Real World Gas Mileage

[toby]

Some folks are dividing the miles driven on a tank of gas by the wrong number, I'd suspect. A buddy of mine said this morning his sister got a Versa identical in every way to mine, and got 41mpg on her first tank of gas. We called her at lunchtime, and she told me she divided her total miles by the size of the tank, which she said was 11 gallons. Now, I fueled up from dead empty after my first tank of gas, and noted that 12.075 gallons was put in, so clearly her fuel mileage per tank is incorrect, which I told her as non-smugly as possible. If you're using the 11 gallon figure, your numbers are wrong, period. Though the dealer also told me the Versa had been filled and topped off at 11 gallons when I bought it, I thought it strange he'd remember that specific number, so I did some checking... Sorry if that brings your averages down even more.
Modified by toby at 3:59 PM 9/1/2006

[Ever Victorious]

I use none of those methods to calculate. Mine is simple... I get a receipt every time I fill up (because I use debit, and mark my transaction in my checkbook later). I always use the same chain of gas stations, but I have 3 different stations I go to (2 are managed by the same owner and have the exact same equipment installed at the exact same time).

My receipt shows the number of gallons I purchased (to the hundredth of a gallon). I take the number of miles I drove, divide it by the number of gallons purchased, and there is my number. It's always got a decimal. I round up or down for approximation purpose because really, what is the difference of a half of an MPG? (Though if you guys here would like, I could get super anal and calculate that out...)

I almost always fill up when I am at the 1/4 mark, which is always within a few miles of 300, and always within a few tenths of a gallon of 10.

Makes estimation really stupidly easy.

Oh, and tank number 11 is going into my car either tomorrow or monday.

Edit: oh, and for the interest of those who use the story of topping off for "cheating", I don't do that. I do not add any gas past when the pump automatically kicks off the fill mechanism.

[ilusha55]

You talking about skoobahead way...Except that your mileage is indicated on receipt and not on odometer in the car.

[BenDupre]

I've discovered the best way is to keep receipts from several consecutive fills and and write the odometer reading at the time of fill. Then you can average over several tanks and you eliminate the error factor of where the pump clicks off. Even when you fill till you can see gas, there can still be a margin of error since the gas tends to foam up and out of the pipe before the fillpipe is actually full.

When you average over several fills your margin of error is (example) 1gal/40 (for four fills) instead of 1gal/10 for one fill. (round numbers)

A number taken this way is more meaningful than several one-tank-at-a-time estimates.

I'm one of those people who's been getting 25-26 mpg in mostly highway driving. When I started averaging all my fills together, I realized I was actually getting 27.5 mpg. Still not a good number, but I can take "rounding errors" out of my list of things that might be contributing to the problem.

I have the CVT and I always keep it below 3000 RPMs. I drive with the AC on, although I have been able to turnit off a few times in the last week. On the highway it's cruise set at 70-75.

I've had my car in to the shop to check for mechanical causes of poor economy, and they report the air-fuel alpha number is in the 92-98% range meaning the car is running a good mixture just a whisper to the rich side.

Ben

[electech]

I think we have about exhausted the gas mileage thread!!!! I thought it was pretty simple to divide the miles by the gallons for fuel economy too. You have a pretty good idea on averaging several tanks, that would take out any variation. My story on my uncle "cheating" was just for a bit of humor and not directed at anyone here. I find that while mine is not as good as I had hoped, it is still better than some are getting. Sor far, mine tends to hover around 30 to 31. This tank, I ran it pretty good and bumped 6000 rpm a few times and it looks like it is going to be in the 28.5 range although I haven't filled up yet to confirm that. Still, it looks like as the miles roll up, I have 1400 now, it is getting a little better. This CVT really takes some attention to drive in town. It is very easy to rev up and driving like a granny is not my ususal style!! But, I have learned to work with the CVT and have improved on every tank so far. Anyway, lets go on to the next subject!!

[Jim2CPU]

On my first tank of fuel (the dealer tank), I registered 31 MPG (US Gallons).

I drove the car very conservatively and a lot of the driving was done on the highway. I'm not that worried either way because as long as the car can average 27-28MPG like my 2003 Accord did, I'll be perfectly happy since my car payment has gone down over $200 per month.

[XterraVersa]

#6 = 35.0 mpg 100% highway#7 = 36.1 mpg 100% highway

The 6-speed needs a taller 6th gear. The rpms get to high at 75+mph. I think Nissan figured the gearing for the east where 65mph is the norm for interstate speed limits.

How hard is it to take miles driven divided by gallons consummed?

