Terrible Versa mileage

[Bubs daddy]

So that was the final straw I guess, no one builds a perfect car and VW has it's issues too, but at least bad mpg's isn't one of them.

"and VW's has it's [sic] issues..." Now there's an understatement.

My Versa has been reliable, economical and a great car. 30-34 mpg combined consistently-for over three years. It performs its rated mileage.

One mechanic who services a few Walgreens Versas certainly isn't the last word for reliability or "disturbing" info. LOL.

[Promise Land]

Anderson Silva ROCKS!

So does GSP. And from how far in left field did that come?!?

[WaVersa]

Are there someone of bought a Scangauge II ? And the Scangauge helped them to get a better fuel economy?

[longo]

I installed a SC II in that little box above the radio in the dash. It's on in there full time, measureing the fuel economy twice every second.

It did in part give me a clue to the reasons for the erattic Versa MPG's.

The Scan Gauge shows instantly that even a side wind, will knock 10 mpg off the fuel economy. Driving at freeway speeds against a headwind and the Scan Gauge will show up to 16 mpg loss.

So yes, it does help you see how dramatically your driving conditons affect the MPG's.

If you are really concerned about consistent great MPG's, look for a car with the best (lowest) drag coeffient.

[Promise Land]

If you are really concerned about consistent great MPG's, look for a car with the best (lowest) drag coeffient.

The Versa is a 0.31 cd. What are some of the other models out there at?

[longo]

Here's a few DC's to check..hardly a best buy shoping list but a interesting place to start comparing.

Some notable examples:* 2.1 - a smooth brick (my 2007 Versa )* 0.9 - a typical bicycle plus cyclist* 0.7 to 1.1 - typical values for a Formula 1 car (wing settings change for each circuit)* at least 0.6 - a typical truck* 0.57 - Hummer H2, 2003* 0.51 - Citroën 2CV* 0.42 - Lamborghini Countach, 1974* 0.39 - Dodge Durango, 2004* 0.38 - Volkswagen Beetle* 0.372 - Ferrari F50, 1996* 0.36 - Citroën DS, 1955* 0.36 - Ferrari Testarossa, 1986* 0.36 - Citroën CX, 1974 (the car was named after the term for drag coefficient)* 0.34 - Ford Sierra, 1982* 0.34 - Ferrari F40, 1987* 0.33 - Dodge Charger, 2006* 0.31 - Citroën GSA, 1980* 0.30 - Saab 92, 1947* 0.30 - Audi 100, 1983* 0.30 - Porsche 996, 1997* 0.29 - Porsche Boxster, 2005* 0.29 - Honda Accord Hybrid, 2005* 0.29 - Lotus Elise, 1958* 0.28 - Porsche 997, 2004* 0.27 - Infiniti G35, 2002 (0.26 with "aero package")* 0.26 - Toyota Prius, 2004* 0.25 - Honda Insight, 1999* 0.212 - Tatra T77, 1938* 0.19 - Mercedes-Benz "Bionic Car" Concept, 2005 (based on the boxfish)* 0.137 - Ford Probe V prototype, 1985

There she is , a 1938 Tatra with unbelivable DC even to this day. And how about that air cooled V8?


Modified by longo at 1:23 PM 2/4/2010

[srellim234]

One mechanic who services a few Walgreens Versas certainly isn't the last word for reliability or "disturbing" info. LOL.

Nor is one driver who gets better than normal performance out of his Versa in a dry, warm weather climate indicative of the performance that could be achieved by every single Versa out there.

I had a Fiat X-19 that performed flawlessly and currently have a 2002 Buick Rendezvous that has given me reliability and 28.5 mpg on 5,000+ mile trips (4 of those trips). I would never presume that my cars are what should be expected of an entire production run in the face of all the problems others reported with those models.

[Bubs daddy]

Nor is one driver who gets better than normal performance out of his Versa in a dry, warm weather climate indicative of the performance that could be achieved by every single Versa out there.

Not better than normal. Just normal. Its rated mileage as per EPA.

Again, mileage is greatly affected by the driver. There are just as many stops signs in other urban areas as there are in Rancho Cucamonga. The weather conditions in that town are better for mileage than in Phoenix where my air conditioning is running nine months out of the year.

