Disappointed!

[ericb2410]

I'm starting to see a little pattern here. I think some of you guys are TOO cautious, keeping your RPMs TOO low.

I shift at 2800-3000 RPM in my 6-speed, and consistently get high 20's to low 30's in mixed driving.

Try it for a tank or two and see if it makes a difference. I mean, what could you lose at this point?

I'll try this for sure on the tank I just filled up on. I've only got about 15 miles on the tank babying it, I'll try keeping the acceleration in the 2,000 - 2,800 RPM bracket for the rest of the tank and will post results after I try the 2nd tank.

[magneticSL]

Wow, I started quite the thread.

First, I wish I had the money to just go trade it in, Versagirlie, but that doesn't fit my real world economics. Who wants to suck up that immediate off the lot depreciation?

Next time though, mark my words, we will do more research and not buy a first year car (even though it's been in Australia longer and we did research that, and because of this, also felt it wasn't necessarily a first year car.).

But I will be keeping in mind two things:1) You get what you pay for, and2) If it seems to good to be true, it probably is.

Now don't get me wrong, we really do love this car. After all, it's based on the Renault Megane/Clio and who doesn't love a French car? Especially when one's husband is French ;-) Yes, we were charmed by that European style and sensibility, along with the sticker mpg. And since Renault does own Nissan we figured a really good bet.

Hopefully Renault will come back to the States....someday......

Good luck to all with increasing your mileage!!!

And Happy Valentine's Day.

[biggie]

But I will be keeping in mind two things:1) You get what you pay for, and

Will disagree, think it has definately been worth the money.

Seems to be greatly varied views depending on the experiences.

[mahout]

You need to know that EPA changed the mpg test procedures. Based on my own Versa SL the mileage range 27 to 33 mpg is good.I also have a Fit Sport. The Versa is a Buick of small cars; the Fit is a Camaro. The Versa has more room and amenities; the Fit is a better driver. Simple as that.

[Ever Victorious]

I also have a Fit Sport. The Versa is a Buick of small cars; the Fit is a Camaro. The Versa has more room and amenities; the Fit is a better driver. Simple as that.

Not so simple as that. Part of it is a matter of numbers, part a matter of opinion. However, test numbers from last year showed that a Versa 6-speed beat a Fit Sport 5-speed both in straight-line acceleration and also the standard test slalom course. The Fit beat the Versa in braking and fuel economy.

Despite the Versa beating the Fit in this test, the Fit scored .02g better in lateral acceleration. However... the tested vehicles were all with their factory stock tires. They are a little wider on the Fit, and also a better brand. If you had the same model of tire on both vehicles, the difference would probably swing a bit better for the Versa... anyone who has ever tried extreme lateral maneuver on the Continentals could tell you THAT.

The Fit is definitely a SPORTIER ride, there is no question about that. However, a sportier ride does not necessarily mean a "better drive". The Fit Sport is a far cry from the Civic Si. Just as the Versa is a far cry from a Sentra SE-R SpecV.

[jacksan1]

However, test numbers from last year showed that a Versa 6-speed beat a Fit Sport 5-speed both in straight-line acceleration and also the standard test slalom course.

I do not dispute the results of these tests. However, having driven both the Fit and Versa (Tiida) extensively, the Fit feels far more confident in a slalom setting. Another way of putting it is that you have to be rather gutsy to go fast in a Versa doing a slalom, whereas the Fit can swing aroung with aplomb. The Versa definitely has more raw power, so if you are willing to brave it (or sweat it), you can get a good time in a slalom. The Fit, underpowered if compared with the Versa, can "swim around" the pylons, barely braking any sweat.

That's merely my impression, of course.

[brizanden]

well ur mistake is that u bought an econo box that is not howt and has little mod potential lol so idk.

[Ever Victorious]

well ur mistake is that u bought an econo box that is not howt and has little mod potential lol so idk.

1) WTF? he didn't buy it for it's mod potential, einstein. He bought it as a commuter.

2) Who let you in here, ricer? We don't come over there and post inane crap in YOUR forum.

