well I have owned my Versa since July 06, and I have driven it pretty much the same since I have owned it. I have just under 12K miles on it. I just filled up tonight, I went 415 miles (the most I have gone on a tank) and it took 13 gallons to fill up, that make it 31.9 miles per gallon. Again the most I have gone. I have watched my mileage slowly improve over time, I'll be taking my car on another road trip here, this month to Long Beach. I'm really looking forward to the mileage and seeing what she well get.
If someone is getting in the low 20's in a Versa, they're either driving in some very specific condition (like using it to deliver newspapers house to house, constant stop and go traffic where they sit for an hour just bumping along, etc.) or there's something VERY wrong with the individual car.
I've mentioned some of the low numbers cited here to the service manager at my Nissan dealer and his reaction is that you'd REALLY have work at it to get mileage that low. It's hard to imagine getting roughly 30% lower mileage short of a mechanical problem or extreme driving circumstance.
A friend who owns a Mini was looking at my Versa yesterday and asking me about it. When I told him the mileage I was getting he was very impressed and said his Mini doesn't even sniff 30 mpg. A little later in the conversation, we were talking transmissions and he said, "Around town, I have trouble getting past 3rd gear".
We drive the same roads, so I know that you CAN get into 5th or 6th gear most places. If you want to be in a lower gear and keep a sportier feeling of more torque going to the wheels, then you're choosing to do that and your mileage is going to suffer as a consequence.
Assuming no mechanical defect with the car, driving styles and habits are pretty much what determines your mileage performance.
3rd tank was 290 miles at 12.1 gallons = ~23mpg 4th tank was 293 miles at 10.6 gallons = ~27mpg
Bought it in March '07...car has yet to break 1000 miles. Conditions have been primarily city, stoplight driving with a relatively gentle touch on the pedals (I have even experimented with the 1st, 2nd, 5th shifting regimen). I like seeing the improving numbers.
As an aside, I am really liking the more upright driving position. I can't stand to drive the wife's Civic anymore, the position is just to low. I was somewhat remorseful at first...but I am really liking this car.
is your versa a CVT, auto or manuel ? I have a CVT and I had been getting 360 miles per tank, and that was combined Freeway and City. Now that I have broke 12K miles, my last tank was 415 miles, that was 70% highway (that was doing 70 mph) and 30% city.
Yep, stuck in city driving will hurt for sure. Keep us up to date on how the "into 6th gear as much as possible" works for you.
I know a lot of it is that the snappy, sportier feel of being in a lower gear is seductive :P We like that feeling of zipping around. But mileage is the price for that.
My mileage on my 2rd tank was only about 28.5 and that was an all highway tank, so as the car breaks in, I assume you'll start to see some improvement as well.
A reporter from a large national newspaper is looking to speak to anyone who has purchased a small car in the past couple of months. If you purchased this car as an additional car for the family versus a replacement, please note that as well. Please provide your daytime contact info to ctalati@edmunds.com no later than Thursday, May 10, 2007.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
I just purchased this new Versa S hatchback with auto trans and the third tank traveling mostly rural between 40 and 60 mph is as follows 246 miles and 6.1 gallons that's 40.3 mph which is outstanding for a car that's not broken in yet. I did not use the a/c. I drove the Oregon coast and back to Portland OR.
I'm glad you like your car, but you can't average your MPG on a half a tank...
Just filled mine, 30.4 mpg, again this is 70% highway (70mph) and 30% city. The car is starting to get the mileage it was supose to.. This is with 12,500 miles on the car.
75 mph I get 29.6 70 mph I get 30.5 65 mph I get 32.8 62 mph I get 35.8 This seems to be the sweet spot. 55 mph I get 37.2 But this is way too slow for my area.
If my wife drives the car I will get around 5 mpg less.
It's been a great car so far. Best for size for the road.
Just completed a 1,439 mile trip through Idaho and Oregon. Now that our SL w/CVT is broken in with almost 5000 miles, it's showing really good mileage numbers. Used 38.98 gallons for overall trip avg of 36.9mpg. Love this car!!
When I purchased this car I expected to get at least what the window sticker suggested. I traded a VW Jetta getting an average of 32mpg. My Versa is getting 23MPG on my last tank.I drive very consertively. I actually baby the car. I can't believe I am only getting 23MPG. I took it into the dealer to get checked and they said all is normal. Do you have any suggestions.
Sorry that is not normal. What speeds do you drive at?