[srellim234]

Bubs, I would suggest you look at True Delta, fueleconomy.gov, etc., etc., etc. Nowhere is the average Versa delivering what you are getting. Like every single model of car on the market, not all are identical and not all perform identically. There are small tolerance variables in manufacturing and assembly that are going to cause some to perform better than others.

An excellent example is the current gas pedal problem at Toyota. Because of the other thread I just did a little follow-up searching. Those parts were built to specs by the company in Indiana and Toyota acknowledges that. Yet, despite the same specs, manufacturing techniques and assembly some of them stick and some don't. Same thing with the fuel pressue regulator problem on the Versa.

We've beaten this subject to death and you still don't recognize that all things are not equal with the vehicle. That's your perogative, but in this case it's very unfounded and naive to continue to believe that.

As for driving conditions, I deal with 3 stop signs in the first 1/4 mile and 2-4 traffic signals the next 1/4 just getting out of my neighborhood. Speed limit is 25mph. That's a tough start and finish to the day for any car. Especially since most days my car is going less than 5 miles.

[Promise Land]

You guys have my mind going here. Given the different transmissions we all have (of the three types), the different environmental conditions, the different driving styles, and different driving patterns every day, how could we try to contain all the info into a rough guess to what the mileage should roughly be?

For instance, for me:75% highway at 55mph or more25% stop and go at 50mph or less4-speed AutoSouthern US (more wet in winter and hot/dry/humid in summer)Drives like an old woman-----------------------------------------~32mpg average

Is there a way to classify a lot of our drivers so that someone with the question of "Is my mpg the same as everyone else" might have an answer by reading a graph or something?

[longo]

Well, this thread about bad Versa MPG's was started by sinha0713 who is getting 22 mpg in mixed driving, followed by raiders4403 who gets from 23 to 28 on a highway trip, and from my own extensive record keeping, also get 26 to 28 mpg highway, (on a good day)

So lets see, so far the suggestions have been; that we might be driving with our foot on the brake, all using the wrong octane gas, don't know how to actually calculate mpg's and my favorite post, "I think I get good mpg's and I love my Versa".

Just to add some perspective, another poster on a similar 'poor mpg' thread from back in 2007 who bought his new Versa to deliver flyers to N.Y. City apartments, said he was getting 11 mpg.

P.S. 'promise land' if they ever meet I think Sylva will beat him too.

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »Nowhere is the average Versa delivering what you are getting. Like every single model of car on the market, not all are identical and not all perform identically. There are small tolerance variables in manufacturing and assembly that are going to cause some to perform better than others.[/quote]Indeed there is. The EPA testing numbers that are stated right on the window sticker.

My fuel mileage rivals many of the same experiences at true delta. 32+ mpg consistently.

We've already had this discussion about tolerances and whatnot. That is going to be insignificant as a contributor. A faulty fuel pump is replaced.

Fuel mileage is affected by many things not the least is weather including temperature, wind and humidity, elevation, speed, tire pressure, road conditions and most importantly, driver habits.

For every Versa that's getting in the 20's there's another getting in the 30's. Someone getting 11 mpg as a courier is either calculating wrong, misinformed, or has the worst driving habits. 10 ton dump trucks get better mileage than that. He also could be less than truthful. It is the internet, you know.

And there are tens of thousands of drivers who encounter multiple stop lights and signs on the way to work. It's not unique to Rancho Cucamongo.
Modified by Bubs daddy at 1:49 AM 2/5/2010

[kc5f]

Fuel mileage is affected by many things ... most importantly, driver habits.

That's still my belief. I put 100k miles on a 2007 Versa CVT Hatchback, and now have 18k miles on the 2008 I bought (new) six months ago. The mileage graphs are nearly identical.

My previous car was a Ford Probe, rated now at fueleconomy.gov as 23/30, and over 240k miles I averaged 35.5 mpg, so the feel the way I drive, as well as not making 5 mile trips, helps me achieve better than typical mileage on any car.

[bondiblue]

the way I drive, as well as not making 5 mile trips, helps me achieve better than typical mileage on any car.

