Disappointed!

[magneticSL]

I have to say I am really disappointed with the Versa (bought in July last year). We have the dash rattle. We have the AC noise. It can't get out of it's own way when needed. And misc. other little things.

But the biggest let down is the mileage. Advertised at 30/36, and on the sticker, when we bought it and now it's advertised at 30 highway?

Well that explains why we aren't getting that great milage we expected (note: we drive conservatively).

I wish we shot the lock off the safe for that Toyota or Honda!

[Versagirlie]

if your really not that happy go trade it in for that toyota or honda...no point in complaining

if you not happy go try and make yourself happy.

BTW I LOVE my V

[jfanaselle]

Maybe you should sell it. I've been nothing but happy with my Versa. I understand that a $17K car is going to have squeeks and creeks (and trust me, they're not as bad as the $24K 2006 Chevrolet HHR that I traded in) and I understand that the EPA mileage estimates on the sticker are simply that... an estimate. However, I average 28-33 mpg, which is far better than almost any other vehicle I could have purchased for this price unless it was a stripped down economy box (Toyota Yaris hatchback maybe?).

I'm not trying to tell you to be happy with your Versa... obviously you've already made the decision that you are not. I'm just trying to say that you would have experienced 5-15% less miles per gallon than the quoted estimate no matter what car you had purchased, especially if you purhcased an '07 before the EPA changed the way they calculate the estimates (and it sounds like you did, since you're upset that the numbers on the '08s changed.) But for the price you paid, you're not going to find a more comfortable, roomy, quiet, and versatile (no pun intended) vehicle out there. Trust me, I looked before I bought my V!

[coxcj]

I'll agree that I'm also disappointed with the mileage. I used to have a VW Jetta that almost always got over 31mpg. But, that one was also a smaller car with a lot less room and it was stick. My CVT is now getting me around 29mpg and even less with winter here and the car working harder.

When you mentioned that you should have paid the extra and got the Toyota or Honda, what models were you considering? When I was shopping around, I was only looking at entry level vehicles and was hard pressed to find any other car that came anywhere close to the comfort and room that the Versa offers.

Also, with the noises in the dash and the air conditioning, have you had anyone look into them. There are a few people that have the rattle in the dash and I remember at least one thread where they found a way to keep it from happening. Also, others have had the AC problem, although I don't know if anyone's had a fix. Maybe it's something that the dealer can look into.

Best of luck. Hopefully you will have a car you're happy with (whether it's your Versa or anything else).

[srellim234]

We bought ours last July and we, too, are disappointed. We were looking for a budget economy, higher mpg car. Over the years I've never failed to get a combined mpg that at least exceeded the city figure on the sticker until the Versa. That includes 10 years of renting all kinds of vehicles on jobs that had me travelling 75% of the time.

We looked at the Fit, the Yaris, and the Versa as our most economical options. Besides a sticker mpg in the same range as the others the Versa offered more room, comfort and other features not available on the others so we went with the Versa. In the real world, though, the Yaris is far superior and the Fit somewhat superior to the gas mileage of the Versa. Which is why the Fit and Yaris sticker mpgs weren't revised downward as much as the Versa after we bought the car..

As for rattles, our Versa is fine. A few rattles that I need to take care of but for the price I certainly didn't expect the fit and finish of a Lexus or Cadillac.

We are not in a financial situation where we can afford to trade the Versa for one of the other cars that gets better mileage. That is something we will probably have to wait another year to do.

That said, if the car fits your needs, wants or expectations the Versa deserves all the praise and loyalty you can heap on it. It is a very good little car that fits solidly in the area of the marketplace it was designed for. It has great creature comforts and options for a car under $20k fully loaded. It just doesn't fit what WE bought it for even though it was promoted as such.

Next time around we will not take a chance on a first model year offering and instead wait to read the real-world results.

[Bubs daddy]

My Versa gets exactly what the mileage figures indicate.

[Andrews Chalmers]

But the biggest let down is the mileage. Advertised at 30/36, and on the sticker, when we bought it and now it's advertised at 30 highway?