[brizanden]

lol i was joking. and im not a ricer haha my cars stock completely

[scorgon]

I do not dispute the results of these tests. However, having driven both the Fit and Versa (Tiida) extensively, the Fit feels far more confident in a slalom setting. Another way of putting it is that you have to be rather gutsy to go fast in a Versa doing a slalom, whereas the Fit can swing aroung with aplomb. The Versa definitely has more raw power, so if you are willing to brave it (or sweat it), you can get a good time in a slalom. The Fit, underpowered if compared with the Versa, can "swim around" the pylons, barely braking any sweat.

That's merely my impression, of course.

I tested the handling yesterday avoiding a deer, and placed the car on its driverside. I blame it on a front wheel drive and lite rear end. If the rear would have stayed planted the manuver would have been fine. I was used to driving a '91 Ford Thunderbird that was more planted.I too was only getting 29mpg with yet to make a long trip. The dealer pushed the mpg numbers as a selling point. I was getting 25-29 with the bird and a v6, so I really expected the sticker numbers on the versa to be correct. I also wonder if everyone is running the vct in overdrive all the time, I am not sure when it makes sense to turn it off.If I get my car back, I will have to remember the car is not capable of high performance manuvers.

[kc5f]

I also wonder if everyone is running the vct in overdrive all the time, I am not sure when it makes sense to turn it off.If I get my car back, I will have to remember the car is not capable of high performance manuvers.

The only time I turn the overdrive on my cvt off is when I need to climb an extremely steep hill at slow speed and don't want the transmission to "shift" before I get to a the top.

And I don't think anybody considers the Versa a high performance car in any way, but EV has autocrossed it, so it apparently is capable of quick turns, etc.

[Rockhound]

I was used to driving a '91 Ford Thunderbird that was more planted. I too was only getting 29mpg with yet to make a long trip. The dealer pushed the mpg numbers as a selling point. I was getting 25-29 with the bird and a v6, so I really expected the sticker numbers on the versa to be correct.

I'm confused. You were 'only' getting 29 MPG without highway driving? How is that 'only'? The current EPA standards put the Versa at 27/33, so you're nearly splitting those figures down the middle without long trips. How is that disappointing again?

I (unfortunately) have first hand experience with both a 10th-gen Thunderbird and a 6th-gen Cougar with the 3.8L Essex V6. Both cars experienced two (!) headgasket failures before 100k. Both were also extremely anemic - only 140hp for all 3600 lb of car. Your mileage with the Tbird is amazing - they were rated for 19/27, so were you achieving those numbers with highway driving?

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be hateful, but since when have the sticker EPA ratings been taken as gospel? Doesn't everyone know that those are simply estimates based on controlled conditions? If you have your sticker, you should get it out and look at it - it will show, in smaller text, what range should be typical for city and highway driving. From that range, an average is posted as the EPA rating.

I'd be disappointed with our Versa as well if we were getting around 20 MPG, but we're not, our current average is at 28 MPG with mostly city driving on the clock. Compared to my wife's 4th-gen Camry (4cyl) that averaged around 25 MPG in town, we're quite happy.

If I get my car back, I will have to remember the car is not capable of high performance manuvers.

It's unfortunate that you wrecked your Versa, and it's good that you weren't injured, but I probably would hesitate to call your incident 'performance maneuvers' - I'd have the tendency to call it an 'evasive measure'. It's one thing to take a corner a little faster than normal, but it's another thing entirely to jerk the wheel in an avoidance situation. The Versa has a tall profile and I'm guessing a high center of gravity for a small car, which contribute to a higher roll-over potential than a 3,600 lb low-slung beast like a Thunderbird.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm still amazed at how clueless people are that a) EPA ratings are an estimate - nothing more and that b) the EPA altered their ratings for 2008 in an attempt to make their estimates closer to real-world numbers.

Similarly, the testing procedures for engine output changed in recent years, causing most engines to 'drop' in rated horsepower under the new system.

I understand some frustration, but also understand that not every Fit or Yaris owner is achieving EPA ratings for their vehicles, either. That's why it's called an estimate.