I'm just the opposite. I'm heavier on the pedal that most drivers, I don't drive crazy, I just don't like taking forever to accelerate to my destined speed. Because of that, I average about 10-12 mpg city in my Durango and about 15-16 highway.

The wife almost always has the V so I don't get much experience with good fuel economy.

[srellim234]

Even the EPA admitted that those 30/36 window stickers were unrealistic and they are now a 28 average. Again, look at the averages being reported in real-world drivng.

Variations in driving condtions exist right here in Rancho. We don't need to go elsewhere to look. Across Carnelian here there is a Versa owner who deals with one stop sign going on to a 45mph street, two stop lghts to the freeway, and a 45 mile freeway run at 65-68 mph. Yes, he gets over 31 mpg.

You also don't seem to understand that there are different levels of equipment failure. A faulty pressure regulator may be operating at 99% efficiency and not catostrophically fail or even appear to be underperforming or show up on a diagnostic that would indicate it is outside of specs and needs to be replaced.. Thus, it is NOT replaced.

I tend to want to help people try to see what is wrong (if anything) with their cars. Whether it be driving habit, parts that are underperforming on their cars, or just the luck of the draw on a car or driving conditios. Longo has done the same. Your response for a long time has been "I'm getting good mileage, so the fact that yu're not must be your fault." I agree with you that the driver is the biggest variable, but it is not the only reason why some of us are not getting good mileage.

[Bubs daddy]

The EPA changed their method of testing for all cars so most cars saw a drop in mileage.

Real world driving is people mashing the pedal, accelerating quickly from stops, driving at higher speeds and other reasons for not getting their rated mileage.

We all know that most cars ratings are for ideal conditions and driving habits. Most people don't care to drive like that. They want to get where they're going whether it be to work, going home after work or running errands, even taking longer trips.

It's not Nissan's fault. They print the mileage on the sticker based upon the EPA's testing methods. Blaming "tolerances" for varying levels of mileage is just baseless supposition, pure speculation and an unverified claim because there isn't any valid testing or measurement under controlled conditions to support it.

The simplest and most likely reasons for the difference in fuel mileage between one Versa owner and another is daily driving practices, % of city/highway driving, weather, fuel blends, altitude, tire pressure and road conditions.

In essence, what has been known for decades to determine fuel mileage. Blaming the car when others are getting the rated mileage is denying what is obvious. The aforementioned reasons are what is causing the difference in Versa mileage between drivers. Not part tolerances.

[VA3JFF]

Yep, the fuel economy certainly drops off in the winter. I run 30-35 mpg during the summer with mostly city driving, and drop to 25-28 mpg during the winter. Sometimes even lower.

Need to move to a more stable and warm climate.

[srellim234]

Having tried tanks accellerating at 2,000 rpm differences from 1,400 to 2,400 rpm I settled in on the best mileage.

"Mashing the pedal" at a whopping 1400 rpms, southern California weather, about 2,000 foot altitude and relatvely flat, checking air pressure religiously, following the maintenance schedule in a likewise religious manner and burning Chevron 87 octane is netting me @28 mpg.

Guess again.

[Promise Land]

I changed my oil this weekend and put semi-synthetic in instead of stadard oil. Maybe that will help a bit. I am also going to wrap the intake with heat reflective tape. Maybe keeping it colder will give a little HP increase and increase the mileage a little.

[eeshazor]

Don't know =/My 09 Versa 1.8L sedan got decreasingly awesome mileage last month, too.But I drive 70 miles round-trip 5 days a week to and from work. Normally I fill up once, maybe twice a week with more 70 mile round-trip drives to see the bf. Found myself filling up 3 times! Then again, I was running about 1,000 miles overdue for an oil change. Finally went and got the oil change, and now I'm getting my great mileage Also, try sticking to one type of fuel. I go for Shell or 76!Chevron & Mobil suck for me lol

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »Having tried tanks accellerating at 2,000 rpm differences from 1,400 to 2,400 rpm I settled in on the best mileage."Mashing the pedal" at a whopping 1400 rpms, southern California weather, about 2,000 foot altitude and relatvely flat, checking air pressure religiously, following the maintenance schedule in a likewise religious manner and burning Chevron 87 octane is netting me @28 mpg.

