Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I did test drive a CVT for the first time today. It is interesting. I have not owned an automatic in over 35 years, but I found it to be better than most automatics i have driven. I did not quite 'get' the overdrive off selection reasoning. Maybe for steep downhill drives. Anyway, I thought there was a hint of roughness when getting underway, which I did not notice in the six speed I had driven. They had a non-power package 6 speed there as well, and I might have driven that, but it looked like it was being sold.
Ben
OK. Back to Versa. I think you MAY have got a lemon. Remember in any production of anything manmade, once in a while, a unit, a batch is not as well made as other batches. Like I said, yr 24 is a statistical anomaly here, as most other users are getting close to 30 or even exceeding that. Not just Nissan, ALL carmakers, including Toyota do have lemons once in a while.
If I were you, I will go through the fundamentals again (as in golf), check tire pressure, check oil level, check wheel alignment, balancing, etc. You must remember that many many factors can cause lower than normal milage, and yr unit MAY have one or more of these factors.
I really believe that the 1.8 Versa deserves +-30 mpg. If you do research on Versas around the world, many will report around this figure. 24 is totally unacceptable ! It really indicates something is not right with your car. If after checking all fundamentals, you still get 24, then you should tell Nissan " hey everybody else getting around 30 or more but why is mine 24 ? " You should pressure them to take yr car for a whole medical check-up, to see what went wrong.
If indeed most people report 29-35, then although Nissan's earlier claims are not accurate, but I will not label them as big liars. After all, if you go to Fit forum, there are also people complaining abt getting as low as 26 ! Now that's even worse than yr Versa, as the Fit has the advantage of less weight and smaller engine remember ?
Remember all manufacturer claims are optimistic ! Show me a car maker who claims LESS than the actual mileage. I am not defending Nissan, just that this kind of thing is pretty common in the car world.
For those getting 30 and above, I guess that's quite normal and fair. No need to worry. There are no conventional 1800 cc engine in the world able to perform like a 1500 cc engine in mpg terms, especially when hauling a heavier body. We got to be realistic here.
Anyone's tried changing to 0W30 full synthetic oil ? I believe this will improve the mpg further. Hope someone will report this soon.
Every drop of gas the engine uses is put there by the ECU. Synthetic oil won't make the ECU run the engine leaner will it?
Ben
I know its a new car, but sometimes it may be one of Nissan's suppliers who screws up, and delivers a lemon component too.
Also why don't you drive normally (conservatively) in the sense that you don't look at the rpm gauge too often. Like Luke Skywalker in StarWars, when he wants to look at the targeting computer, Ben Obiwan said " No Luke, use the force ! Trust yr instinct ! "
Sometimes yr experience and instinct may be better than if you rely on gauges too often. Try it. Who knows ? If using the force still nets you 24, its time to see yr Nissan dealer's manager.
http://themotoroilsite.com/forums/
The title and the headline 25k mile oil may put people off, thinking it's a snake oil's website, untrustworthy. Give the writer a chance to explain. Trust me, he knows what he is talking about. And he means CERTAIN types of oil + filtration can give you 25k mile oil interval, NOT all synthetic oil. He is no clown.
Skip the part about Christianity if you are not one (the writer is an ardent Christian), and read the tons of full synthetic info. Its really very detailed and I do agree they make sense. The writer explains WHY full syn is good for yr car, even helping mpg.
I will summarize for you. The writer's point is, synthetic oil not only allows you extended drain intervals, but they contain more additives, better friction reduction (better mpg), better heat resistant etc. Basically it's like comparing a premium wall emulsion paint to a cheap one. The price difference maybe say 2-3 times, BUT the synthetic's strength / durability / cleaning efficiency is perhaps 10 times stronger !
Thus the writer says a mineral or semi oil say 15W50 actually possess LESS film strength than a FULL syn 5W30 say. Some people think that a 50 weight oil is more viscous, and thus " stronger " than a 30 oil. Yes, if the oil is of the same type. And I believe many new cars could contain 40/50 weight mineral / semi in their engines. Which is way too viscous ! Modern engines can benefit from more " thin " and more slippery oil like a 30 weight oil. And full syns are so strong that there is very little risk of oil loss due to the " small " 30 figure.
Thus once yr car has reached break-in point (when many have different opinion abt this), you can switch to full syn and enjoy better protection, extended drains and better mpg.
How much better ? The writer says depending on car and condition, could be from only 5% to as much as 20% !