2825 miles / 74.974 gallons = 37.68 mpg

[electech]

I got the CVT for this very reason. I was seeing 3000 at only 70. I would imagine at 75 or better the 6sp would turn 3500 or better. The CVT turns about 600 rpm lower at the same speeds. That should make it getter better mileage. Time will tell.

[JeppAbando]

finished up the tank ( quarter tank left, actually) from wednesday night, and the final numbers i got came to about 35mpg. 50% hway/50% city, so it's prolly a better number than that, and also i try to slow down when the lights turns stop. i have about 2330 miles on it now

so at quarter tank left, i filled it up, actually went to 10.57 gallons (i saw the gas , almost overflowed), and that's at 2.75/gallonHOPE IT GETS BETTER!

[versacarl]

The best I have seen it 41 mpg, I average 35 and have driven 4000.I HATE THIS CARFOR THE PRICE I COULD HAVE PURCHASED A FIT. __________________________________________________________

Edit by moderator.

Let's try to stick to the topic at hand. Refer to your original thread if you need to rant about your Versa troubles.

Thanks.

[OKVersa]

Tank #1 showed 34.3 MPG so we were very happy.

Tank #2 was 27.4.

Identical trips, btw. Almost same mileage. Same terrain.

The only thing we can think of is that on the second trip we used the a/c for all the journey as it was in the afternoon and on the first tank we only used it 1/2 the time.

It also seems that the dealer must have either topped it off or reset the trip meter after driving it around. I drove the first tank. Hubby drove the 2nd. Obviously he would drive it harder than I would, especially taking off from a light. I drive like a girl!

Both trips were 20/80 percent city/highway.

It seems like our driving styles and the a/c wouldn't account for the 7 MPG difference, so it seems reasonable that the dealer must have topped it off and/or reset the trip meter.

[michael.slavitch]

This weekend I drove 345 kilometers on 23 liters of gas, that translates into 6.66 l/100km. That was 60/40 highway city driving, little AC, but highway driving on cruise control. I have the CVT. It gets exactly double the fuel economy of our minivan. This was with four people in the car.

Fall weather, temperature low 70's.

I drove 120km/h on the highway with the engine running under 2400rpm.Amazing. On other cars I noticed that milage drops with cruise control as the fixed gearing forces the engine to rev or drop. With the CVT the engine stays flat while the gearing changes as you go uphill or down.

People who are getting bad mileage should ask themselves this:

1. How hot is it when you buy gas? Gas expands as temperature rises, on a hot day you'll get a few percent less energy than on a cold day.

2. On hot days engine efficiency drops due to less oxygen density in the air, the same you get at altitude.

3. Hot day + high altitude means they are combined.

4. A/C on hard while driving at low speed translates into horrible fuel economy. At high speed there is enough torque to drive the compressor without much impact.

5. EPA numbers are calibrated at 15 degrees celcius. Hot weather will be worse. In fact you'll get your best fuel economy on a clean dry road in very cold conditions due to the oxygen density of the air and the increased density of the gasoline. Gasoline is about 10% more dense and hence has 10% more energy on a cold winter day vs a hot summer day. More important the cold air acts as an intercooler, the dense air has more oxygen and the engine runs more efficiently.

[Jim2CPU]

SL w/ CVT

2nd Tank -> 28MPG (mostly city)3rd Tank -> 32MPG (mostly highway)

[BenDupre]

Your 7mpg may be more due to differences in the level of gas in the tank when you stopped filling. Best to divide the miles of several fills by the gallons of several fills to minimize the affect of premature pump shutoff. Pumps shut off when gas foams up the fillpipe. There is pretty much no hope of consistently getting the pump to shut off at the same point from one fill to the next, which you assume happened when you divide the miles of one tank by the gallons of the last fill. The margin of error is double since your baseline is the level from the fill before. A typical margin may be +/- 1 gallon for each fill. If you were -1 gal on the previous fill and +1 gallon on tha last fill your calculations are off by 2 gallons. It can have a significant impact and is the most likely cause for large swings from one tank to the next.

Ben

[OKVersa]

Ben,

That makes sense. I wouldn't expect it to be exact each time, but I remember thinking the first day, "Isn't this needle ever going to move off of 'F'?" With the next fill up it moved much quicker. I have to think the dealer topped it off.

In the 80's, I drove a Mercury Lynx. I could get 40 MPG with the a/c in August in Oklahoma, if I stayed on the highway. That was in the olden days when 55 was the law. City driving with a/c brought it down considerably. I had forgotten how badly a/c affects compact cars and we drove 70 about 15 of those highway miles with the Versa. With the Lynx, I would shut off the a/c going uphill. Maybe that's something I'll consider with the Versa.

