Does 2200 rpm at 70mph (with CVT) seem right?

[Fla_Versa]

I am perplexed with the lackluster fuel mileage I am getting with my SL equipped with a CVT transmission.

I just had my first oil change (a synthetic blend) today at 3195 miles on my odometer. I live in very flat Florida, and have had extensive use of my air conditioner through most of my Versa's miles since its purchase on August 28th.

My average fuel mileage has been 28.8mpg after consuming 90.811 gallons of fuel against 2616.7 miles logged. I check my tire pressure weekly, and only occasionally drive above 70mph. Nor can I lay claim to jack-rabbit starts from a stand-still, but I don't baby it either.

Most of the time I am letting cruise-control do all the work on my rural commute to work; locking the speed between 65 and 70 mph on long straight roads. I am 21 miles from work, and typically do no "city" driving.

The speed limits in town drop to 45mph for a few of the miles each day before pulling into the parking lot or my driveway on either end of the trip.(o.k., o.k.......25mph in my neighborhood, but most are doing 30 or slightly more).

Assuming that I have basically the most ideal driving conditions (except for the Florida heat) I get frustraited that my mileage isn't better. I noticed today that with cruise control set at 70mph, my tach is reading 2200 rpms. I think this is nice and low (which would be a good thing) but I am grasping for causes for the poor economy. Is anyone "cruising" lower?

I am not seeing any exhaust smoke or hearing any popping (or smelling any fuel), so I don't think I am running too rich. But who knows. Can my (typical) use of air conditioning really rob that much economy?

My "stealer" said give it time to settle down/break-in, and they won't be concerned until poor mileage is still evident at 10,000 miles or so.

What does everyone else think?

Thanks ahead of time for your comments....

[motoguy128]

I used to own a '03 Toyota Corolla. On those message boards there was a lot of talk about fuel mileage when the car was new. 10,000 miles was considered that amount of time needed for full break-in. I was only getting 32-25mpg at first in mostly freeway driving. After my second oil change around 6000 miles, I was getting closer to 36-38, with a few tanks right at 40mpg. That car was awesome on fuel. It also weighed 300lbs less than the Versa and had better aerodynamics and a taller top gear ratio.

Give it some time. The Versa has a pretty good A/C unit for a small car (better than my corolla) that probably consumes more power than you'd expect. 28mpg is a little low.

2200RPM at 70mpg in my opinion is a little low for a car with an engine this small. That's about the same as my Honda Accord 4 cyclinder did wiht it's 5 speed automatic. The 6 speed Versa spins around 3200RPM at 70mph. It would be nice if it was a little lower, but it's typical for a car thsi size. My Corolla was a little lower, the Fit and Yaris are a few hundred RPM higher.

[proxim2020]

I agree with motoguy. Give your car more time to improve on the fuel economy. Remember that the EPA estimates aren't realistic. They aren't hard line numbers that your car should get at a minimum. It's perfectly possible that your car will never get to that estimate.

I've heard lots about the CVT running at really low RPMs. I think this is by design to help save on gas. I wouldn't be worried about the RPMs unless it was starting to cause problem (i.e very slow acceleration)

[BenDupre]

I'm getting the same results as you are with about 6175 miles on the car now. My commute sounds about the same as yours. My CVT is geared the same as yours. I also live in FLAT country (Iowa). I also drive "normally." I don't race and I gave up babying the car after about 2000 miles and haven't hurt my mileage at all since I stopped creeping onto the freeway. I too am perplexed.

I've had the dealer check the car, and the air-fuel alpha reads normal. The car seems to be performing acording to it's design, but that doesn't mean the design isn't at fault. I personally think the CVT curves are a little too agressive. This transmission is rated 2mpg above the manual due to the taller ratio. But most with the manual seem to be reporting better economy. This tells me that over the entire duty cycle, the CVT is probably spending too much time at higher revs than nevessary.

That's my best guess. Don't know if there will ever be a software change to address it.

Ben

[Link3]

I noticed today that with cruise control set at 70mph, my tach is reading 2200 rpms. I think this is nice and low (which would be a good thing) but I am grasping for causes for the poor economy. Is anyone "cruising" lower?

On a flat highway with little wind I have a tach reading of 2200 rpm at 65 mph and 2400 rpm at 70 mph. On a recent weekend trip during a leg where I ran the cruise control at 70 mph I hit my best fuel economy for a stint at just over 33 mpg.

[Fla_Versa]

Thanks everyone for your replies! I am glad that I am fitting into "normal" performance numbers.

I totally understand that the posted EPA numbers are estimates, and that in real life most vehicles will never reach their upper treadmill readings. I'll add that even the posted "real-life" fuel numbers in small print in the lower left-hand corner of the maroni (window) sticker may be wishfull thinking for most of us.

I once had a new 1976 Toyota Corolla SR5 HB with a 5-speed manual transmission that eventually performed wonderfully. Probably my best fuel efficieny vehicle to date, keeping my fingers crossed for the Versa someday to do better.

Regards,-paul

[Paula]

My 6MT SL has about 3,400 miles on it now. Gonna get the first oil change in a couple of weeks. Runs about 3200-3300 at 70 mph. What I'm seeing is more miles = better fuel economy. Initially I was getting around 28 but now I'm averaging around 33-34.

Mom's CVT SL has about 1,200 miles on it. Runs around 2,200-2,300 at 70. She's currently averaging 31-33.

We're both pretty conservative drivers...... and I haven't chirpped my tires in quite a while. (took me some time to "re-learn" how to drive a stick ! )

Paula

[OKVersa]

I checked on our road trip yesterday, and our CVT is right at 2200 at 65, and slightly higher when we turn on the a/c.

[kc5f]

My CVT on flat roads consistently runs 2000rpm at 60mph and 2500 at 75. Over 6000 miles so far, and averaging about 32mpg.

[motoguy128]

On a second thought. It is possible tha the CVT is running at too low RPM's for good economy. This engine's sweet spot might be closer to 3000 RPM, or at least the engine runs most effecient at smaller throttle settings. For example... 20% throttle at 2500RPM for example might still use more fuel than 15% throttle at 3000 RPM. Remember the only disadvantage of higher RPM is more internal friction losses in the engine. But it's possible that the engine breaths better and produces the same power with a slightly leaner mixture.