But I like what he said " When it comes to protecting yr car, don't be cheap, YOUR CAR WASN'T ! " Correct ! Thus Versa owners pay $15k or more, and if you decide to use her for at least 3 years, it makes sense to give her the best oil you can afford for maximum protection / efficiency.
Plus extended drain intervals means the total cost difference of using full syn compared to semi / mineral is really not great. The thing the writer stresses is PEACE of MIND. You will get peace of mind and less trouble / repairs if the best oil is protecting yr engine day after day.
Enough from me. Download and read that website and you will see what I mean.
To bendupre, synth can make a difference in millage. It tends to break down less and generally tends to "bond" better than conventional oils. On lower MPG cars like my jeep (8 mpg, i kid you not) it made no difference, but on my VW camper bus it improved it by alomst 2 mpg, from about 17 to 19. The biggest advantage is that it helps the engine wear less, particularly on cams and rings. That makes the engines tend to last a lot longer. I still have a set of VW pistons around here some where from a 2000cc stock engine that died at 70K on conventional, and a set from an overported 2165cc that I rebuilt, still running, after 120K. The difference was visibly stunning. That is why I kept the parts, I'm weird like that
anyway ...
I will be contacting Nissan in the morning and seeing about having them take a look. I sincearly, truely, hope there is a correctable issue. I would dearly love to come back to this page and say "hey they found that the discombobulator pin was loose and now I get 30+ just like all you guys. This car is great!" lol! So far though I don't see that, and just to point out I was not the only person seeing 24mpg, there were a few others.
Also I will likely pack up the kids to go visit some frinds in Austin this week end (from Dallas/Ft Worth). The drive down and back should be nearly 100% highway. I intend to drive at 60 the whole trip. This is slower than I would like but is more in line with how the EPA test is conducted. It should also take almost axactly one tank. So I hope to report back soon.
(Are you sure about the check thing, I could really use the money. Us programmers just don't get paid enough he he)
More reasons why you should forget abt the rpm gauge :
1. You are not going to drive like that for the long haul right ? It's tiring, boring and hazardous. A car could brake suddenly in front when your eyes are studying whether you have reached 2500 or 2700 rpm.
2. The OPTIMUM rpm for shifting the Versa engine MAY NOT be at 2700-3000 rpm. At what rpm ? I don't know, but I believe our driver's instinct will tell us by feeling, and the engine sound, the car's current acceleration, etc.
So later this weekend when you make yr weekend trip, remember Ben ObiWan Kenobi " Use the Force Tab00 ! "
Just relax, drive NORMALLY (don't try to show-off the Versa's extra power when you meet a Fit / Yaris on the road), don't do jack rabbit starts. Don't even look at the rpm gauge once if possible. Do what you have been doing all these years.
Remember Tab00, the Force will be with you, always !
And if yr weekend trip still yields a lousy number, then you can go back to Master Yoda, and say " Master, the Force ain't do any good, fix it or I turn to the Dark Side ! "
Believe it or not. I once read a report that said filling yr car with octane too high won't just waste money, the gas mileage could actually ALSO DROP !
I think it's a fair comparison. I'd feel very troubled if the Versa touted for its economy could not match the mileage of the older Sentra.
kcflyer do you remember if things improved after the engine broke in? What is the magic number in terms of mileage to realize the 95% of the max?
Ben
my 0.02
Leahcol
I think that can be said for just about any car, except maybe a hybrid. Stop-and-go kills mpg, as do full-throttle starts.
It would be interesting to know what the Versa MT will do in "pure" highway driving at around 70 mph (the fastest speed limit in my part of the U.S.). From your experience it looks like it will easily exceed the EPA highway rating.
If it's really running that rich, it's going to start fouling the O2 sensor and polluting the CAT.
Ben
Although it's a pain, I think it's time to take your car in to the Nissan service dept. Hopefully they will find something.
Another thing that's been worrying me about mileage is the fill technique. It's got to be about impossible to fill your tank to exactly the same point every time, and part of a gallon discrepancy can affect calculations esp when you consider the double margin of error: The tank before I filled a little low...The tank after I filled a little high...
I've started saving gas receipts and am going to sit down and calculate an average over several tanks, that should eliminate or reduce the margin of error. It's not going to increase my numbers though.
To be as accurate as possible, I've been topping off (filling until I can see gas come up the fillpipe. When I did this last night, I heard a loud gurgling sound after I took the pump out. I think gas may have been siphoning back up into the evap canister. Does anyone know if soaking the evap canister can affect performance or mileage? Perhapps I'm shooting myself inthe foot here?