In the city driving which I don't do much I get round 28. On the road I am now getting in the 34 plus. I drive from my home to work it's 61 miles one way. So I put in at least 122 to 124. 23 is far too low and I would check tires pressure first and how your driving.
Thank you for the reply. I drive rather slow. My driving is 95% city so my average speed is probably about 30 mph. Occasionally I am on a short stretch of freeway and get my speed up to about 65 for maybe about 6 miles. My rpm's barely reach 2800 at any given time. I have a very "light foot". My A/C is on most of the time. My car has about 700 miles to date. I just can't believe that my mileage is anything close to normal. I will give it another 2 tankful's and see where I am at that time. I am even keeping a very close watch on my tire pressure which I am keeping at 34 LBS. If my mileage stays at this low level I just am not sure who I can turn to if the dealer says there is nothing that they can find wrong. Any suggestions you have would be helpful. Thanks.
You might have the dealer check the O2 sensors. Previous messages in this discussion board from early March talk about the same kind of problem of lousy mileage. Hope you can get it fixed!
At about 700 miles, you're still really in the break in period, so I'd expect some improvement because of that. But with 95% of your driving being city and AC on most of the time, I'm guessing you'll have trouble reaching the estimated numbers. You didn't say, but I'm assuming you do not have a 6-speed Versa, so that 95% city driving is going to be keeping you in lower than top gear a lot of the time and your mileage will be lower than someone facing different driving conditions.
Might be interesting to have a passenger take some short videos of the driving conditions we're all facing and put them on our CarSpace pages to make it easier to compare our different situations and driving styles. My "light foot" is no doubt different from yours, and when you say "city driving" that brings a picture to my mind that might not match yours as well.
Thanks for your reply. My car is actually an automatic. The overdrive is on all time. The dealer did say that they checked the emissions...I'm not sure if that is the o2 sensor or not. If after a couple thousand miles the gas mileage is still very low (20's), where would you suggest I turn to next? Thanks again.
Well if an O2 sensor were bad, I would expect to see the car throwing a code and the check engine light coming on. So I'm going on the assumption that we're still breaking it in. The first couple of tanks on my 6 speed only got about 28.5 mpg and most of that was long distance highway driving. Closing in on 6000 miles right now and driving basically short trips of about 8-10 miles one way with some traffic light starts and stops and the last fillup worked out to 33.3mpg which is about 17% better than the highway mileage I was initially getting.
Your driving conditions are going to affect it a lot, especially with the automatic, since it's going to decide what gear it needs to be in. We've been driving nothing but sticks since 1979 and I my approach is to always be in the highest gear that I can without "lugging". So I generally find myself in 6th gear as soon as possible. For example, yesterday I was stopped at a red light on a downgrade. When the light turned green, I went from 1st directly to 6th, just a habit. I'm CERTAIN my mileage would suffer if I wanted to enjoy a snappier feel from the car wanted to runit up and down through the gears all the time and play "sports car" :P I have to run some typical errands today, so I'll try to keep a log of how long the trip was, how much time it took, and how much of that time I spent in 6th gear. I have NO idea what that percentage is going to be, but I'm going to guess 60% and see how close I get.
When I post my "travel log" I'll include some deatils, and maybe photos, of the roads and conditions I'm facing on a daily basis so you can make a better comparison with your own situation.
As an aside, I'm also in the middle of another mileage experiment. I just did my first tire rotation, and my buddy who owns a tire shop now fills tires with nitrogen because a lot of people are demanding it due to the purported benefits. Since I keep track of my mileage a bit more closely than most, we decided to see what effect, if any, the nitrogen will have. The nitrogen is supposed leak slower out of tires over the long haul. MY theory is that folks who generally don't monitor tire pressures might get a bit of mileage improvement because the tires that they normally would have run on at lower pressure (which decreases mileage)will be closer to normal than they usually have them. I'm not expecting any difference in mileage beacuse I pay attention to my tire pressures and don't ever run around on low tires.
Thanks again for your reply. This is actually my first automatic in quite some time. I too was of the mindset in my manual cars to be in the highest gear possible without lugging the engine. I would be happy to be getting 28-32mpg, which is what I should be getting, but 23mpg is not that much better than a Hummer considering the vast weight difference between the two. Thanks again.
My Jetta was a 5 speed and I averaged about 300 miles to a tank. I commute an average of 10-15 miles to work each day(5 days). I go to different stores in a given area each day.I filled up every 2 weeks. There is no way my versa should be a 23mpg car. There has to be something wrong. I am going to make an appointment at a different dealer than I bought the car to see if they can figure it out after 2 more fill-ups, if I don't see any improvement. If you have any other ideas please let me know.
