CVT and MPG

[YipMan_Style]

I've read some discussions from Maxima to Vera with Sentra and Altima in between. It seems like nearly all owners with CVTs are getting a lower MPG than EPA numbers.

Are there anyone that is getting better than EPA numbers?

[EvillE423]

I voted for Worse than EPA #s. I've only had experience with 1 car with a CVT and it was a rental car that was used on about a 4 hour or so trip which normally would make it on 1 fill up there and 1 back we had to use 2 there and 2 back with that rental car. It was a Dodge Caliber tho, whether or not that matters or not, idk. Feel free to delete my vote if possible since it wasn't with a Nissan if you would like.

[Dattebayo]

There is a whole lot more friction involved in the way CVT works compared to a transmission, so it's logical that it would eat up more gas.

[PapaSmurf2k3]

Ditto on the dodge caliber. I think I only mustered like 23 measly MPG out of that s***. I recall it being very poor for the corresponding lack of nut.

I also took a road trip in an Altima CVT. We didn't hit the advertised highway MPG figure, but we weren't travelling 55mph either. I want to say we were getting about 15% lower going about 75mph in the QR time bomb.

[nissangirl74]

The Cube's mileage is pretty consistent with the published numbers of 27/31. We get 28.9. Doesn't mean I condone purchasing one. Ever.

[Jesda]

The Cube's mileage is pretty consistent with the published numbers of 27/31. We get 28.9. Doesn't mean I condone purchasing one. Ever.

Wobbly in crosswinds?

[nissangirl74]

The Cube's mileage is pretty consistent with the published numbers of 27/31. We get 28.9. Doesn't mean I condone purchasing one. Ever.

Wobbly in crosswinds?

Horribly

[Bubba1]

Doesn't mean I condone purchasing one. Ever.

^This. With so many different factors influencing gas mileage besides the type of transmission, the only conclusion I can draw from this poll is that the EPA is finally getting a little better at estimating averages.

[jdansmith]

I put = to, my wife gets less I get a bit more. The wife drives more short trips and takes off a litter faster along with waiting to brake later while approaching red lights, stop signs, slower moving traffic.

I had to relearn how I drive to achieve slightly better mpg than advertised, no jackrabbit starts, starting from a standstill on any incline I take off overdrive until approx 2200-2500 rpm depending on incline and speed limit. One other technique I use is accelerating 5-7 mph faster than speed limit downhill and keeping rpm as low as possible climbing the next hill even if I end up 5 mph lower than posted speed limit. If you can drive like this you can =mpg or surpass epa rating, It does take discipline to achieve the epa mpg.

[YipMan_Style]

The reason why I'm asking this is, on my other geared AT cars, Nissan or not, I've always gotten better than EPA numbers with my driving.

So if the EPA numbers for hwy said 36, I can get 40. Now, I'm considering a CVT so I'm factoring real (CVT) MPG too.

[jdansmith]

I like ours for the family car, its an 08 Sentra 2.0 S and it's a bit heavy for a 4cyl car One reason I chose our car was mpg and was a bit frustrated at first when the mpg was lower than expected. I did some research and found out how it liked to be driven to achieve the posted mpg.

Another reason we chose the Sentra was it had 848lbs loaded capacity as we are a family of 5 and an average weight of 160, many people overload small cars and it takes its toll on equipment over time and can be dangerous. The only real complaint we have is the H rated tires do not last long, the original tires lasted around 33,000 miles and the next set a bit less ( they got spooky in the rain with 4/32nds tread left) on the third set at 60,000 miles and the first 2 sets were 40k mile tires.

[Bubba1]

The reason why I'm asking this is, on my other geared AT cars, Nissan or not, I've always gotten better than EPA numbers with my driving.

So if the EPA numbers for hwy said 36, I can get 40. Now, I'm considering a CVT so I'm factoring real (CVT) MPG too.

I'm not sure I understand the value comparing one's personal economy performance numbers against an EPA "estimate" as any kind of basis for purchasing a vehicle equipped with a CVT vs. traditional A/T.

I would think other factors like long term reliability or post warranty costs to repair might carry more weight for deciding on a transmission type.

[YipMan_Style]

The reason why I'm asking this is, on my other geared AT cars, Nissan or not, I've always gotten better than EPA numbers with my driving.

So if the EPA numbers for hwy said 36, I can get 40. Now, I'm considering a CVT so I'm factoring real (CVT) MPG too.

I'm not sure I understand the value comparing one's personal economy performance numbers against an EPA "estimate" as any kind of basis for purchasing a vehicle equipped with a CVT vs. traditional A/T.

I would think other factors like long term reliability or post warranty costs to repair might carry more weight for deciding on a transmission type.

Let's put it this way. I didn't check the exact numbers for this example.

Honda FIt EPA 35 MPG AT - If I read this, for me, that would mean 40MPG. That has been true for all the AT cars I have owned. For my driving, it has always been better than the EPA numbers.

Nissan Versa 35 MPG CVT. If I read this, and if most people are getting less than EPA, lets say 30 MPG, than chances are I will not get 40MPG.

If the Versa was to be able to get "better than EPA numbers" then there is a chance of me getting 40 MPG.

So since Versa is cheaper than the Fit, Versa would than be a "better car."

That's just my logic in the question about CVT. BTW, I'm not looking at a Versa, and was just setting up the example.

[numbnuts240]

better mpg means better car?

[raremotive]

Ford Focus is also looking pretty good as far as price and mileage.

http://autos.yahoo.com/news/the-over-40 ... ings-.html

If I were to buy a small vehicle comparable to the fit/versa/focus I would definitely look for the hatchback ie... 5 door models, mostly dues to more cargo capacity of the rear.

Also, are you buying new? If cost is a concern, then consider buying a low mileage second hand vehicle. When new it will lose 15% to 20% it's value once driven off the lot. If having the virgin drive is worth the cost vs a low-mile for 80-85% of it's original value, that's up to you.