Well that explains why we aren't getting that great milage we expected (note: we drive conservatively).

I wish we shot the lock off the safe for that Toyota or Honda!

For what it is worth... the EPA estimates were revised across all vehicles as the EPA modified its testing protocols. Nissan didn't lie in 2006-2007 and then decide to tell the truth in 2007-2008...

[jfanaselle]

Toyota Yaris: 2007 EPA estimates for MPG are 34 mpg City, 40 mpg Hwy. 2008 EPA esimates are 29 mpg City, 36 mpg Hwy. That's a variance of 10% hwy and 14.7% city from 2007 to 2008. The overall variance average is 12.35%.

Nissan Versa: 2007 EPA estimates for MPG are 30 mpg City and 34 mpg Hwy (for a 6 speed manual). 2008 estimates are 24 mpg city, 32 mpg Hwy (for the same 6 speed transmission). This is a variance of 5.88% Hwy. and 20% city. The overall variance average is 12.94%.

The point is that EVERY vehicle manufacturer had the same decrease in advertised EPA estimated miles per gallon from 2007 to 2008. The Versa took a slightly larger hit in the City but the Yaris took a slightly larger hit on the Hwy. This is because of the way the EPA revised the testing standards (to more realistically represent real-world driving habits and conditions).

My average MPG approx 29.5 mpg with about 80% hwy and 20% city driving. According to the 2008 EPA estimates and this hwy/city ratio, I should be experiencing 30.4 mpg. My number is fairly consistant with this new average, and I cruise on the freeway at 75 mph instead of the speed limit of 70 mph. Final point: I am not disappointed... I am getting exactly what I expected to.

[srellim234]

Real world results being reported back to fueleconomy.gov indicate that the Yaris with automatic transmission is averaging 10% better gas mileage than the EPA sticker while the Versa with CVT is not.

Bottom line: The Yaris (34.7 mpg) and Fit (32.4 mpg)are both averaging above their old city mileage estimates on the stickers; the Versa is below (28.5). The real-life discrepancy downward with the Versa is actually greater than the other two.

[Versa Madness]

Comparing the Versa to the Yaris and Fit is not fair. The Versa has a 1.8L engine while both the Yaris and Fit run a 1.5L. The Versa is also heavier and bigger than those other two as well. I wish that people would match up the Versa to it's comparable rival, the Toyota Matrix/Pontiac Vibe. Both share the same wheel base, weight and engine displacement. Try to get a Matrix for under $12k as I did with my V....

[jfanaselle]

Well then, I guess it pays to wait until people post their own gas milage experiences and review them before buying a new vehicle if this is the primary reason you're purchasing it.

As I've stated before (and you have, too, srellim234), I still think this is the best car for the money out there. I don't mind sacraficing MPG for comfort and space if I'm still hovering around 30 mpg on the highway. I drive 140 miles per day and when you drive that much, comfort is just as important as fuel economy. When I test drove the Yaris and the Fit before buying my Versa, I hated them both. The seats weren't comfortable to me, there wasn't enough leg room in the Yaris and the Fit felt like it was squeezing me from the sides.

I can understand your disappointment, especially if you were expecting better fuel economy. I expected less than what was advertised on the sticker, but it is definately disappointing to know that other vehicles are getting above what is on the sticker. I wonder how many other factors play into this, though. Things such as the average age of the driver (who the car appeals to) can have an adverse affect on mileage, because of the habits of the driver. We are quick to put the Yaris and the Fit in the same category as the Versa, but I've never seen a man my age drive either.

This is why I try not to look at the competition after I've made a decision. Hindsite is always 20/20, but you can't go back in time.

[arco]

Nissan Versa: 2007 EPA estimates for MPG are 30 mpg City and 34 mpg Hwy (for a 6 speed manual). 2008 estimates are 24 mpg city, 32 mpg Hwy (for the same 6 speed transmission). This is a variance of 5.88% Hwy. and 20% city. The overall variance average is 12.94%.