Ben
My last fill up I decided to do that exact thing. I filled the tank until I could see fuel. Since pumps may fill at different rates (some seem to be super fast, some super slow) "click off" could vary some. Although probably not *too* much, this is the way I've decided to fill the Versa to be sure. I wouldn't worry about the gurgling sound. I think if you had a true evap problem your Versa would throw a "check engine" light.
The annoying thing is we really shouldn't have to do this but the Damn mileage figures just don't make sense do they?! :mad:
I'll post my next fill as most of it will be highway-80%.
Filled tank until fuel was at top of filler neck. Drove 100.1 miles.
90% tollway @55-70MPH
10% mixed (small amounts of stop & go to and from tollway)@20-50MPH
Filled tank at same pump until fuel was at filler neck about to pour out-2.729 gallons
36.68MPG
My wife has driven this car (stop and go suburban style) the past 4 tanks and her mileage has ranged from 21-25.
There really can be a great range of MPG with this car.
If you truly got 26MPG after 175 miles on the highway I think a trip to the dealership service department is in order. What was your tach reading when you were doing your highway speed?
My CVT was 2400rpm @ 70MPH.
It was late last night and so there was no traffic slowing me down/speeding up. Just a few gentle hills where tach climbed to 2800-3000 and then settled back down at the crest.
I had a 36 MPG reading with 90 miles on the trip meter before I filled up to do my test last night. I wrote it off to filling inacuracy.
I'm going to call the service department Monday and ask them.
Ben
I have a feeling you will get lip service from a phone call to the dealership but who knows. Maybe there's a new service bulletin on something that may be related to MPG. Let us know.
Ben
This last tank was 70 miles freeway, 280 city (Portland).
Any advice?
I'll let y'all know if they do/don't find anything.
One thing I did do was take the last 4 gas receipts and average mileage over all of them and came out a little better than what I've been figuring tank-to-tank. It's 27.5 as an average over 4 tanks. Still not an acceptable number since my driving is 80-90% highway.
Ben
Drove from Pheonix to San Diego R/T total 780 miles and used 27 gallon for the whole trip. averaged at 28.888 so 29 MPG..
I didn't go over 75 (speed limit is 75) on the freeway, used cruise control 90% of the time. Had the A/C on for the whole trip to SD, didn't used it while I was there, and used it on my way back.
My car has the CVT and at 72 MPH the car is taching 2400 rpms.
I'n not real happy with my MPG, my last car a 2000 Ford contour SE was getting 32 on the freeway doing 70 with the AC.I'm starting to wonder like others if there is a problem with our cars... I should have averaged at least 30-31 on my trip since 95% of that 780 miles was freeway...
Tony
Im not familiar with the area. Is that a flat and level drive? What was your 5% city driving like? How much idleing?
Getting 29MPG with your 1.8 litre engine turning @2400 RPM for that many miles doesn't make sense unless you were hitting some serious headwind or very hilly terrain. Running with the AC on is irrelavent at highway speeds.
Im looking forward to Bendupres visit to his Nissan dealership. Looks like he can start the ball rolling.
The car is not even getting the "fine print" mileage!
Off to the dealership right now.
Ben
So the dealer checked the air-fuel Alpha and the real-time numbers for the MAF and O2 sensors. He says the alpha number should be 100% with a +/- 10% tolerance. Mine was reading 98% and the number stored in memory (an average) was 92%. Numbers below 100 are rich, above: lean. 100% is perfect. So NDF "No Defect Found"
Of course this air-fuel alpha number is only reporting that the ECM is maintaining the ratio within it's own target which is a function of it's programming. If the programming says the ideal mixture is X then it's performing it's job and maintaining the mixture within 10% of X. That doesn't confirm the programming isn't wacked and X really isn't the appropriate mixture for this engine. The throttle curves and CVT curves could be major factors that would impact mileage on this car. BUT, dealer service centers don't write software. They only flash the ECM with new software from the factory when a TSB tells them to.
There isn't really anything the dealer can do. Modern vehicles don't have a mixture screw on the side of the carburetor to tweak and lean out the mixture (they don't even have carburetors).
Everything the car does is now controlled by software. Which leads me back to where I started: cross my fingers and hope the factory realizes there's a problem and releases a software update to fix it.
The service manager was honest enough to explain that the rings can still be "wearing in" (they are "seated" at the factory) up to about 5000-7000 miles and that's why efficiency improves with break-in. The honest part: 2-3 mpg is all that can be expected MAX. break-in isn't going to improve the mileage by 10MPG.
