I hear a few complaining about poor mileage.

Read this =>http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml

And see if it is your driving habits or the car. You may be surprised if you follow those tips for a full tank.

XterraVersa wrote:I hear a few complaining about poor mileage.

Read this =>http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/driveHabits.shtml

And see if it is your driving habits or the car. You may be surprised if you follow those tips for a full tank.

Scanning through the reports on the forum pages, just about all the mentions of low mileage were from owners of CVT-equipped cars. Of all the complaints about low mileage, all but one reported having the CVT. Seems that driving habits may not be the main factor, here.

The EPA rating for the CVT is actually *higher* than the 6-speed...but, of course, the EPA test procedure doesn't really reflect the real world.

In my particular case, my Versa drives the same route in the same stop-and-go traffic (e.g., little opportunity for jackrabbit starts) that my previous car did. Previous car was an Oldsmobile, a thousand pounds heavier with 80 horsepower more than the Versa. But the Versa only gets 5 MPG more....

You can feel the CVT "hunt" in certain conditions; the car seems to have trouble figuring out which combination of engine throttle and transmission gearing to use. Kind of like when a regular auto transmission keeps upshifting and downshifting, but with the CVT, it'll just rev up and rev back while trying to find the perfect combination for the road. That has to hurt mileage.

The last mile of my ~9 mile commute is a mile-long ~8% grade, uphill. The car maintains a nice, steady speed up the hill, but the computer can't seem to decide on the right RPM/gearing combo until the car is practically to the top.

It appears that if you're looking for best fuel economy, select the 6-speed Versa.

Ron

I guess when they say CVT is more fuel efficient, manufactures are comparing it to regular automatic transmission, manual being the most economical.

Also, i didn't notice any revs while going uphill when test driving the versa. May be it has something to do with you particular trany?

ilusha55 wrote:I guess when they say CVT is more fuel efficient, manufactures are comparing it to regular automatic transmission, manual being the most economical.

Not on the Versa. If you go to the official specifications page....

http://www.nissanusa.com/versa/specifications.html

...and click the Fuel Economy link, you'll see the manual is rated 30 city/34 highway while the CVT is rated 30 city, 36 highway.

The EPA tests are highly artificial...they aren't based on driving real cars in real conditions. After all, that's where "Your mileage may vary" comes from.

Because the tests are artificial, manufacturers can "game" their designs...optimize them to get better results on the testing, where the changes don't really help real-world conditions. The 25 MPG I'm getting is actually about what I suspected I'd get, based on past experience with EPA ratings. What's throwing me off is the reports of the manual transmission cars getting 25% to 40% better mileage, despite a near-identical EPA rating.

ilusha55 wrote:Also, i didn't notice any revs while going uphill when test driving the versa. May be it has something to do with you particular trany?

It's something I didn't notice during the test drive, either...and I took it up the same hill I drive every day. Don't think anything changed since then, but I've paid a bit more attention and got more attuned to the car. It really is only noticable if you watch the tach. One good feature of the Versa (among many; I'm not as negative about the car as I may sound) is the soundproofing in the cabin. So it's not obvious unless you're watching for it. Driving up that hill for ~2 minutes, there's darn little else to do. :-)

Ron

Though several of you CVT owners have reported poor fuel milegae, I should also note that the highest reported fuel mileage was ALSO on a CVT, reported by XterraVersa.

Lets hear from those with the CVT.What kind of actual numbers are you getting? My first two tanks (mostly city)---------25MPG.

Anyone doing better with the CVT?
Modified by skoobahead at 10:25 AM 8/14/2006

Hm I thought the CVT would win agaist the 6spd due to its taller gearing at highway speeds, but by just keeping under 55 mph, the 6spd stilll wins in terms of fuel economy. (CVT has more friction losses, so the lower revs don't really mean its burning less fuel than a 6spd that has higher rpms)

CVT has some good coasting abilities that are apparent with speeds under 40 mph but some users report it can't decide if it wants to cruise of pass someone. So i'm sure the 6 gears are more tuned for city driving than highway driving, I think I'll save my pennies and continue to row my gears even if I do hate it sometimes.

Plus a 6 spd has the secret ability to restart the engine which I abuse on my civic currently. You won't believe the things I do to get the mileage I'm getting...

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums...=1510 its a handful of reading but, it will make you think twice the next time you fill up gas at a station (which is 25 days for me!

Ever Victorious wrote:Though several of you CVT owners have reported poor fuel milegae, I should also note that the highest reported fuel mileage was ALSO on a CVT, reported by XterraVersa.

Nope; I have the 6 speed

G'Day. The only time one needs to turn off the bloody OD in the CVT is when they don't want to barrell down a mountain pass. Keep it on mates, it keeps it under 2000 rpm. I just found that I'm getting 33 mpg in town. Plus I used the A/C for a bit, just to see what it felt like. In WA one doesn't need an A/C but three days a year.