Yeah, well it's that 20% in the city that really ticks me off. I'm sure I'd get wonderful gas mileage if I did a lot of highway driving, but I don't. Fourteen months later, I'm barely breaking 20 mpg, on average.

I know pretty much all the car companies had their estimates lowered, but the whole thing still seems pretty shady to me. Even though everyone knew the old EPA estimates were inflated, it was still fraud.

[srellim234]

Your statement would be all right if the Matrix/Vibe was the gas mileage/model the Versa was being pitted against by Nissan and Nissan dealers. The 30/36 mpg on the 2007 sticker put it squarely as a high mpg alternative to the Fit and the Yaris. We expected to get at least 30 out of it because of past experience getting at least the city mileage out of vehicles.

The weight of the car, size of the engine, etc. and whether or not the car was supposed to be pitted against the Matrix/Vibe is totally irrelevant. Any manufacturer might, at any time, come up with a power train that will deliver great mpg, especially with gas prices and the public screaming for better. Remember, our 2007s were the first model year. Who knew the Versa would be farther off the mileage in our type of real-world driving than the other cars being touted as high mpg vehicles?

As I've said before, the Versa is a good car. It just doesn't deliver what WE were looking for.

[Ever Victorious]

I know pretty much all the car companies had their estimates lowered, but the whole thing still seems pretty shady to me. Even though everyone knew the old EPA estimates were inflated, it was still fraud.

It has been asked at least 30 times before, and I guess it needs to be asked again, for your sake.

How, exactly, is it fraud if Nissan posts the EPA estimates? Nissan did not come up with them. The EPA won't let the post any OTHER numbers. What are they supposed to do, not post any numbers at all? Oh wait, they can't do that either.

You want to place blame, place it on the EPA where the blame lies. And seriously, watch your mouth. "Fraud" is a 5-letter f-bomb. It's a very potent word, learn to use it where it ACTUALLY applies, not where your whiny butt wants to put it.

[Diznum]

When I first started driving "The little car" it was during our big storm we just had, the little car had to struggle against the wind and rain etc. I got 25 mpg combined, but as soon as the weather stabilized it began to climb to 28 mpg and last night i filled it and checked, now up to 30 mpg! I believe that even if you think you're driving easy, you probably aren't. Also how are your tires? put a little extra air: 35 pounds plus is OK.Air cleaner checked? I will also go with synthetic oil on my first and every oil change there after. Try to keep your foot out of it and I'm sure your mileage will improve. Give the car a chance.

[arco]

EV, where did I accuse Nissan of anything? As you put it, the EPA wouldn't let them post any other numbers. You just made my point... thanks! Want to revisit the definition of fraud again?

And why do I have to "watch my mouth"? Is the EPA going to come after me? (Oh no!!!)

[Ever Victorious]

EV, where did I accuse Nissan of anything? As you put it, the EPA wouldn't let them post any other numbers. You just made my point... thanks! Want to revisit the definition of fraud again?

And why do I have to "watch my mouth"? Is the EPA going to come after me? (Oh no!!!)

You did not specify who was committing the fraud, in your opinion, and the topic had not changed off of Nissan's posted ratings. Perhaps if you wanted to clarify, you should have done that in the original message.

Fraud also requires one BIG thing: Intent. If you INADVERTANTLY lead people to believe something, based on information you received that was flawed from another source, then you're not committing fraud.

That is one word I absolutely HATE because it is used wantonly. It's used to try to shock people into swaying their opinions or caving in to demands.

So... once again, I have to ask:

Who committed the alleged fraud, and where is your proof that there was intent to defraud a target?

[srellim234]

Diznum- I run 35 lbs in the tires. Service and maintenance is done faithfully. 90% of acceleration is done at 2,000 to 2,200 rpms. I have over 8,000 miles on the car and the last tank, all city driving, the vehicle was never over 2,400 rpms and got only 21.9 mpg. I have gotten over 30 mpg on two tanks since I bought the car but both tanks involved driving situations that are not my normal drive.

