Versa has a roomier and more comfortable rear seat for adults. Trade-offs.

credulus

European cars have had the gas filler door on the passenger side for years, at least going back to the late '60s with my experience. And, since the Versa has some European input, perhaps this is the reason. Since most of my cars have it on the passenger side, I much prefer that location.

lego3

I am very interested by the Versa but I found on the Nissan Australian site that the recommended fuel grade is 91, which is Premium grade in Canada and... lot more expensive then regular unleaded. Anyone knows what will be the grade for North American cars?

http://www.nissan.com.au/tiida/specifications.asp?displayAll#topOfPage

Also, interesting is the towing capacity... In australia it is rated at 1000KG.... that's odd...

Thanks for your reply.

Lego

jrct9454

For competitive reasons, there is absolutely ZERO chance that this car will need anything but regular, pump octane 87, when introduced in North America. Nothing else in this class runs on premium, and that's the end of that tune....marketing calls the shots in this case.

And I too doubt seriously that NA towing capacity will be much over 1000 lbs - maybe 1500? Again, it has to do with what the market demands - in Australia, this is important - here, practically off the radar screen.

gotenks243

I believe Australia advertises octane using the RON method, as do many other countries. The US and Canada use (RON+MON)/2, so there's a good chance 91 RON corresponds to 87 (RON+MON)/2, or Regular.

The Versa is now officially my preference among the cars in its class. It was my favorite among the competition that I sat in at the Detroit show: the Yaris, Rio5/Accent, Caliber, etc. The only car potentially holding me back from my Versa preference was the Fit. They had two at Detroit, but neither were unlocked.

Well, today I got to sit in a Fit, and it's definitely nowhere near as roomy as the bigger Versa. It's still adequate on space, so I could still live with the Fit. That is, until I sat in the driver's seat. The lack of a dead pedal, or any comfortable place to rest my left foot, has confirmed my preference for the Versa. It's just not worth it to drive a car I wouldn't be comfortable in.

I can't wait to test drive the Versa this fall. I was a little dismayed at the low as-tested mileage in that one comparison test, but I suppose preproduction models may not be a precise gauge on the fuel economy of the vehicles that will be on dealer's lots. Ever the optimist :shades:

Mike

lego3

Thanks, you are probably right, I went back to the Nissan Australian site to check what was the grade fuel for the Z to compare as the Z use Premium, and over in Australia it is called PULP, so it looks like the Versa will use regular unleaded.

I was just worried that the good mileage estimate was because of the premium gas. Can't wait to see the official number. Regardless, it will be in the range of other comparable small cars, so it looks like my next car.

I went to a local Dealer and I can put a deposit and reserve one but they don't have the final prices yet. I was told somewhere in June.

Regarding the towing capacity, I would prefer that mananufacturer stick to what the car is capable of instead of adjusting their specs based on the country and marketing...

I want to pull occasionally a small ATV maybe 1000lbls total. Same issue with the Mazda 5, in UK, you can pull a small trailer but nothing in the US Canada... Not all of us can afford mutliple cars for multiple need.

Lego

carzzz

"Versa EPA Mileage Estimate Revised [April. 7, 06]

Gardena, Calif. (April 7, 2006) - Nissan is revising downward its estimated EPA city/hwy mileage for Versa models. EPA mileage for CVT-equipped Versa models is 33 mpg combined, down from the previously announced 38 mpg estimate."

I knew this would happen after seeing the C/D comparison test

backy

That's a pretty big mis-calculation on Nissan's part. And the CVT is probably the most fuel-efficient variant of the Versa, since that's the one Nissan touts when it comes to fuel economy. I wonder what the 6-speed or the 4-speed automatic will do for mpg.

anotherscott

Thanks for the info, backy. Yes, its sounds like the U.S. Fit won't have the adjustable seat height. When you sat in it, did you find the seat too high or too low for your liking? And how tall are you?

And yes, the Versa has been around as the Tilda, but my understanding is, the revised version for U.S. is being built in Mexico at a plant that has not produced Tildas before... i.e. it is first-year production for that plant, whereas the Fit is essentially fifth year production for its Japanese plant.

backy

The Fit's seat was too low in the front of the cushion, i.e. it was too flat for my comfort. If I could have raised the front of the cushion up a bit it would have been fine. As it was, I had to choose between a comfortable reach to the wheel and pedals or having my thighs supported. The lack of a dead pedal didn't help either.