Also, the air didn't get to the back that well, which is another thread.

Thanks for responding.

[Ever Victorious]

Just got back from my first long road trip.

Tank on the way over: 30 mpg.Tank on the way back: 33 mpg.

Overall, cruised at a slightly faster pace on the way down. Also did a mountain road at a really... awkward speed.

[1337sizz0rz]

My SL 6 Speed is consistently getting 32 MPG. Sometimes I do romp on the throttle a bit, but for the most part I keep it under 3000 RPM's. Most of my driving is around town.

I'm thrilled..It is so much better than that S10 Blazer I was driving. And honestly, there is just as much room in the back for my three backseat passengers as there was in the Chevy.
Modified by 1337sizz0rz at 3:48 PM 9/16/2006

[bjl1830]

I've got the Versa 1.8SL CVT here in Canada.

Should my mileage improve with each subsequent tank of gas, as I have been getting very poor mileage thus far. My driving patterns are approximately 75%/25% (city/highway), almost completely on weekends where there is far less traffic compared to work-week (and hence, less stop and go), and very limited A/C use. On my first fill-up, I only got about 250-275km (and yes, I did mean km and not miles) at which point I was running on next to empty. On the next fill-up, I got about 350km.

I noticed that it tends to hover around 1500RPMs in city, and around 2000RPMs on highway.

As long as it continues to improve, then I won't worry about it. But after that first tank of gas, I was extremely concerned as to whether there might be something wrong, as the estimated fuel economy numbers was a big plus for my choosing this car to begin with. Is this normal for the first several fills?

Thanks for the input!

[electech]

I don't know what that translates into as far as mpg but on mine, I am getting around 30 mpg. It has not changed much since the original tank. I have gotten mine to the point where I know if I am getting 30 mpg or not by watching the fuel gauge. At the 3/4 mark, I should have 100 miles on the trip odometer, at the 1/2 mark have 200 miles, at the 1/4 mark have 300 miles and when the low fuel light comes on have 330 miles on the odometer. That works out to 30 mpg. So far, I have checked my low fuel light 3 times and it is just about dead on having 2 gallons left when it comes on. On mine, I wouldn't want to go past 350 miles before filling up just to be on the safe side. Now, you'll have to do the conversions!!! Some folks are getting better, but I am not. And I baby the crap out of this thing. I WILL NOT turn the dang A/C off for the sake of mileage and if it doesn't improve, I am going to start running it like I stole it!!! This is my first Nissan and I like everything about it but the mileage.

[campersand]

I've heard that mpg can improve after the break-in period. Is this a possibility for those of you getting not-so-great mileage?

I don't have mine yet but if I don't average at least 30mpg I'm going to be pretty pissed. I think most people seem to be getting that or better though.

[rwanttaja]

I've heard that mpg can improve after the break-in period. Is this a possibility for those of you getting not-so-great mileage?

My first tank was about 25 GPH; today's fill was 28.5...though it included a bit more road mileage. With fall coming on, the AC will be running less, too.

Ron

[kc5f]

My first tank yesterday worked out to 32.5 mpg, and at $2.19 per gallon, to boot. About 75% highway (70-75mph), but much of that in the mountains. Not much AC use, either, plus my daughter says I "drive like a grandpa"!

I've been using the cruise with the CVT, but find in the mountains it often runs up to 3500 rpm when hitting a hill at 70mph. I find with the cruise off if I anticipate the hill I can usually keep it down to 3000 until it drops at the top of the hill. I hope it improves the mileage even more, as I was spoiled with my Probe at 35mpg...

[OKVersa]

About 2/3 highway, 1/3 city driving, plus driving 90 miles of that highway INTO 24 MPH winds, we got 29.3 MPG.

That's something I can live with given that Oklahoma winds blow 360 days of the year. My Jimmy would get about 16 MPG against the wind.

So I'm happy!

[indus49]

I have a 4 speed auto (non-cvt, in other words), and I've found my gas mileage to be around 26-27. Does that seem low to anyone?

[campersand]

Man, I'm trying to stay excited about getting a Versa but the more I read about the mpg, the more I question my decision. The five things I'm looking for are:

-reliability-safety-fuel economy-cargo space-comfort

So far I've found quite a few that have three or four of them. I thought the Versa was the one with everything but now I'm thinking it probably doesn't have the fuel economy that I want.So what now?

[rwanttaja]

Man, I'm trying to stay excited about getting a Versa but the more I read about the mpg, the more I question my decision. The five things I'm looking for are:

-reliability-safety-fuel economy-cargo space-comfort

So far I've found quite a few that have three or four of them. I thought the Versa was the one with everything but now I'm thinking it probably doesn't have the fuel economy that I want.So what now?