It is not a matter of "giving the car a chance." After 8,000 miles it's more a matter of the Versa being a car that has a narrower optimum mpg operating range than other cars; where and when I drive doesn't fit that narrow range.

[marleyfan]

MPG is only one factor in the satisfaction level of any car. For all cars there is give and take. If MPG is the absolute most important factor then go buy a tin can Yaris. I guarantee I'll enjoy the driving experience in my Versa more than you. I'm not happy with the mileage of my car. But I love the car. It is head and shoulders above any other entry level car out there. And I drove almost every one of them. If you want it all: high quality trim levels, superior gas mileage, adequate powertrain, high tech options such as bluetooth, then don't by ANY entry level car.....from any company. Not everybody is going to be satisfied with the Versa. That's why we have choices.

[randyshemin@comcast.]

We've had our SL with CVT for a month now, and are getting 28-29 mpg in combined driving. We have yet to go on an all highway trip.

We are VERY pleased with everything about our Versa, and compared to my 01 Sentra SE (which gets about the same mpg give or take 1-2 mpg), the Versa is a far more comfiortable and roomy car.

Compared to the Fit and Yaris we also shopped, there is no comparison.

[srellim234]

You're right. We all have choices. I'm merely pointing out that my wife and I didn't make the right one with the Versa to fit our needs.

We already have a Buick in the driveway that gives us all the comfort, roominess and driving experience we're happy with, much more comfort and roominess than the Versa. The Versa was to be the "utilitarian" car we would use as a second car, one that would prevent us from beating up the Buick needlessly day in and day out, while delivering 30+ mpg. The kind of trips (market, kids to school, 20 miles to visit parents, shorter commutes in rush hour) that don't place the premium on comfort, but rather on saving on the gas bill.

For over 25 years we've used two Honda Civics and a Geo Metro, all purchased used, to fill that need and we've been very happy. Averaged 33-38 mpg and used our bigger primary cars for the longer or "comfort" trips. That way we didn't beat up the bigger car and stayed a little greener for the environment as well. This time we went with a new car, the Versa, instead of used.

For our needs and wants, mpg was a much higher consideration than what it is for most people. That the Versa was to be a second car and not the primary vehicle, unlike most owners here, was a large part of it. For someone in our situation, unlike most here, the Versa doesn't deliver enough of a savings over our other car to justify the price.

I do agree wholeheartedly with buying the Versa as a primary car. You can't beat it for the price. I just can't justify buying it at the level of mpg it delivers compared to the 2007 sticker when I'm averaging 22 mpg out of the car that was already sitting in the garage.

[corpsecorps]

I dont understand all the bad mileage?I drive into and Around NYC (with New York City Traffic) and the lowest I have gotten is 30mpg.

Do you guys run AC on high all the time?Let it Idle for Hours?Floor it and Jam the brakes all the time?Measure your mile incorrectly? The one guy said he got bad mileage because he only got 170 miles when the needle hit "E". (now that was scientific).

I think we have a lot of Human Error around here!

[Ever Victorious]

I don't know how much the A/C actually affects it. In my initial fuel economy study, there wasn't a significant data variance between running A/C a lot and a little. I run my A/C nearly 100% of the time, even in the winter, to keep the windows from fogging up. Yet my lifetime fuel economy is still over 30 MPG.

[srellim234]

I think the problems we see documented here are not the result of bad driving. I, for one, meticulously document daily mileage, driving conditions, etc. in a diary kept in the car. Gas mileage figures are verified using online calculators and reporting using the fill-up procedure suggested by the True Delta Reliability website for consistency in reporting.

In my opinion, we see enough problems with sets of these cars that most of the gas mileage discrepancies are probably within the engineering and asembly of the car. The inconsistencies with the fuel pumps are an example. "Dashboard rattle" is another. Inconsistencies allow some cars to run better than others. Heck, in the late '80s I probably had the only trouble free Fiat X-19 in the state of California! We loved that car. Based on the trouble everyone else had with it, though, I never recommended buying one to others.