I also found out (and I still don't beleive this) that NISSAN's ECM doesn't "learn" how to better control the vehicle over time, and there isn't any "idle-learning" procedure to do as someone further up this thread mentioned FIT owners were experiencing.
I think all the owners that are having bad mileage need to complain to NISSAN otherwise they aren't going to know they have a problem. I guarantee you the engineers aren't reading EDMUNDS forums for reports on problems their vehicles are having.
They will listen to dealers, but dealers are already used to hearing owners whine about fuel economy and they have their book full of PAT answers (excuses): you drive too many city miles, you're a leadfoot, you need to turn off the air conditioner, you don't know how to calculate mileage, that's the mileage you're supposed to get...
SO CALL NISSAN
Ben
Actual Mileage
will vary with options, driving
conditions, driving habits and
vehicle's condition. Results
report [sic] to the EPA indicate that
the majority of these vehicles
with these estimates will
achieve between:
XX and XX mpg in city and between
XX and XX mpg on the highway
Does your sticker have different wording? If not, I think the key words are "actual mileage will vary..." and "the majority of these vehicles". Majority is 50%. That leaves a whole LOT of Versas that may NOT achieve the estimates on the sticker. Unfortunately, it looks like yours is one of them, for whatever reason(s).
Look at it another way: 29 mpg in mixed driving is quite good for a mid-sized car that isn't broken in yet.
Had the service manager heard of any others complaining about Versa mileage either locally or through other Nissan channels?
What was his reaction when you told him you were getting 27MPG on the highway?
Logic doesn't follow that because the statement is worded that way then 49.999 percent of vehicles will underperform estimates. Nor does the disclaimer excuse that performance.
If I could even get 29 the highway, I wouldn't be so torqued. 29 in 50/50 driving would be okay, if I was getting that.
Ben
The service manager was nice, respectful, and both listened to my complaint and tolerated my questioning.
He knew nothing about Versa specifically. This dealership has sold only one other Versa that I know of. Last I herd they had pre-sold a few. One or two of those might have come in in the last month, but I don't think so. There were no complaints lodged in his shop nor had he any knowledge of any others. No TSBs have been released.
This afternoon I called NISSAN customer service to see if I could talk to a technician and there is a 50-foot wall of isolation between NISSANs corporate service staff and their consumers. It would not budge. I must have been told 8 times "you have to talk with the dealer." "If you haven't been given satisfactory support from the dealer, you can lodge a complaint" The dealer did exactly everything they could. They diagnosed the "problem" (or lack thereof) acording to factory training and common sense. They aren't in control of the ECM programming and therefore there isn't anything they can do.
"What to do with a product complaint" just isn't in the script they give to cuatomer service reps. I lodged a complaint anyway and they gave me a number and told me they would check withthe dealer and someone would get back to me "If it was necessary." Whatever that meant. Well I know what it meant.. don't call us we'll call you (or not).
I am doubtful a mileage complaint will make it up through channels to NISSAN corporate. Especially when air/fuel alpha numbers report within tolerance. I will keep track of mileage from here out. Watch for TSBs, and try synthetic oil. I will also have one more chat with the service manager to see if he can put my complaint through to corporate.
BUT I am done driving like a grandmother afraid to break 3K on the tach. Babying the car hasn't seemed to yield any headway and therefore I'm convinced the problem lies elsewhere than in my right foot.
Ben
My suggestion is this : Let's get data on other cars, as many as possible, whose weight is similar to Versa, also uses 1800 cc engine, whose dimensions, height is also not too different (taller and wider cars contribute to extra wind drag at higher speeds and may affect mpg somewhat)
And if possible, the mpg data should be obtained from as many sources as possible. By now we know those EPA / official claims are not reliable.
For this exercise, I will need the help of other members. Pls help.
Who knows the fault is not the engine, but simply Nissan being too optimistic early on. Because if it turns out that all cars of Versa's size, weight and engine all perform similarly, then there is nothing more anyone can do.
This could be similar to many hybrid owner's complaint that company claims are far from what they are getting. And now many believe there is nothing wrong with those hybrid engines, just that the makers got optimistic (again !)
One of the "tuner heads" I am friends with had a good Idea I think I will try. Supposedly, when Nissan performs the EPA test to come up with the estimated milage numbers they also have to record and report emissions output levels and RPM at key points during the test. This is part of the basis for the numbers that you and I get tested on during an inspection. A "inspection" test would confirm roughly these numbers. If the milage is as far off as mine seems to be there should be a measurable and largly noticable difference in the emissions data. I don't know how true this all is but it is the only option I have heard of at so far that would put any sort of proof on paper. I also might be able to get use of a Dyno where I can check the HP. Nissan boasts 122 for the Versa. Poor fuel economy should also affect this.