OK... back from the morning errands with some more specific obeservations. What I did was to keep track of miles driven and time spent in 6th gear while the engine was running this morning. I took some pictures on the road as well to try and illustrate the drving conditions I typically see. I'll tryto get them together in a Carspace photo album later today so you can judge for yourself.
Fired up the Versa at 9:25AM and headed to town. I have a stretch of rural two lane that's 5 miles long to start and end the trek, so that's why I'm thinking my average speed will be biased upwards. Had a stop watch that I started each time I shifted into 6th gear and stopped when I came out of 6th into a lower gear.
From home to back home was 1 hour 6 minutes. Total time that the engine was running was 45 minutes, 35 seconds, and during that time I was in 6th gear for 26 minutes, 12 seconds. That's 57.4% of the time the engine is running that I was in 6th gear. I had 4 stops on the trip.
The total distance I traveled was 23.7 miles, so my avereage speed, while the engine was running, was a scorching 31.19 mph! Since that first and last 5 miles of the trip is basically made between 40 and 50mph with no stops, this doesn't really surprise me.I'm no doubt facing more rural condition than you are. If you truly are averaging 30mph on the roads you're facing, then your mileage does seem to be oddly low. But I'm guessing your estimate of average speed might be a bit high, and that your daily driving conditions have your automatic putting you in top gear far less often. I could be wrong about that though. Would be interesting to hear a detailed desciption of your typical run for comparision purposes.
Talking about this with one of the techs at my local Nissan dealer (great place for the daily gossip...LOL) and he's thinking that 700 miles isn't quite through break-in yet. My experience with my Versa showed a noticeable increase once I got into that 1000-1500 mile range. It definitely had increased by the time I got to the first oil change at 3750. I'll be keeping to the every 7500 mile service schedule, but that first one was to give the car the once over. They used to have me bring new Nissans in for an oil change at 1000 miles, so this was that initial change.
In any event, I think you're still breaking the car in and things will improve for you. Check out your driving conditions if you can. Maybe there are some surprises there that you didn't expect!
PS - If I get a chance, I'll try the same thing with a passenger so I can get a better idea of how many MILES I drive in 6th gear. No way to do that safely by myself!
I'm sure nitrogen's been discussed elsewhere, but what a load of hooey! Air's 80% nitrogen, oxygen molecules are bigger, not smaller, than nitrogen (not that it matters), so the whole thing reeks of $$ grubbing.
The mileage will likely improve somewhat after break-in. However, if you read the other posts, you will see that it would be more unusual if you had great gas mileage in a Versa. It seems to be a struggle to go higher than 30 MPG unless you do 95% highway driving and if you did 95% highway driving, you could about match the Versa's MPG in many bigger cars. The gas mileage seems to be a disappointment for most owners.
I agree about the nitrogen fad. My friend that owns the tire store would not have gotten the nitrogen system if everyone and their uncle wasn't asking for it. The market in action :P
And it's not the size of the molecules that matters. In a tire filled with compressed air, the oxygen molecules tend to "migrate" through the wall of the tire over time. That's why, when you open the garage to check on your dust-covered AMC Pacer the tires are often flat. But nitrogen molecules migrate 3 to 4 times more slowly than oxygen, so tires stay properly inflated longer. Staying properly inflated longer is why some places are able to claim a gain in mileage. Those folks who normally don't pay attention to tire pressures will see less of a decrease in mileage when they are not running around on flat tires, or I guess Ishould say spending less time running around on less than properly inflated tires. I guess some would look at less of a decrease as an increase.
In any event, I'll continue my little mileage experiment/driving conditions survey to see where it leads me.
I guess that's where I'm puzzeled - why the faster oxygen migration? In my line of work, we deal with hydrogen and helium migration because of their small size (hydrogen can actually migrate between the crystal structure in steel, causing 'hydrogen imbrittlement', weakening critical high pressure fittings), but I'm not aware of a reason oxygen would do that faster than nitrogen. I understand that's the assertion, but where's the proof?
So after the O2 replacement we are still not getting anywhere near the avg you guys are posting ;
3/19/2007 279.3 mi 10.899 gal 25.63 mpg 4/7/2007 242.6 mi 11.462 gal 21.17 mpg 4/15/2007 172.4 mi 3.982 gal 43.29 mpg must be error 4/17/2007 228.7 mi 11.2 gal 20.42 mpg 5/1/2007 231.0 mi 9.197 gal 25.12 mpg 5/13/2007 231.7 mi 10.41 gal 22.26 mpg
So after 5896 mi we have a running AVG total of 23.38 mpg :mad: :lemon: :lemon: :lemon:
Ok people, I just filled her up, went 371 miles and it took 11.5 to fill her up, that come out to be 32.2 MPG, this was again, 70% highway and 30% city. I have to say, I'm happy that my little girl is getting better mileage then she had.