I think for the most part the Versa has a narrower efficiency range than other cars I've been around. I'm glad it works for you, but although you get 30+ mpg others are out here really trying and getting 27 or less out of it through no fault of their own. The cars are only averaging 28 mpg combined in the real world although the original sticker indicated 30/36 and the CVT was rated higher than the manual transmission.

[vpnavy]

I dont understand all the bad mileage?I drive into and Around NYC (with New York City Traffic) and the lowest I have gotten is 30mpg.

Do you guys run AC on high all the time?Let it Idle for Hours?Floor it and Jam the brakes all the time?Measure your mile incorrectly? The one guy said he got bad mileage because he only got 170 miles when the needle hit "E". (now that was scientific).

I think we have a lot of Human Error around here!

I agree with you corpsecorps. It constantly amazes me how some can't break 30MPG and I'm consistently pulling between 29 and 34 MPGs (last 8 fill-ups).

[ericb2410]

http://img511.imageshack.us/im...7.jpg

This is what I use to document my mileage. Everything is accurate, and I take it easy on the car. I accelerate at under 2,000 RPM at all times unless I absolutely need to get it going quick, which is not often. Almost all driving is done in suburban/city conditions, with no highway per tank. The exception is the first entry for 2008, which was highway miles. Reported MPG is what my ScanGauge II shows, green fields are entered by myself, yellow fields are calculated in the spreadsheet. I make sure that there is no user error here. While my car is still very young, and fuel mileage not totally broken in yet, I am content with my results. I'm looking for the spring blend of gasoline to up my mileage a bit, along with more miles to finalize the fuel break in.

[Ever Victorious]

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?

[KimberKenobi]

Can I just note that the Versa is heavy for it's class with a bigger engine so the fact that it gets as close as it does to the other 2 in it's class is amazing. My first Camel consistently got 33mpg after the initial 5600 miles (I consistently go 80-90 on the highway and I like to be 'first off the line' at a stop light). I traded it in for aesthetic issues and have been troubled by my current Camel's propensity to not average above 27.7 (even with amending my driving habits to sticking closer to 70-75 on the highway and keeping my rpms around 2k when starting out)...

I would also like to note (OT) to Srellim that I love my mom's Bertone X1/9 (it's a 1986) and am thinking of purchasing it from her when she sells it this spring.

[marleyfan]

I'll be the first to admit that I don't baby my V between lights. It's just not in me. Don't get me wrong, I don't race from light to light, but I refuse to be constantlyl thinking about my gas mileage every time I step on the pedal. I'm not happy with my mileage but I know that at least part of it is my fault. However, I have tried to go for an entire tank feathering the pedal and it didn't seem to make much difference. Almost all of my driving is city. I have noticed that the few times I've been on the highway with it my mileage has increased significantly. This car simply loves the highway. Unfortunately I'm rarely able to make it happy.

[srellim234]

Exactly right. And you know what? It's just a series of things, none intentional on anyone's part, that leads me to my displeasure with the gas mileage figure. We wouldn't even be having this discussion, and I wouldn't be unhappy with my mileage, if the EPA sticker had read something like "26 city, 36 highway." The EPA's tests were conducted the same way on this car that they test all cars. The narrow, controlled environment of the test put the city mileage at 30, a figure that drops off more drastically outside of the test parameters with this car than with any other car I've been around. That is not the EPA's fault, and Nissan had nothing whatsoever to do with that figure other than engineering the car and sending the car to the EPA.

Did Nissan intentionally design the car to perform great in the test but not in real life? Absolutely not. They know that customer loyalty and satisfaction as well as word of mouth advertising is the only way any major car company is going to survive long-term. That the car performed that well in testing is more likely just something that happened. Based on the old EPA ratings, most cars had more than the 6 mpg differential between city and highway mpg. I didn't pick up on and question that when looking at the Versa.

As I indicated earlier in this thread, I made the mistake of buying a first model year car without having the benefit of a year or two of real world performance to study. The wrong thing to do when I had such narrow demands as to what I wanted out of the car. That is clearly MY fault, not Nissan or the EPA.