I think it't the Tiida... I mistyped "Tilda" on one post.

bamacar

That makes the mpg for the Versa not only worse than the Fit and Yaris, but worse than the Civic and Corolla, too. Of course it is really the size of a Civic and Corolla anyway.

The only thing that put in the class of the Fit and Yaris was better mileage. Now they should just call it what it is - a replacement for the present Sentra as the new Sentra moves up in size. Nissan should bring over the Cube or something similar to have a real competitor in the B class.

alpha01

Did people really believe the 38 MPG claim? I've thought it was off since first published, and I almost wonder if it was a PR mistake that just was left to linger... how could an engine that size, pulling the weight of the Versa... yield a COMBINED 38 MPG....???

~alpha

backy

The Civic and Corolla have combined fuel economy in the 35-36 mpg range. They are both more powerful and larger than the Versa, and don't have a CVT. So I don't see where 38 mpg combined for a car of the Versa's size and power is out of the question. But it's obviously out of the question for the Versa.

alpha01

I didn't have time to check the Civic, but Toyota lists the Corolla LE automatic with no options at 2615lbs. Add heavy things like ABS, moonroof, etc, and youre probably still under 2700lbs. This is less than the weight of the Versa according to the Car and Driver article, if memory serves me correctly, the Versa is up around 2850lbs.(please feel free to discredit this if it does not). The Versa hatch, by a crude eye measurement, also looks to have a much greater aerodynamic drag as well. The Versa also uses a larger displacement engine than either the frugal Corolla and Civic, and other things being equal, a larger displacement engine will use more gas than a smaller engine even if the smaller engine is similarly powerful.

So, I am not surprised, and really, never believed Nissan could manage a 38MPG overall - 3 miles per gallon better than the impressive Corolla....
~alpha

backy

I thought the Civic and Corolla use 1.8L engines. That is what the Versa has. I think the Versa's weight in the C/D test was just over 2700, and that was the loaded SL model. The Civic's engine is 140 hp, the Corolla's is 130 (or at least it used to be), and the Versa's is 120. The Civic has gained a lot of weight since the last generation. It used to be around 2500 pounds but it's considerably heavier now. I don't have time to look up the numbers now but I think it's over 2700.

I am not surprised the 38 mpg figure was reduced, but I was hopeful it would stand up. Still more points for the more-expensive Fit.

alpha01

My apologies, I thought the Versa used a 2.0L engine. (Corolla is rated at 126, btw). It must have been the Dodge Caliber that was heavy in the C/D test, I know there was one weighty entry. Civic DX MT is 2628, Civic EX AT is 2804 (both in Sedan guise).

I also must profess that my correct disbelief in the 38 MPG number roots in that Nissan hasnt offered any particularly frugal 4s in this country for some time. (The Altima is rated at 29 MPG HWY with the 4 and auto... thats pretty poor.... the Sentra is rated at 35 MPG HWY with a manual, and 34 auto... only as good as an Accord, barely better than Camry, Sonata... etc....)

~alpha

backy

Big mpg numbers don't seem to be a priority for Nissan. However, the 33 mpg overall with the CVT isn't far off the combined EPA ratings for the rest of this class (with automatics). I wonder now if the standard 6-speed in the Versa will be the mpg champ for that model, at least on the highway?

sniffles

I found the EPA ratings for the Versa while reading this review on the Fit. I looks like its going to be 30/34 for the 6-speed manual and 30/36 for the CVT. A little disappointing.

http://research.cars.com/go/crp/research.jsp;jsessionid=MRDPVNZUUQ0K1LAZGQME2VA?- aff=national&revid=49766&makeid=18&modelid=8235&year=2007&revlogtype=20&section=- reviews

backy

Yep, that Fit, or even the Accent, is looking better all the time...

iluvmysephia1

looking better all the time for me.

Although 30/34 aren't nasty ghastly numbers.

dudleyr

34 is terrible. That is the same as a 2.4 liter Accord, Sonata or Camry, and only 2 better than a 3.5 liter Avalon. That is 7 mpg less than the Corolla - which is an old design and has more power.