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
averaged 26 mpg (+/- 2 mpg).
continue to be extremely satisfied with vehicle.
During the week I drive 30 miles each way to work. Approx 25 miles of that is on the highway. We do mostly city driving with it the rest of the time with some highway driving. I try not to be too aggresive with it at starts and I go approx 65-75 on the highway.
" 33 mpg on the highway is not likely something you'd see on a long highway drive but certainly possible as a misleading 'instantaneous' reading right after you reset the computer. "
Have to disagree on that. We have never seen less than 31 on hwy and usually 33-35 mpg at 65-68 mph, SLAWD. AVID tires @ 38psi, no A/C, light load, no wind, little traffic, same pump, same fuel, no cruise. We do that consistently on the same 150 mile loop and have verified the ODO on a measured hwy patrol course.
And while we're doing that loop, the MPG gauge has never gone over 28.4.
But this has been very valuable information. People I've talked to regarding the Forester claim 25 mpg or better. I've not heard anyone getting less - yet - on average. Going through all the posts pertaining to the AWD, it looks like they average out to about 23 mpg.
Just for the record, my average daily commute is a little over 30 miles each way - about 70% hwy/30% suburban streets. When I travel, this vehicle would be fairly well loaded down (at times, I would need a car top carrier). I drive 70-80 on the interstate and about 5 mph over in town or on 2-lanes (yeah, I have a heavy foot). I don't act like I have an egg between my foot and the accelerator. I get up to speed quickly. Whatever tire pressure is posted on the vehicle or in the book is what I run. [Over-inflating can wear your tires prematurely down the center and a set of tires will easily off-set whatever little fuel you may save. Furthermore, it's not as safe, since you do not get the entire contact patch to the pavement and that's really all you have between you and disaster.]
So I take all these things into consideration and figure I would come out on the lower end of the spectrum. I already have a 2004 Avalanche that gets 14-15 city and 17 highway (which I'm keeping). I need to improve on that considerably, as I'm getting rid of a 2000 Beetle TDI that gets about 42 mpg.
Plus, I'm not encouraged by the person who is getting really poor mileage and can get no satisfaction from his dealer or Nissan. I think you've just tilted me in favor of the Forester. So thanks to everyone who contributed.
I am still concerned about the fuel mileage though.
I was somewhat intrigued by the '09 Forester. We had a '97 and thought it was a fine ride. I've also had about five other Sube wagons since they started selling in the states and generally like the marque for where we live.
The '09 I drove was the 2.5 without the power upgrade as I don't want to be forced into premium fuel (I forget the actual model handle).
From a utilitarian standpoint I think the Sube may be a better choice since it has more cargo room. However, it measures a bit less ground clearance which is important here. I found it to be a dog upon entering the Interstate compared to my old '97. I think the 4-spd auto is way out of date and very dull to drive. Part of the allure to me of the Rogue is the seven speeds with the paddles. It also seemed doggy compared to the Rogue (with proper use of paddles, anyway).
I never gave the CRV serious thought as it doesn't seem what we want, although our Honda dealer (we have a FIT) is fairly decent.
The Rogue feels more fun to drive than either the Sube or RAV, although the RAV is OK for a utility.
Having had some pretty extensive experience with the RAV, I'd say it might be my first choice when/if they ditch the side opening gate...provided I wanted to pay more up front and have slightly worse MPG. But the RAV was no MPG hog. We consistently did about 25 overall. Given the V6 very handy power/acceleration, it has some advantages. From a utilitarian viewpoint we found it OK, too, especially with all the ways they pack in cubbies and cupholders. To us, the RAV has the most user-friendly cabin layout of anything in the class for day-to-day livability. However, we found it very uncomfortable on long trips with an annoying hobby-horse ride and seats that don't support very well.
It may very well come down to which brand has the best dealer experience. My son has an Outback and has not had good dealer experience, unfortunately, so I chose to stay away. But I do think the '09 Sube is an excellent choice. I just hope they bring it more up to date.
Re the hard tire thing: It's true that way over-inflation will cause excess center wear, but a Dunlop rep has told me that 3-5 lbs over the auto maker's sticker won't cause enough center wear to worry about. 45 lbs. probably would. And frankly the Rogue feels better at 5 lbs. over.
IMO, regarding tires, there is a serious ding against the Rogue: The OEM tires.
All the new ones around here are coming through with Continental 4x4 Contacts with only 6-8 tread depth. That's about 1/2 of what you'll get shopping for your own tires. The OEMs won't last very long. If one cares about that, then you need to crank in extra $$ for trading out of the Contacts at delivery. We recommend getting a quote on that before signing the papers.
So we suggest you measure tread on anything new you're tasting. It's a real PITA to have to shell out several hundred $$ in only a year or so for new tires.
Re the Rogue: Also be aware that there is an issue with paint scraping and wearing on the rockers under the doors. There could be a recall on that, but not so far. It is a problem on every one we've looked at and requires you do some work to preserve the paint. (If anyone is interested about that, check the NICO Rogue forum for pix and solutions).
As far as gas milage.... I bought my Rogue in November and now have 19500 miles on it. I work out of my Rogue and drive 300 - 400 miles a week. I am getting 25 - 26 MPG running 70% city and 30 % highway.
On the clearance, though, the specs on the Edmunds web site says the Forester has more clearance than the Rogue.