My driving is 95% city so my average speed is probably about 30 mph.
I've been following nearly all the subcompact threads and every model has dissatisfied owners with the exact same issue.
Pretty much: city miles + A/C + automatic + short trips = low mpg numbers (below EPA figures).
If you has more of a mixture of highway and city or a manual transmission, your mileage would be better. The new smaller cars (Fit, Yaris, Aveo, Versa) don't seem to be very fuel-efficient under the circumstances above.
Also, 700 miles on the clock is WAY too early to be freaking out -- every car I've owned has gotten quite a bit better over time. I'm currently getting my best mileage numbers with an Aveo, at 129K miles.
I'm happy to see some people getting over 30 mpg, since the Versa would be on my list of potential cars to look at when I replace my current vehicle.
If I can expect under 30mpg at any point in the future no matter how many miles I have, I feel as though I made a mistake buying a Versa, considering the many alternitives out there.
I'm in the market for a second car and I'm not seeing the "many alternatives". I'm looking for a hatchback/small wagon with good fuel efficiency. Unfortunately most of the driving will be around town, Am I doomed to under 25 mpg? So far I have been looking at the Versa and the Toyota Matrix.
If you get a YARIS and drive 100% city and IF you drive like I do, you can expect more than 30MPG.
I drive a 2001 Echo (automatic) which has essentially the same drivetrain and I have never gotten less than 35 MPG in pure city driving.
With city driving I mean an average of less than 20 miles traveled per hour, lots of stop and go.
Of course the Yaris is lighter and has a smaller engine than a Versa.
Last week I rented a Versa (4 speed AT) and over 438 miles I used 12.33 gallons of gas resulting in 35.5 MPG. My typical commute these days is 40 miles each way, 50% city stop and go and 50% highway. Average traveling time is 85 minutes.
I drive like there is an egg under the accelerator pedal, I brake as little as possible without being an obstacle for other drivers and I never exceed the speed limit on the highway (62 MPH = 100 KPH). Not much fun to drive that way but very effective in terms of the amount of gas used.
A CVT equipped Versa would be about 10% better for fuel economy than the 4 speed AT.
If you mostly drive "around town," then a hybrid will have a huge benefit in fuel economy. Think of 45-50 mpg vs 25 mpg driving a similar sized non-hybrid car the same way. If you drive mostly highway miles, you lose most of the fuel economy benefit of a hybrid.
I'm very surprised to read so many posts about poor gas mileage with this little car. My recommendation is to buy an Accord next time.
I've put over 25K miles on my 2006 I-4 Accord and have only dipped under 30 MPG TWICE! The first time was on the very first tank of fuel and the second time was heavy city driving and heavy on the gas pedal.
I regularly get 35-37 MPG on the highway and I don't drive like a grandma.
I don't want to rub it in, but I agree about the Accord. The Versa is a wonderful concept and does many things right (wish more companies made a hatch - Honda), but mpg seems to be below some larger cars like the Accord.
I have a 2007 MT Accord 4-cyl, and get around 40 mpg at 65 mph (best is 41.3 over 549 miles with a few city miles). Higher speeds drop mpg into the mid to upper 30's and lifetime average for about 5,000 miles is 31.7.
The Versa should be able to handily beat the Accord, but that does not seem to be the case.
Last tank was 100% city driving with A/C. Bought the Versa in late March '07 and the car has 1200 miles on it. My Versa is a 6-spd manual SL. I know that pure city driving wreaks havoc on fuel efficiency and I am still waiting on the "break-in" period. With that said, I am less than happy, so far, with the fuel efficency. Then again, I beleive that in 2007, cars this size should be getting 30 mpg city MINIMUM on a regular basis.
I have noticed that the Versa gets better mileage with age, I'm currently getting over 30 now with a mix of driving. I have 12K miles on versa and love it..
Now don't worry my milegage was low when I first got my versa, also don't listen to the people who talk about accords gettting 40 MPG, the versa well make you happy, again I have 12K miles on it, and love it to death...
