what will they do, arrest themselves?K03sport wrote:
Cany you make a claim to the the Canadian Vehicle Police explaining you car is not meeting or performing at government standards???
I keep forgetting there are no standards, just guessing using a formula.frankohabs wrote:
what will they do, arrest themselves?
[oh, and it ain't standards, it's expectations . . . and we all know about not living up to expectations . . .
I've got to agree with this, at least for my early production model. I averaged 32.7 for the first 5k and 31.7 for the first 10k. The reason for the drop is that I bought it in the fall, and by 10k it was winter. But looking at a graph over the three winters and two summers, it's consistently averaged 30-32 in the winter and 33-35 in the summer. The "break-in" period fits the curve perfectly.srellim234 wrote:Not so fast on the "poor gas mileage until you reach 10,000 miles" claim.
Well, you better care who set the mileage rating before crying "false advertising". Car manufacturers have no say in the efficiency ratings the EPA assigns their respective cars.tama48 wrote:I don't give a hoot about who set the EPA numbers. Nissan, the man in the moon or the EPA. Here are the facts:
When I researched the car I saw one set of estimated mpg numbers POSTED on the car window.
I buy the car with that being the MAJOR reason ( miles per gallon). It has never come close to the original numbers on the sticker (I still have the sticker). Then Whoever changed those numbers (doesn't matter to me) after I bought the car.
Well, that's what Google is for, right? Do a little research yourself instead of just taking everything at face value.tama48 wrote:Had I known the true numbers of the MPG BEFORE I bought the car I wouldn't have.
Like I said never again. But thanks for all the clearification as to who sets the estimated mpg numbers.
Right on, Bubs. I think most folks would be surprised to see how they actually drive as compared to how they think they drive, you know? My Mazda has a built in mileage computer, essentially a less feature-rich Scan Gauge built in the center stack. It keeps track of stats like average speed, and average/instantaneous mileage.Bubs daddy wrote:I have the CVT and get the mileage on the sticker...
...I'm just going to say it. Maybe it's not the car. Maybe it's your driving.
'twas just a generalization . . . but many of us have seen mileage improve after the [whatever] "break-in".srellim234 wrote:Not so fast on the "poor gas mileage until you reach 10,000 miles" claim.
I really don't know what to make of the break-in length. Hard to believe that at some point a switch is flipped and the mileage drastically improves, but that appears to be what some folks are experiencing. Ours was a very slow, steady increase in economy over the first couple thousand miles from 25-26 MPG in town to eventually consistently getting 27-30 MPG in town, depending on factors like seasons and fuel blends.dangene wrote:After reading several posts on this forum about long break-in miles on the Versa and improvement in mileage after the second oil change or 10,000 miles, I look forward to better mileage in future. 10,000 miles is a long break-in period! For now, I will postpone my battle with the dealer. Thanks, 1_Sleek_Versa and others. This is the value of forums: to learn from the experience of others.
All you do is divide the miles (or km) driven by the amount of fuel you used. So next time you get gas, zero the odometer before you leave, and then when you fill up again, record the mileage and divide by the volume of fuel. If you were to drive 300 miles till you fill up and you used 10 gallons, your Versa would be returning 30 MPG.iluvmyVersa08 wrote:This may sound like a stupid/silly question, but how do you figure out your MPG?
So would you define your 'commuter driving' as city or highway? Just curious.Bergerman wrote: I just calculated and over 5000 miles of commuter driving (combined with no big trips) I have averaged 27 MPG. Not great but the sticker says 24/31 so just about in the middle but I have been running regular unleaded. I'm just wondering if I might get better with the higher octain grades. Thoughts?
I hope you're joking!pbrady12 wrote:If you get awesome fuel economy with your versa, your comments are worthless.
No problem!iluvmyVersa08 wrote:Thank you ROCKHOUND. I will give it a try the next time I fill up. I appreciate your help Thanks!
Well, it looks like your main problem is that you went with the S model, which with either the standard transmission or 4-speed auto does not achieve the same mileage as the CVT. Sure, some folks have reported lackluster mileage with the CVT as well, but by far it is the most economical transmission of the three.fjwagner wrote:Our Versa has gotten horrible gas mileage from day one until today (13000 miles). We have two 6 cylinder cars that get better highway mileage than the Versa. The in-town mileage is almost identical. Some economy car! The only saving grace is that we did not have to pay that much for it.
Gotcha. Sounds like you've got a 4-speed automatic model then (based on the EPA rating you mentioned)? 27 MPG combined isn't too shabby, I'd think. But with gas prices as low as they are, I guess it couldn't hurt to at least try 89 octane.Bergerman wrote:I would define commuter driving as normal around town stuff. I have 24 miles one way to work of highway and the rest would be around town stuff with short trips. Maybe i'll burn a tank of 89 to see if it makes a difference. Thanks.