If you look at the forums for the typical Versa competitors, you'll see the same complaints about mileage. The EPA ratings are artificial, and should only be used to compare models to each other, not as a guarrantee of what your fuel bill will be.

The reliability at this point is unknown, but as a new model, some teething problems must be expected. I still own my previous Nissan (1984 pickup) and the only money I put into it was a new clutch at 145,000 miles.

The Versa has been crash-tested by the NTSHA, and has received some pretty good ratings.

The only issue regaring cargo space is the "step" left when the rear seats are folded. Nissan *has* the solution to this, in the form of the Tiida storage bin that effectively raises the floor in the trunk to the level of the folded seats, and then gives you some "under floor storage." I wish they offered that in the US, and I bet they eventually will.

As far as comfort is concerned, I'm pretty happy with my Versa. Lotsa room, a fair ride (for a small car), low noise level, and great convenience features like the wheel-mounted radio controls and the intelligent key.

We looked at the Versa, Yaris, and Fit, and picked the Versa as offering the best combination of price and value. While some aspects of the Versa could be improved (like a telescoping steering wheel for us long legged/short armed folks) I'm still happy with my selection.

Ron

[electech]

I too am happy with my selection although the gas mileage on mine looks as if it is going to stay around 30 on average. It has a good ride, low noise, tons of room for its size (actually more leg room in the rear than my '02 Explorer) and is fun to drive. I find that the electric power steering takes some getting used to because mine likes to wander a bit in cross winds. If you can get over the 35 to 40 mpg dream and settle for 30, you will be happy.

[campersand]

If you look at the forums for the typical Versa competitors, you'll see the same complaints about mileage. The EPA ratings are artificial, and should only be used to compare models to each other, not as a guarrantee of what your fuel bill will be.

The reliability at this point is unknown, but as a new model, some teething problems must be expected. I still own my previous Nissan (1984 pickup) and the only money I put into it was a new clutch at 145,000 miles.

The Versa has been crash-tested by the NTSHA, and has received some pretty good ratings.

The only issue regaring cargo space is the "step" left when the rear seats are folded. Nissan *has* the solution to this, in the form of the Tiida storage bin that effectively raises the floor in the trunk to the level of the folded seats, and then gives you some "under floor storage." I wish they offered that in the US, and I bet they eventually will.

As far as comfort is concerned, I'm pretty happy with my Versa. Lotsa room, a fair ride (for a small car), low noise level, and great convenience features like the wheel-mounted radio controls and the intelligent key.Ron

Thanks for the info but what I meant was, I thought the Versa had everything I wanted, but now I'm starting to wonder about the mpg. I know I'd be happy with the rest of the stuff.

And yeah, there are complaints in the Fit Freaks forum and maybe some in the Scion Life forum (I was considering an XB as well) but still those people seem to be getting closer to the epa ratings than most Versa owners. Fit owners seem to average about 34mpg, xb owners about 33, Versa owners about 29. That's not cool at all, since one of the main reasons I'm buying a new car is to get better mpg.

Like I said, I really want to be excited about the Versa but it's hard when I'm reading about so many people getting 26mpg.

[motoguy128]

Put 2 passengers in the Fit, Xb or Yaris then try and merge on the freeway. The Versa with just the driver only matches the performance of it's rivals, but in real world driving, I'll trade the extra power and torque to have a car that feels like it can keep up with traffic. Remember, the Versa weighs between 200-500lbs more than it's rivals and the larger interior space results in larger body that has more wind drag.

Heck, up to 4000 RPM, I think the Vesa's torquey 1.8L and short gearing allows it to outperform the new Civic and all other comparable small cars under $18,000. In real world driving, you don't live at redline.

[campersand]

Put 2 passengers in the Fit, Xb or Yaris then try and merge on the freeway. The Versa with just the driver only matches the performance of it's rivals, but in real world driving, I'll trade the extra power and torque to have a car that feels like it can keep up with traffic. Remember, the Versa weighs between 200-500lbs more than it's rivals and the larger interior space results in larger body that has more wind drag.

Heck, up to 4000 RPM, I think the Vesa's torquey 1.8L and short gearing allows it to outperform the new Civic and all other comparable small cars under $18,000. In real world driving, you don't live at redline.

See, I think that's where I differ from a lot of people. I don't really care about torque or hp. I'd be perfectly happy driving a Fit if only the seats were more comfy and the ride was a bit smoother, or driving a smaller version of the Versa. I'd actually rather have a smaller car so I could get better mpg.