33 MPG in town?So your 3 MPG *above* the EPA?No way Jose. You don't know how to calculate mileage.

philmcneal wrote:http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums...=1510 its a handful of reading but, it will make you think twice the next time you fill up gas at a station (which is 25 days for me!

Thanks for the link...interesting stuff. What caught my eye was the reference to the air conditioning costing 5%-25% of the mileage. I suspect smaller engines (like the Versa) are probably affected more...guess I'll wait and see what happens when the weather cools down.

Interesting insights about the internal friction of the CVT. As an engineer, I like the *concept* of the CVT (the car computer can select exactly the right combination of engine RPM and gearing for the conditions) but wonder if its execution might not be quite right.

My funny CVT story came when I was shopping for the car. My salesman was very young. He started explaining about how the car had a variable transmission, and I said, "Like a Go-Kart, huh?" That took him a bit aback...

Ron

Could be you divide backwards where you were taught. 204 miles at 6.2 gal. What do you come up with? You may want to go get an electronic calculator. I'll give it a few more fillups at 1/2 tank intervals and see if it stays at that rate.

33 MPG is pretty impressive.Looks like you have the best CVT mileage to date. What do you consider "in town" mate?. Cant wait to see your "highway" numbers.

Thanks for the tip on the electronic calculator. When did those come out?

jgus2399 wrote:G'Day. The only time one needs to turn off the bloody OD in the CVT is when they don't want to barrell down a mountain pass. Keep it on mates, it keeps it under 2000 rpm. I just found that I'm getting 33 mpg in town. Plus I used the A/C for a bit, just to see what it felt like. In WA one doesn't need an A/C but three days a year.

You are saying that putting the car in overdrive saves fuel by keeping the rpm low? Is this not dagnerous for permanent use?
Modified by ilusha55 at 9:04 AM 8/15/2006

On my CVT, after three tanks I've gotten:

1. 29 mpg2. 31mpg3. 28.5 mpg

Since I bought the car I've driven a mixture of highway (usually close to 80mpg) and city driving. Using the A/C a lot too. The last mileage was after the break-in period ended so I was driving it pretty hard.

Now I'm not surprised that the mileage isn't even up the EPA city estimate because my 05 Element was the same way when we bought it new. It took several thousand miles before I saw the gas mileage improve. In fact, after checking the mileage at around 30,000 i noticed the mpg was much better than when new! It just seems to take a while for these engines to fully break in.

after about 3 fill-ups on my cvt, i'm getting about:1. 292. 333. 31assuming.i'm also a very casual driver, no speed racer mumbo-jumbo.

EDIT:mainly highway driving.
Modified by penpen-commander at 4:36 PM 8/15/2006

ilusha55 wrote:
You are saying that putting the car in overdrive saves fuel by keeping the rpm low? Is this not dagnerous for permanent use?

Modified by ilusha55 at 9:04 AM 8/15/2006

Not in the least. "Overdrive" is an interesting term. While technically correct (it means putting the vehicle in a final gear with a less-than 1:1 ratio), we use it quite incorrectly in many terms.

It used to be applied to automatic transmissions for a long time. For instance, GM loved their "3-speed automatic with pushbutton overdrive". The ACTUAL translation of this is: "4-speed automatic where you can push a button and disable 4th gear".

again, "Overdrive" just refers to any gear where the ratio is less than 1:1. I had a Kia that had both 4th and 5th gears that were technically overdrives. Noone referred to them as that, they were simply 4th and 5th gear.

That was my first stop at the gas pump and I may have gotten a little excited, prematurely. There are only1500 miles on the car. I believe another post said they didn't start seeing the good mileage until after the car was well broken in, about 10,000. My mileage to work is 12 miles, average 40 mpg with about 6 stoplights, lots of trees, no wind. I'm taking it on a trip over the mountains (Stevens Pass, Cascade Mt) in a week or two and I may have to eat my words.

jgus2399 wrote:That was my first stop at the gas pump and I may have gotten a little excited, prematurely. There are only1500 miles on the car. I believe another post said they didn't start seeing the good mileage until after the car was well broken in, about 10,000. My mileage to work is 12 miles, average 40 mpg with about 6 stoplights, lots of trees, no wind. I'm taking it on a trip over the mountains (Stevens Pass, Cascade Mt) in a week or two and I may have to eat my words.

Okay... I think we need a third Versa owner from Washington State to chime in.

I've only driven 200 miles so far and I'm one tick over the half-tank mark. How does that compare with everyone else? I have one of the "dreaded" CVT's. But man, the smooth acceleration with a lot of the torque available from the start is very nice. I have to hand it to Nissan; I should test drive an '07 Maxima sometime soon.

My commute is about 45 miles round-trip between Mill Creek and Fremont. So far I've been loving it and hopefully it'll rack up to some decent MPG's.

Cheers,Kermee