"also don't listen to the people who talk about accords gettting 40 MPG"
They do get 40 - read the Accord MPG board - some are even pushing 40 with the MT V-6. CR got the automatic 4-cyl Accord at 38 highway in their test. That was a 2003 automatic, before the engine mods that upped the mileage (and hp). The 06 and 07 models do better and the stick shift models better still (though the automatics regain the lead at the highest speeds because of their taller gearing)
CR tested 2 Versas CVT and MT - the highway mileage of both was below the Accord. Your local library has all the details.
The Versa is far from a guzzler, but for its size and the size of its engine, I agree with hbfever that the mileage should be better. I think the situation is made worse by the early projections of 38 mpg combined EPA.
I was originally considering the Versa along with the Fit et al, but my wife wanted more room, and we had heard/read a lot of good things about the mpg of the Accord. I actually liked the Versa better than the Altima for seating comfort. The Altima has terrible rear head room and the Versa has plenty.
but have to correct: CR's overall mpg for the current Accord is 23 mpg. Not exactly 40. In their tests city lowest was 16 mpg, highway best 32.
CR's overal mpg for the Versa is 28. In their tests city was lowest 21 mpg, highway 36. So all over the map like many posters have noted. Overall means combined city/highway.
Just what you would expect since the Accord is a bigger, heavier car. So you wouldn't be comparing it to a Versa.
Nobody said the Accord had 40 mpg overall - just highway.
Yup again. The previous exchange on the Accord and 40 mpg was about whether or not the Accord can attain this number. No one said a word about the overall mpg.
Yes, you are right, but CR says the V6 gets "only 1 mpg less than the 166 hp 4 cyl. engine". So that would be 24 mpg overall. According to CR then, The Versa still beats that, as you would expect since it is smaller.
Agree that we shouldn't be comparing the Accord/Camry to the Versa in fuel economy but those models appear to be the closest in real world mileage. The Fit/Yaris and Civic/Corolla get far better fuel economy than the Versa.
My 2003 Accord 4 cylinder manual averaged 30mpg and got 33-36mpg on the highway over 40,000 miles. I must say I am not sure I have seen hardly anyone get better on their Versa here.
I'm comparing Automatic transmissions because that's what CR's stats are and what most people buy. I'm sure you do get better mileage in a MT car of any type, but most of the comparos are with the Versa CVT with the AT of other vehicles. In that comparo, overall, Versa = 28 Accord = 24
I have to say that generally small cars don't get as good gas mileage as they used to. I had a '95 Civic (MT again) that regularly got between 30-40 mpg. But it only had 109 hp. I think recent generations have added much more hp and probably weight too with all the technology like air bags, ABS systems, etc that my old Civic didn't have. The current Civic size wise looks like the old Accord!
The Fit/Yaris and Civic/Corolla get far better fuel economy than the Versa.
Yes, both on the average and on the absolute numbers. When it comes to attaining 40 mpg, for instance, all of the four cars you have listed above can attain it (fairly easily in some cases too). With the Versa, you pretty much need a tailwind on a downhill and maybe get 40 mpg. Maybe.
Then again, if you don't need a number like that, but rather enjoy a comfortable and spacious vehicle that is relatively economical, I would say that the Versa still fits the bill.
I have to say that generally small cars don't get as good gas mileage as they used to. I had a '95 Civic (MT again) that regularly got between 30-40 mpg. But it only had 109 hp. I think recent generations have added much more hp and probably weight too with all the technology like air bags, ABS systems, etc that my old Civic didn't have. The current Civic size wise looks like the old Accord!
A good point! I, too, owned a '95 Civic (hatchback and MT), and the worst mileage that I ever got was 29 mpg in one of the worst snowstorms plus below zero temp for a week, driving purely on big city streets. Under normal driving conditions, I would have had to put a parking break on and drive in the first gear the whole time in order to get below 30 mpg (slightly exaggerated, of course )
that the Civic doesn't come in a hatchback version in the US. The Fit and Yaris seem too narrow for me. That's why I'm looking at the Versa and Matrix.
When you say that the Fit, for instance, is too narrow, are you referring to the exterior, interior, or both?
To me personally, what matters is the interior, and in that area, the Versa is only 5 mm wider than the Fit (1390 mm vs. 1385 mm; sources: nissan.co.jp and honda.co.jp). That is such a small difference. When it comes to the Yaris (sedan), the interior width is exactly the same as the Versa, at 1390 mm wide (source: toyota.co.jp).
Comments
I've mentioned some of the low numbers cited here to the service manager at my Nissan dealer and his reaction is that you'd REALLY have work at it to get mileage that low. It's hard to imagine getting roughly 30% lower mileage short of a mechanical problem or extreme driving circumstance.