Guess again.

[/quote]That's the thing. I'm not guessing. It's been known for decades, Those factors are what affect mileage.

If you're getting 28 mpg, you're getting about what the EPA gives as rated mileage for the Versa: MPG (city) 28 MPG (highway) 34 MPG (combined) 30

You're getting the rated city mileage of the car, very near the comined mileage of the car. I'm not understanding, what is your complaint?
Modified by Bubs daddy at 9:17 PM 2/8/2010

[srellim234]

Now you change your story. The rating was not 28 when we bought it. The car was rated city 30, hwy 36 under the old ratings. Almost 4 dozen cars driven over the years that I've tracked mileage in (many rentals in addition to the ones we've owned) and this Versa is the ONLY one that I have been unable to nurse toat least the city rated level for cmbined driving. I'm doing more ciy driving the last 7 months but bfore that it was only delivering 27.9 on 50/50 driving.

The only time this car delivered the type gas mileage it was rated for was one tank in Florida, accellerating at 1,400 rpms and running sustained 45-50mph on a flat highway with very few signals. That one tank was 36.6.

Even on the freeway to and from Florida on that trip the car failed to get over 32. Because of that I am very sympathetic to the fact that the reason that some people are unable to nrse decent mileage out of their cars may very well be something in the Versa design or manufacturing or assembly that may cause them to be affected by the factors you cite much more severely than other cars.

[srellim234]

Interesting discussion about this subject with an engineer who has done testing on plane engines this morning. On a previous job he tested some truck fleet engines using some of the same equipment they're using for car tests and has paid attention to a lot of the standard and testing changes.

I went looking at the EPA website and found out a lot, too.

The testing parameters are supplied to the manufacturers, the manufacturers perform the tests and supply the resulting data. EPA does not perform the tests and only "spot-check" tests cars to verify results.Very few cars are actually teted by the EPA.

The engineer indicated that it would be very easy under the old guidelines for a car to be "tweaked" a little to give better results within the narrow parameters of the old tests. All cars would have to come off the line with the new tweak as part of the production run in case the EPA did test the car, but the fall-off outside of the narrow line would be more dramatic than most other cars.

That may be part of what happened here. Trying to stretch the Versa to the +30 range they may have sacrificed day in, day out mileage for most drivers and made it more susceptible to other factors. That would be born out by the fact that of the higher mileage vehicles from 2007 the Versa is the only one among the Yaris, Corolla, Fit, Civic, and others that is reporting an overall mpg at fueleconomy.com that is under the old standard city mileage.

Some inconsistencies in how the CVT "shifts" could be affecting my mileage as well. From a stop, I know my CVT will not accellerate at a straight 1400 rpm. RPMs must be run above that to get the car to drop into a higher gear much the way a regular automatic drops the RPMs when the car shifts. Once it drops in a straight 1400 RPM accelleration is OK. Multiply that little glitch by the number of starts from a dead stop in a tank and it could afffect overall mileage by quite a bit. Is that how it is supposed to work or is there an issue here?

He had a few other things to say, too, but this is already a pretty long post.

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »Because of that I am very sympathetic to the fact that the reason that some people are unable to nrse decent mileage out of their cars may very well be something in the Versa design or manufacturing or assembly that may cause them to be affected by the factors you cite much more severely than other cars.[/quote]But the newer and older ratings reflect exactly what your car is getting.

Most people who bought a car up until recently knew the EPA mileage ratings were optimistic at best. Most drivers would adjust their figures downward because that was reality. As far as changing my story, good grief I'm trying to keep up with what it is you want Nissan to do or what it is you want.

An explanation? Your money back?

The most important disclaimer is stated on the 2007 Versa Monroney sticker:

"Actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits, and vehicle's conditions. Results reported to EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles will achieve between 25-35 mpg in the city and between 30-42 on the highway."

As far as internet mileage databases consider this. A few dozen or hundred Versa owners enter their data into the site. How is this data derived?

By the owners themselves so it is ripe for inaccuracies, different methods of deriving those figures, no standard or controlled scientific method. Different weather conditions, altitudes, road conditions, driving habits, car condition, and a number of other factors that all influence mileage significantly.