[scorgon]

I'm confused. You were 'only' getting 29 MPG without highway driving? How is that 'only'? The current EPA standards put the Versa at 27/33, so you're nearly splitting those figures down the middle without long trips. How is that disappointing again? I (unfortunately) have first hand experience with both a 10th-gen Thunderbird and a 6th-gen Cougar with the 3.8L Essex V6. Both cars experienced two (!) headgasket failures before 100k. Both were also extremely anemic - only 140hp for all 3600 lb of car. Your mileage with the Tbird is amazing - they were rated for 19/27, so were you achieving those numbers with highway driving? Yes and have gotten 29hwy in ford ranger(5sp/od is the reason)Don't get me wrong here, I'm not trying to be hateful, but since when have the sticker EPA ratings been taken as gospel? Doesn't everyone know that those are simply estimates based on controlled conditions? If you have your sticker, you should get it out and look at it - it will show, in smaller text, what range should be typical for city and highway driving. From that range, an average is posted as the EPA rating.It's unfortunate that you wrecked your Versa, and it's good that you weren't injured, but I probably would hesitate to call your incident 'performance maneuvers' - I'd have the tendency to call it an 'evasive measure'. It's one thing to take a corner a little faster than normal, but it's another thing entirely to jerk the wheel in an avoidance situation. The Versa has a tall profile and I'm guessing a high center of gravity for a small car, which contribute to a higher roll-over potential than a 3,600 lb low-slung beast like a Thunderbird.

Most of my driving is better to be considered hwy driving, I live in the country and commute 18 miles one way to work. I should have known the handling wouldn't be great with the taller profile but it seems that all manufacturers have gone that way. You are right it was more of an evasive maneuver(you won't catch me trying a salom course at speed after this accident). I have had other vehicles capable of the same maneuver but none with as tall a profile. (Mercury Capri,Dodge Omni, Pontiac Sunfire/Gran Prix as well as the T-Bird) The Omni evaded a deer on the NY thruway at 70mph with out a roll-over.My T-Bird 129K head gasket is what caused me to buy a new vehicle. I really am not trying to complain about the gas milage, I know winter is a bad time to check MPG and expected better numbers this summer on a long trip(hope I get a chance). The dealer used the numbers as comparison for the amount of savings on fuel that the Versa would save compared to the T-Bird and the lower numbers reduces those savings.I know that I didn't buy a performance car.As far as the sticker numbers I would rather them be lower and exceed them and think I am getting over then not be able to reach them and wonder what is wrong.I wouldn't have bought the car if I didn't like it, I don't expect any other model in the size and price range to react much different.

[Ever Victorious]

And I don't think anybody considers the Versa a high performance car in any way, but EV has autocrossed it, so it apparently is capable of quick turns, etc.

Other than the fantastically crappy OEM tires (which are actually more likely what led to his accident), the Versa is no worse in the autocross than any other car I've driven. Actually probably better than my 1st gen Legacy, which has a much lower profile, but also weighs significantly more.

[fastlyfe]

i am disapointed too. why would someone waste there time worrying about a few miles per gallon. are you that hard up for cash? I noticed I was only getting 28-30 mpg combined driving. but it could have been a number of things. 18'' rims, cold air intake, exhaust or redline shifts. but that's just me. for you buy a hybird. you will get the gas mileage your are looking for. the versa is great on gas but is not a hybird. and the fit and yaris is not good if you transport people other than kids. I know a guy who can tune your car and get you 4 more miles per gallon but some people are not happy no matter what happens.

[Diznum]

Yeah you're not kidding that the Versa is tail happy, I drive the canyons to get to my work in the Mid-Wilshire area of LA. When I was finally started getting used to the little car and started to push it more the swaying showed itself but more than anything the over steer is crazy!!! I'm getting used to that as well. I Can see how you put it on it's side with the stock suspension and tire/wheel set up, but I'm sure if you put some lowering springs and better tires and if you want bigger wheels and tires, which is what I'm doing plus better seats it will turn from a pig to a fine handling car. Be careful out there!!!

[srellim234]

i am disapointed too. why would someone waste there time worrying about a few miles per gallon. are you that hard up for cash? I noticed I was only getting 28-30 mpg combined driving. but it could have been a number of things. 18'' rims, cold air intake, exhaust or redline shifts. but that's just me. for you buy a hybird. you will get the gas mileage your are looking for. the versa is great on gas but is not a hybird. and the fit and yaris is not good if you transport people other than kids. I know a guy who can tune your car and get you 4 more miles per gallon but some people are not happy no matter what happens.

A) Waste of time worrying? Hard up for money? Get laid off from your job in today's economy, like I am right now, with a mortgage and two little kids at home, and maybe you'll have an idea of what life is like for some of us out here. You have to scrape and claw to make ends meet. The difference between the average reported Yaris mileage and the the average reported Versa mileage (34.7 to 28.5) is a little more than just "a few" miles per gallon. Based on 15k miles a year it's almost $24 a month at $3 a gallon. That does make an important difference to some people.