A friend who owns a Mini was looking at my Versa yesterday and asking me about it. When I told him the mileage I was getting he was very impressed and said his Mini doesn't even sniff 30 mpg. A little later in the conversation, we were talking transmissions and he said, "Around town, I have trouble getting past 3rd gear".
We drive the same roads, so I know that you CAN get into 5th or 6th gear most places. If you want to be in a lower gear and keep a sportier feeling of more torque going to the wheels, then you're choosing to do that and your mileage is going to suffer as a consequence.
Assuming no mechanical defect with the car, driving styles and habits are pretty much what determines your mileage performance.
4th tank was 293 miles at 10.6 gallons = ~27mpg
Bought it in March '07...car has yet to break 1000 miles. Conditions have been primarily city, stoplight driving with a relatively gentle touch on the pedals (I have even experimented with the 1st, 2nd, 5th shifting regimen). I like seeing the improving numbers.
As an aside, I am really liking the more upright driving position. I can't stand to drive the wife's Civic anymore, the position is just to low. I was somewhat remorseful at first...but I am really liking this car.
Tony
I know a lot of it is that the snappy, sportier feel of being in a lower gear is seductive :P We like that feeling of zipping around. But mileage is the price for that.
My mileage on my 2rd tank was only about 28.5 and that was an all highway tank, so as the car breaks in, I assume you'll start to see some improvement as well.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
I cannot say enough about this car.
Just filled mine, 30.4 mpg, again this is 70% highway (70mph) and 30% city. The car is starting to get the mileage it was supose to.. This is with 12,500 miles on the car.
I use Mobil 1 only 5w30 change it every 5k
Reg gas.
75 mph I get 29.6
70 mph I get 30.5
65 mph I get 32.8
62 mph I get 35.8 This seems to be the sweet spot.
55 mph I get 37.2 But this is way too slow for my area.
If my wife drives the car I will get around 5 mpg less.
It's been a great car so far. Best for size for the road.
The way you drive makes a really big difference.
Used 38.98 gallons for overall trip avg of 36.9mpg. Love this car!!
In the city driving which I don't do much I get round 28. On the road I am now getting in the 34 plus. I drive from my home to work it's 61 miles one way. So I put in at least 122 to 124. 23 is far too low and I would check tires pressure first and how your driving.
You didn't say, but I'm assuming you do not have a 6-speed Versa, so that 95% city driving is going to be keeping you in lower than top gear a lot of the time and your mileage will be lower than someone facing different driving conditions.
Might be interesting to have a passenger take some short videos of the driving conditions we're all facing and put them on our CarSpace pages to make it easier to compare our different situations and driving styles. My "light foot" is no doubt different from yours, and when you say "city driving" that brings a picture to my mind that might not match yours as well.
The first couple of tanks on my 6 speed only got about 28.5 mpg and most of that was long distance highway driving. Closing in on 6000 miles right now and driving basically short trips of about 8-10 miles one way with some traffic light starts and stops and the last fillup worked out to 33.3mpg which is about 17% better than the highway mileage I was initially getting.
Your driving conditions are going to affect it a lot, especially with the automatic, since it's going to decide what gear it needs to be in. We've been driving nothing but sticks since 1979 and I my approach is to always be in the highest gear that I can without "lugging". So I generally find myself in 6th gear as soon as possible. For example, yesterday I was stopped at a red light on a downgrade. When the light turned green, I went from 1st directly to 6th, just a habit. I'm CERTAIN my mileage would suffer if I wanted to enjoy a snappier feel from the car wanted to runit up and down through the gears all the time and play "sports car" :P
I have to run some typical errands today, so I'll try to keep a log of how long the trip was, how much time it took, and how much of that time I spent in 6th gear. I have NO idea what that percentage is going to be, but I'm going to guess 60% and see how close I get.
When I post my "travel log" I'll include some deatils, and maybe photos, of the roads and conditions I'm facing on a daily basis so you can make a better comparison with your own situation.
As an aside, I'm also in the middle of another mileage experiment. I just did my first tire rotation, and my buddy who owns a tire shop now fills tires with nitrogen because a lot of people are demanding it due to the purported benefits. Since I keep track of my mileage a bit more closely than most, we decided to see what effect, if any, the nitrogen will have. The nitrogen is supposed leak slower out of tires over the long haul. MY theory is that folks who generally don't monitor tire pressures might get a bit of mileage improvement because the tires that they normally would have run on at lower pressure (which decreases mileage)will be closer to normal than they usually have them. I'm not expecting any difference in mileage beacuse I pay attention to my tire pressures and don't ever run around on low tires.