I have complained about the gas milage since the start, Nissan Service Dep. stated since there was no trouble light on the dash panel there was nothing wrong with the car.
Long story short, my Rouge is now at Nissan getting the transmition replaced.
how stupid this sounds! - we're degenerating into a bunch of mindless idiots that look to a silly computer for answers to everything - and your Nissan Service techs are apparently in front of the line!
Ultimately this sounds logical though - if your tranny is 'slipping' somehow (or if the tranny computer) is selecting gear ratios that are too high - FE would be effected. The question is, of course, why those 'trained' service techs wouldn't have been able to diagnose this with a simple test drive :confuse: It's not like Nissan hasn't built a CVT before.
My Rogue (SL AWD) manages 25+ mpg overall (60% highway), runs great, and can turn as low as 2100 rpm at 70. Sorry to hear about your problems and would be interested to know if the tranny replacement is the real fix.
Driving in light traffic 55-60mph (DC Area) I averaged 29.2mpg,,keeeping the RPM's below 2k really made a difference in the mileage and possibly the engine and drive train breaking in as well.
A/C on
cruise control used about 50% of the trip
Quite frankly, posts like these are one reason why I've chosen to focus on the Forester. While there is some disparity in mileage returns on that thread, no one has reported anything like this or the issues one or two other have seen. Everyone over there is getting 20 to low 30s, depending on driving style, speed, type of traffic, terrain and road conditions - which is within the realm of reason. Aggressive stop and go city traffic versus steady state highway cruising makes a big difference in these little 4 cylinders.
The only decision for me now is whether to go with Forester or go with a mid-size sedan - the Malibu LTZ. The Bu does not offer the utility or AWD of the small SUV, but it does offer much better mpg (33 mpg highway with the 4 cyl, 6AT) and even better creature comforts than either the Rogue SL or Forester Limited. I even like it better than the Altima 2.5 SL and the Altima is a very nice car.
So, I probably won't hang around this thread much longer. But I do appreciate all the good information I've gathered.
Good luck to you.
apparently true - have observed 70 mph to be at approx 2200 rpm if the tranny is left in 'D' BUT over 2500 rpm in '6th' a significant difference that logically would effect FE. The CVT while it does take some getting used to, is phenomenally smooth in the Rogueand cetainly 'smoother' than any AT I've ever had in any car - really don't understand why anybody would want to paddle shift it - after all it is no 'sports car' and overiding the computer gear 'selections' hurts FE???
yeah, no kidding - I think that those same truck stops might also have a different definition of 'justifiable homicide'
'drafting' (to be truly effective) requires that one follow any vehicle much too closely to be safe! They can and do write tickets for this kind of thing?
In addition to that little Rogue being a danger and an annoyance, any fuel savings that you might get out of it is coming at the expense of the trucker. It's tough enough for those guys to stay in business without having to shell out extra cash from their own pockets just so you can feel good about cutting your own fuel costs. Moreover, the rest of us end up paying more for the products they deliver. There is no free lunch.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
I have not heard of this. The big rig is going to generate the suction behind the vehicle regardless - the same suction with a drafter as without. There is no magical connection back to the big rig, is there? Where did you read this?
My understanding is that the drafter is entering into the suction zone where the air came off the big rig. But that zone is always present...
The truck drivers don't like it because people follow too closely, and the drivers can't see them in the mirrors.
I'm afraid not. Flow patterns are changed and the truck has to do extra work. The notion of a perpetual motion machine still doesn't fly.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
gas like it is going out of style.
NISSAN SERVICE DEPT SUCKS,
they acted like they could not heare the noise in my CVT, until it finnally needed replacement, now my AC knocks, they act like they cannot hear that as well.
NISSAN CUSTOMER SERVICE DEPT SUCKS,
wen the dealer service dep did not acknowledg there was a problem with my MPG, they called the service dept that said 17mpg was normal on freeway and then called me an repeated what the mechanic told me.
since then we found out my car needed a new transmition
NISSAN SUCKS, CUSOMER SERVICE SUCKS, THEY DO NOT CARE IF YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH YOUR CAR AND THEY WILL TRY TO IGNORE MECHANICAL ISSUES UNTIL YOUR WARRANTY IS EXPIRED.
My '99 Quest has a factory oil change interval of 7,500 miles, and it's kicking along at 129,000 miles using regular oil at that interval (or longer ).
There's no time interval listed in our guide. Oil is so good these days it's hard to imagine changing it every 3 months unless the miles were up there.
Purchased in April of 08.
SL AWD, all options.
did a full tank on the highway going up through Ohio and back home to Kentucky, averaged 27.6 MPG figured manually. trip computer was saying 28.3.
average over last 3 tanks of normal driving, 60% in town and about 40% highway averaged 24.2. I have had no issues with the vehicle and the AWD has been nice in the rain as it feels very secure. oh, and I drive moderate.. not a heavy foot, but not feathering it either.
The Rogue does seem to get quite consistent mileage given the variables of interpreting the varying driver habits and terrain and season etc. If one is drastically different than the other, then usually it could be traced to a bad sensor somewhere, or even as drastic a measure as a tranny problem. He mentioned he was going to have his replaced. But a simple answer to even your one question of how many rpms did his car show in OD at 70 mph would have garnered up at least some credibility with the complaints to the car and help substantiate if he actually owned one.
Would that be imperial or US gallons?