B) Hybrid was never an option due to the purchase prices.

C) Ths was to be our second car, the commuter/around town errand/pick up the kids from school car. So we wouldn't beat up our larger, nicer vehicle that we use for transporting adults.

D) Kissing people off as being the type of person who would be unhappy no matter what happens doesn't apply here. This is the ONLY car out of about 4 dozen that I've owned or rented over the years that I've been unable to get a combined mileage that exceeded at least the city mileage on the sticker using the older EPA standards. I'd be happy if I were getting at least the 30mpg out of the car that was the listed city mileage on it.

[Frahman]

I think the point the OP made was that on balance, the Versa did not meet their needs. They posted this opinion on a Versa Forum, which is exactly the place to post opinions about a Versa. Their opinion is entirely correct for their circumstances. And it might be useful to those visiting this forum looking for info before making a decision to buy.

Others, for example me, did place gas mileage in my purchasing criteria, but it wasn't top of the list. And although I don't thrash the car, babying it to get extra mpg yields less return than the extra time is worth FOR ME.

Of course, I still remember paying 100 bucks to fill a little Audi, and that was before gas prices spiked. No idea what they are paying for gas in the UK now. That along with 50.5 cents for every business mile I drive (and more than 50 percent of my Versa miles are just that) means that gas costs are pretty much covered.

I would also add that the Versa is a bit of an anomaly. It is a bigger car than the oft quoted Yaris and Fit competition. But it is smaller than the corolla and Civic (unless you look inside, then its BIGGER). So it is really hard to compare apples with apples.

In short, it is what it is. And saying you are disappointed is not wrong, if indeed that is what you are.

[motoguy128]

I test drove the Fit, Civic, and Yaris before buying the Versa. I previously owned an '03 Corolla as well. All of those cars get better mileage, but all 4 weigh less, but have a lot less interior volume. The interior size and low cost won for me. A 3 door Yaris was the only car that was cheaper than the Versa S.

The mileage is a little lower than it cold be for a 1.8L, even with it's 2700lbs. The Corolla at 2500lbs gets about 28/38 is real world use when I owned it. But it has better aerodynamics... so does the Civic. Overall the Versa engine misses the mark for effeciency. The 2.5L motor does a better job. The 3.5L VQ motor is a little sub par.

I think overall the Versa's engine is about average, while the Honda 1.8 and Toyota 1.8 get exceptionally good mileage. Look at the small engines offered by Hyundai, Ford/Mazda, GM, Mistubishi/Chrysler and you'll see they are the same or worse than the Versa.

[xterraowner]

I currently own a 2005 Nissan Xterra. Purchased in Dec 2005. I am considering buying a 2008 Nissan Vera S, automatic transmission. They are offering it to me for $13,450, any feedback out there on price and advice on reliability would be helpful to me.

I want to trade in the xterrra due to the fuel cost to fill and FE. I was looking at a Mazda 3, but they are a little too pricy for me. I am at the positive end of equity for the Xterra, the Nissan dealership is offering me $13,000 for it. They brought the sticker price for the Versa down from $16,445 to $13,450. - which is $70 below the incoice price. Anyone out there advise me to go for the CVT?

Thanks

[frankoV]

So you're basically trading the Xterra for a Versa S?

[dauphine]

I'm glad to see this thread and have read it with great interest.

We, too, have gotten mileage that is not what we had expected (23-27mpg combined city/highway driving) although we're conservative drivers and are very contientious about the maintenance schedule. We also drove the Yaris and the Fit, but chose the Versa because of the enhanced safety features for rear-seat passengers since we were going to be using the car to do the school run and neither the Fit nor the Yaris had air bags in the back. Because of that crucial feature we really felt that the Versa was our best option.

We've come to the conclusion that we've unluckily gotten one of the occasional cars that roll of the assembly line lacking something-who knows what-that affects the mpg. It happens to all models and this time we happened to get one of them. We're not happy about it but we're not in a position to trade the car in so we'll just have to deal with it. Next time that probably won't be the case. That's life.

I'm still jealous of all the great mpg I see other drivers getting!