I don't place any confidence in the accuracy of those figures on internet sites because they are not verified or shown to be valid. Anyone could put any number in there whether they drive a Versa or not. Whether their method of calculating mpg is accurate or not. Whether they actually filled the car with fuel to near the same place as they did before or not.

Who knows. Maybe the blend of gas you're filling up with affects the Versa more adversely than another guy who fills up somewhere else two states away. Again, hundreds of reasons.

This happens with all cars. Someone gets 22 mpg. Someone gets 26. Someone gets 20.

Based upon my method of filling up the car to near the same spot each time and dividing the miles driven on that tank by the gallons used, most of the I get anywhere between 30-34 mpg. Sometimes it drops below 30 because of more city driving. Sometimes it is as high as 34 or a bit more if it's a long highway trip but not often merely because the speed limit is 75 so mileage is going to suffer.

I say if you're that disappointed, if you can, do what Longo did and buy yourself a Jetta TDI. He seems pretty happy about it. I think that's one of the few cars out there right now that often will get higher than its rated mileage.

I certainly wish you the best and hope you resolve your mileage issues.

[srellim234]

You cited Michael Karesh's website to back up your statement and now you are backing away from it saying you don't place any confidece in the accuracy of it? You can't have it both ways.

I don't want Nissn to do anything about it. I am pointing out that when people complain about the Versa gas mileage the Versa with CVT is delivering lower gas mileage in relation to the sticker that any other car with an automatic transmission and a similar mileage rating. At True Delta, fueleconomy.gov AND Fuelly.com. Mabe Nissan could explain why their car is the worst in that area at all the reporting websites.

It is also a matter of being sympathetic to others and trying to help them with improving their gas mileage instead of just kissing them off as you seem prone to do.

[rwc2]

Have owned top-end 2010 hatchback FE (hah!) 1.8SL hatchback for about 2 and one half months and have gotten between 20 and 22mpg on the first 2,000 miles. People I know with Honda Fit are getting 30mpg on pure city driving like the type I am doing -- slightly better than the EPA ratings, and I'm stuck getting way less than the 28mpg the Versa is rated for.

Went to dealer this week to complain, he checked fuel/air mixture and said everything was OK. He argued that it was too early to tell and car had to be broken in more and said I should use 91 octane or better. But from the sound of letters I've seen in forums I'm probably not going to get much better mileage.

Jeez, this Versa replaced my 18-year-old Stanza which was running on 3 cylinders and was getting about 21mpg!

Like another letter writer, I've noticed that just about any acceleration gets the car quickly over 3000rpm.

I love the space, the handling and its smooth cvt but the mileage is killing me.
Modified by rwc2 at 6:57 PM 2/10/2010

[longo]

Welcome to the Versa Forum..sorry to see your first post is about bad Versa MPG's,

I bought the first 2007 Versa SL CVT in town and loved everything about it except that Gas guzzing 1.8 motor.

If I could have read the posts on this forum before I made the deal, I wouldn't have bought it...the posted mpgs on the window sticker looked great, but in real life, the poor mpgs drove me crazy.

[rwc2]

to longo: Thanks for the reply. Though I'm not sure you will see this as there was no reply button on replies to a reply. I'm new here, so is the only way to view your reply to someone to click on the reply button on the original comment? And then if you want to reply to someone else who replies to you, do you have to go back to the original comment and hit reply again?

[rwc2]

"Actual mileage will vary with options, driving conditions, driving habits, and vehicle's conditions. Results reported to EPA indicate that the majority of vehicles will achieve between 25-35 mpg in the city and between 30-42 on the highway."

boy, I would be happy if I was within those averages, but I'm way below them getting 20-22 with my new 2010 cvt hatchback. I have noticed the rpms go up real fast whenever you accelerate, and I don't mean punching it, just normal acceleration. I think this poor mileage may be connected to that.

[srellim234]

My best mileage comes trying to hold the rpms down around 1400. A couple of other people around here have reported the same. It is very difficult to hold it that low but if you can you should see some improvement.

Surprisingly, the cvt doesn't accellerate much faster when you press the gas pedal harder. Rpms go up but all it's doing is eating gas. At least that's been my experience.