One last thing that was questioned was the basis for Fuel\Air mixture calculations. I am curious how elevation plays a factor. O2 sensors don't typically detect the partial pressure of O2 in the air. This partial pressure is quite different at sea level vs. plains (say 1000-2000 ft.) vs. mountain (say 5000+). A lower partial pressure of O2 means that a larger volume of "air" is required to mix, conversly for lower elevations. I am curious what the "target elevation" was calibrated for? Mayby I am wrong with this point.
Some one else asked about terrain. I live in Dallas Texas (Arlington actually). I would be suprised if there were a difference of more than 200ft of natural elevation within 30 miles of here. There is almost certainly not that much change along my daily commute.
As far as Nissan not looking at Edmonds. I would not be so sure. Expecially with this being a new car and early in the release to a new consumer base, I would put money on the fact that they are looking at every major forum to guage its reception. The more people report what they are getting the better.
Tony :shades:
Fueleconomy.gov should be all you need for data.
What are you going to do the data you collect? Send it to Ralph Nader?
Ben
This process got me absolutely nowhere, but when the consumer affairs rep called me back to discuss my issue, she did admit that the complaints are reviewed. However, she did not know by whom.
In a round of conversation about what would happen to my complaint after she closed the file, she actually said "Nissan does not listen to the advice of consumers" From her lips to God's ears I am not making this up. Just one of those moments when you hope the recorder is on and the auditors are listening. Unfortunately, I beleive her statement and therefore doubt anyone will hear it or act on her stupidity for making such a claim.
I do, however, beleive that a number of complaints to NISSAN from owners is the only thing that may lead to some sort of technical review of the issue at hand. The procedure of reading the ECMs air-fuel alpha number is diagnostic of some problems that affect fuel economy, however it is not diagnostic of the issue at hand which is ECM logic that is not properly optimized to conserve fuel.
The warranty claims coded NDF (No Defect Found) aren't going to get any attention at NISSAN, but the calls to consumer affairs might, if there is a statistically significant number of them. So PLEASE if you are having an issue, don't take it lying down. This car can be tuned properly we just have to get the factory to take notice of the problem by complaining.
Thanks,
Ben
I am getting apprehensive seeing as how I won't be getting my Versa until September. I don't know if I will be getting one of those "Monday" cars or one that meets the EPA specs.
It's obvious that something is amiss with your Versa (and others), but other people are getting good or great MPG. That being the case I absolutely agree with you - there is something wrong with your particular Versa and it should be fixable. Did you finance with Nissan? There are some situations where unhappy owners can get some leverage through their finance source, but it works best when you finance with the manufacturer's captive company.
This may be a stupid question, but has anyone played with the OD (overdrive button)? I would assume that turning overdrive off would decrease mpg because of the increased engine braking. I would be curious as to what really does happen when OD is turned off. Personally I don't understand why Nissan would even want owners to fiddle with it.
Good luck Ben. If I have a problem with my MPG I will surely jump on the bandwagon.
Regarding OD/Off button on the CVT: It should be labeled "Transmission off" It seems to lock the tranny into a single ratio, a low one at that. Overdrive off is a complete misnomer for the control considering what that button does in normal 4-sp automatic trannies. In a normal transmission it eliminates one of the "positions" of the planetary gearset making it impossible for the transmission to acheive overdrive (output higher than input). It is normally only used when towing.
I too am perplexed why anyone would ever press it. I did just out of curiosity. The function does not even simulate that of the standard planetary automatic transmission. I'm sure with the changed gearing profile it becomes impossible for the transmission to overdrive, but it also changes the curve to a very linear pattern. Completely useless control.
Ben
As for the experience, in an odd way, it reminded me of my first car, a 66 Corvair with the two speed Powerglide...
While the trans did intrigue me, I do think I'd opt for the 6 speed, not having owned an automatic in over 35 years.
BTW, and regarding corporate responsiveness, I've owned Nissans before, and Nissan corporate always directed my questions to the local dealer. My wife owns a 2006 Hyundai, and the opposite is true. Although she has experienced absolutely no problems with the car since purchase in December 2005, Hyundai corporate is always either writing letters or calling her to ensure that she's happy with the car, and asking if there is anything they can do for her! This is somewhat refreshing customer service from ANY company these days.
Nissan should have just put the new 2.5 in the versa. Combined with less weight on the versa. it would have posted probably 37 highway