[KimberKenobi]

I would advise a positive on the CVT if the increase in price (you'll have to go to the SL package) is worth it to you... You'll most likely get better mileage with the CVT vs. the auto, you'll get the arm rest and the nicer trim plus maplights and a sunglass holder...

Good luck making a decision! That's quite a trade they're willing to give you on your Xterra.

[xterraowner]

Yeah, I thought so too. my Xterra has 20,000 miles on it. Right now SUV's arent hot sellers due to fuel prices, so a 2005 with no miles would retail for around $18K. They were really willing to make a deal with me. They were able to get my APR lower than my current loan and my monthly payment 5 dollars less each month too.

Although, I've heard that even the automatic transmission gets pretty good gas mileage. May go with that, considering that right now it costs me about $60 to fill up the Xterra, which gets about 18 MPG. Didnt do enough research when I bought it, first new car, not been happy with it since.

What about all of the kinks I've read about in the Versa sensors, dash (noices), Gas caps etc...? I'm very concerned with reliability more than the real life gas mileage over the EPA estimate... i am a fairly conservative driver.

Ive had so few issues with the Xterra, but I cant afford the gas anymore, plus if I trade it in, I'd have the same monthly payment for a brand new care versus a 2 year old gas gussler.

[xterraowner]

Correct.

[gotak]

I test drove the Fit, Civic, and Yaris before buying the Versa. I previously owned an '03 Corolla as well. All of those cars get better mileage, but all 4 weigh less, but have a lot less interior volume. The interior size and low cost won for me. A 3 door Yaris was the only car that was cheaper than the Versa S.

The mileage is a little lower than it cold be for a 1.8L, even with it's 2700lbs. The Corolla at 2500lbs gets about 28/38 is real world use when I owned it. But it has better aerodynamics... so does the Civic. Overall the Versa engine misses the mark for effeciency. The 2.5L motor does a better job. The 3.5L VQ motor is a little sub par.

I think overall the Versa's engine is about average, while the Honda 1.8 and Toyota 1.8 get exceptionally good mileage. Look at the small engines offered by Hyundai, Ford/Mazda, GM, Mistubishi/Chrysler and you'll see they are the same or worse than the Versa.

My 2.5L 177 hp engine on the sentra gets about 22 to 26 mpg (Depending if you do the math yourself or use the read out and depending on if I am crawling through snow or on cleared roads) with like 95% city driving. I don't consider that great but it's not bad. On pure highway I get about 30 by the car gauge so I guess reality is maybe 33 to 35.

So is the versa kind of bad? From my numbers you might say yes but you have to realize I accelerate at 2 to 2.5k rpm (and the CVT brings it down to 1.5k or even 1.1k rpm quickly) (if you look up one of those dyno charts out there that means I use around 70 to 80 hp to accelerate)and I look far far ahead so I coast towards a red light instead of having to brake hard at the end. So maybe if you actively try to drive with a lighter foot and don't brake so much you'll get much much better MPG on the Versa.

[srellim234]

That seems to be where I'm losing some mpg with the CVT transmission compared to a normal transmission. My CVT just doesn't "coast" well. it seems the CVT drags a little, slowing the car quicker than a normal transmission.

[bikeman]

That seems to be where I'm losing some mpg with the CVT transmission compared to a normal transmission. My CVT just doesn't "coast" well. it seems the CVT drags a little, slowing the car quicker than a normal transmission.

That hasn't been my experience. I almost always coast to red lights. Probably drives the folks behind me nuts. I'm amazed at how many drivers accelerate right up to a light.

David

[gotak]

That seems to be where I'm losing some mpg with the CVT transmission compared to a normal transmission. My CVT just doesn't "coast" well. it seems the CVT drags a little, slowing the car quicker than a normal transmission.

The CVT has a locking torque converter which seems a bit aggressive on the engine braking. However, you'll find it starts coasting better when it hits 40 kph (whatever that is in mph). I think that's when the converter unlocks. If it brothers you you can give it slight bit of gas and it stops it from dragging so much. Very much like what happens in a manual car.

[scorgon]

not only did I crash my versa, but should I be worried that in totaling it the airbags did not deploy???? Right front impact from a ditch then somehow rolled onto drivers side but no air bag deployment?? Broke only the rear window if you can believe that.'07 Versa SL sedan 2700miTotal loss