We'll see.
Fired up the Versa at 9:25AM and headed to town. I have a stretch of rural two lane that's 5 miles long to start and end the trek, so that's why I'm thinking my average speed will be biased upwards. Had a stop watch that I started each time I shifted into 6th gear and stopped when I came out of 6th into a lower gear.
From home to back home was 1 hour 6 minutes. Total time that the engine was running was 45 minutes, 35 seconds, and during that time I was in 6th gear for 26 minutes, 12 seconds. That's 57.4% of the time the engine is running that I was in 6th gear. I had 4 stops on the trip.
The total distance I traveled was 23.7 miles, so my avereage speed, while the engine was running, was a scorching 31.19 mph!
Talking about this with one of the techs at my local Nissan dealer (great place for the daily gossip...LOL) and he's thinking that 700 miles isn't quite through break-in yet. My experience with my Versa showed a noticeable increase once I got into that 1000-1500 mile range. It definitely had increased by the time I got to the first oil change at 3750. I'll be keeping to the every 7500 mile service schedule, but that first one was to give the car the once over. They used to have me bring new Nissans in for an oil change at 1000 miles, so this was that initial change.
In any event, I think you're still breaking the car in and things will improve for you. Check out your driving conditions if you can. Maybe there are some surprises there that you didn't expect!
PS - If I get a chance, I'll try the same thing with a passenger so I can get a better idea of how many MILES I drive in 6th gear. No way to do that safely by myself!
However, if you read the other posts, you will see that it would be more unusual if you had great gas mileage in a Versa.
It seems to be a struggle to go higher than 30 MPG unless you do 95% highway driving and if you did 95% highway driving, you could about match the Versa's MPG in many bigger cars.
The gas mileage seems to be a disappointment for most owners.
And it's not the size of the molecules that matters. In a tire filled with compressed air, the oxygen molecules tend to "migrate" through the wall of the tire over time. That's why, when you open the garage to check on your dust-covered AMC Pacer the tires are often flat. But nitrogen molecules migrate 3 to 4 times more slowly than oxygen, so tires stay properly inflated longer. Staying properly inflated longer is why some places are able to claim a gain in mileage. Those folks who normally don't pay attention to tire pressures will see less of a decrease in mileage when they are not running around on flat tires, or I guess Ishould say spending less time running around on less than properly inflated tires. I guess some would look at less of a decrease as an increase.
In any event, I'll continue my little mileage experiment/driving conditions survey to see where it leads me.
3/19/2007 279.3 mi 10.899 gal 25.63 mpg
4/7/2007 242.6 mi 11.462 gal 21.17 mpg
4/15/2007 172.4 mi 3.982 gal 43.29 mpg must be error
4/17/2007 228.7 mi 11.2 gal 20.42 mpg
5/1/2007 231.0 mi 9.197 gal 25.12 mpg
5/13/2007 231.7 mi 10.41 gal 22.26 mpg
So after 5896 mi we have a running AVG total of 23.38 mpg
Tony
I've been following nearly all the subcompact threads and every model has dissatisfied owners with the exact same issue.
Pretty much: city miles + A/C + automatic + short trips = low mpg numbers (below EPA figures).
If you has more of a mixture of highway and city or a manual transmission, your mileage would be better. The new smaller cars (Fit, Yaris, Aveo, Versa) don't seem to be very fuel-efficient under the circumstances above.
Also, 700 miles on the clock is WAY too early to be freaking out -- every car I've owned has gotten quite a bit better over time. I'm currently getting my best mileage numbers with an Aveo, at 129K miles.
I'm happy to see some people getting over 30 mpg, since the Versa would be on my list of potential cars to look at when I replace my current vehicle.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
I drive a 2001 Echo (automatic) which has essentially the same drivetrain and I have never gotten less than 35 MPG in pure city driving.
With city driving I mean an average of less than 20 miles traveled per hour, lots of stop and go.
Of course the Yaris is lighter and has a smaller engine than a Versa.
Last week I rented a Versa (4 speed AT) and over 438 miles I used 12.33 gallons of gas resulting in 35.5 MPG. My typical commute these days is 40 miles each way, 50% city stop and go and 50% highway. Average traveling time is 85 minutes.
I drive like there is an egg under the accelerator pedal, I brake as little as possible without being an obstacle for other drivers and I never exceed the speed limit on the highway (62 MPH = 100 KPH). Not much fun to drive that way but very effective in terms of the amount of gas used.
A CVT equipped Versa would be about 10% better for fuel economy than the 4 speed AT.
If you drive mostly highway miles, you lose most of the fuel economy benefit of a hybrid.
I've put over 25K miles on my 2006 I-4 Accord and have only dipped under 30 MPG TWICE! The first time was on the very first tank of fuel and the second time was heavy city driving and heavy on the gas pedal.
I regularly get 35-37 MPG on the highway and I don't drive like a grandma.
I have a 2007 MT Accord 4-cyl, and get around 40 mpg at 65 mph (best is 41.3 over 549 miles with a few city miles). Higher speeds drop mpg into the mid to upper 30's and lifetime average for about 5,000 miles is 31.7.
The Versa should be able to handily beat the Accord, but that does not seem to be the case.
300 miles/12.3 gallons = 24.39 mpg
Now don't worry my milegage was low when I first got my versa, also don't listen to the people who talk about accords gettting 40 MPG, the versa well make you happy, again I have 12K miles on it, and love it to death...
tony
That's worse than our seven-year-old Subaru Forester (2.5 L and AWD). I WOULD be disappointed if I were you.
But hang in there. Some cars do break in after a while. 1200 miles is not that many miles in.
They do get 40 - read the Accord MPG board - some are even pushing 40 with the MT V-6. CR got the automatic 4-cyl Accord at 38 highway in their test. That was a 2003 automatic, before the engine mods that upped the mileage (and hp). The 06 and 07 models do better and the stick shift models better still (though the automatics regain the lead at the highest speeds because of their taller gearing)
CR tested 2 Versas CVT and MT - the highway mileage of both was below the Accord. Your local library has all the details.
The Versa is far from a guzzler, but for its size and the size of its engine, I agree with hbfever that the mileage should be better. I think the situation is made worse by the early projections of 38 mpg combined EPA.
I was originally considering the Versa along with the Fit et al, but my wife wanted more room, and we had heard/read a lot of good things about the mpg of the Accord. I actually liked the Versa better than the Altima for seating comfort. The Altima has terrible rear head room and the Versa has plenty.
In their tests city lowest was 16 mpg, highway best 32.
CR's overal mpg for the Versa is 28. In their tests city was lowest 21 mpg, highway 36. So all over the map like many posters have noted.
Overall means combined city/highway.
Just what you would expect since the Accord is a bigger, heavier car. So you wouldn't be comparing it to a Versa.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
Nobody said the Accord had 40 mpg overall - just highway.
Yup.
Nobody said the Accord had 40 mpg overall - just highway.
Yup again. The previous exchange on the Accord and 40 mpg was about whether or not the Accord can attain this number. No one said a word about the overall mpg.
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
My 2003 Accord 4 cylinder manual averaged 30mpg and got 33-36mpg on the highway over 40,000 miles. I must say I am not sure I have seen hardly anyone get better on their Versa here.
Versa = 28
Accord = 24
I have to say that generally small cars don't get as good gas mileage as they used to. I had a '95 Civic (MT again) that regularly got between 30-40 mpg. But it only had 109 hp. I think recent generations have added much more hp and probably weight too with all the technology like air bags, ABS systems, etc that my old Civic didn't have. The current Civic size wise looks like the old Accord!
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
Yes, both on the average and on the absolute numbers. When it comes to attaining 40 mpg, for instance, all of the four cars you have listed above can attain it (fairly easily in some cases too). With the Versa, you pretty much need a tailwind on a downhill and maybe get 40 mpg. Maybe.
Then again, if you don't need a number like that, but rather enjoy a comfortable and spacious vehicle that is relatively economical, I would say that the Versa still fits the bill.
A good point! I, too, owned a '95 Civic (hatchback and MT), and the worst mileage that I ever got was 29 mpg in one of the worst snowstorms plus below zero temp for a week, driving purely on big city streets. Under normal driving conditions, I would have had to put a parking break on and drive in the first gear the whole time in order to get below 30 mpg (slightly exaggerated, of course
'24 Chevy Blazer EV 2LT
When you say that the Fit, for instance, is too narrow, are you referring to the exterior, interior, or both?
To me personally, what matters is the interior, and in that area, the Versa is only 5 mm wider than the Fit (1390 mm vs. 1385 mm; sources: nissan.co.jp and honda.co.jp). That is such a small difference. When it comes to the Yaris (sedan), the interior width is exactly the same as the Versa, at 1390 mm wide (source: toyota.co.jp).