Terrible Versa mileage

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »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.[/quote]Who's Michael Karesh? I don't know about his site. I'm referring to any site that tracks mileage. I'm quoting from the EPA ratings on your sticker, not a fuel mileage website.

Quote »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.[/quote]I think you're a bit sensitive and melodramatic. I've suggested many ways to improve mileage...for years. You're getting the rated mileage of your Versa that's clearly stated on the sticker.

-------------------------If one is getting 20 mpg then going to 91 octane will do absolutely nothing except drain your wallet quicker. Too many anecdotal testimonies to decide what is true and what is exagerrated.

I don't think I could get 20 mpg in the Versa if I tried. Maybe going uphill for 400 miles.

[kc5f]

I've noticed that just about any acceleration gets the car quickly over 3000rpm.

One thing is that the computer in the Versa adjusts the CVT to your driving habits over time. If you started out driving it by seeing what it would do, it may be that yours has adjusted to that style of driving. (3000rpm is enough to get to and hold the car at about 90mph.)

As srellim234 stated, higher rpm's don't make that much of a difference in getting the CVT up to speed. I usually get going fast enough at 2000rpm and if I have somebody on my tail then 2500rpm does quite well.

Hopefully a period of driving without high acceleration will be reflected in your computer module's settings. Or you could reset it and let it "learn" new habits.

[srellim234]

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

Modified by Bubs daddy at 1:49 AM 2/5/2010

True Delta is Michael Karesh's site. The above is your quote, not mine.

I am NOT getting the mileage stated on my 2007 Versa sticker. The stciker clearly stated 30/36, NOT the 28 you keep claiming.

By the way, when the EPA revised stickers downward, they only applied a mathematical formula that was derived through negotiations with manufacturers. That is why all cars went down on the ratings. The formula was universally applied to all cars. The new numbers were not derived from EPA testing. The Corolla, Yaris, Matrix, Civic, Fit, etc. are all performing at the mileage ratings under the old system, not the new.

There is no reason to believe that there is some kind of conspiracy that people are sabotaging or underreporting mileage only for the Versa and not the other cars at every reporting website. The Versa is still the only 2007 in the higher mileage automatics that is not meeting an average that is above the listed city mileage under the OLD standards.

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »True Delta is Michael Karesh's site. The above is your quote, not mine.

[/quote]So I'm supposed to know who owns the site? Yes, I have been to true delta. So why are you referring to the website by the person's name who owns or runs it? You write like I'm suppose to know this person.

Quote »I am NOT getting the mileage stated on my 2007 Versa sticker. The stciker clearly stated 30/36, NOT the 28 you keep claiming. [/quote]
Modified by Bubs daddy at 10:31 AM 2/11/2010

[srellim234]

1. If you linked thrugh to sign up at True Delta through the sticky thread at the top of this forum, it is Michael Karesh who provides the link and description of his site. He comes in from time to time to "re-invite" people to participate in his site.

Michael and I have traded emails about the flaw in his gas mileage calculations and to the best of my knowledge they still haven't corrected it. They do not take the total miles driven and divide it by the total number of gallons used. They only average all the mpgs reported per tank.

To demonstrate the flaw: Tank 1: 300 miles, 10 gallons = 30.0 mpg You top off the tank after city driving: 20 miles, 1 gallon = 20 mpg

True Delta calculates the car at getting (30.0 + 20.0)/2 = 25.0 mpgActual calculation should be 320 miles / 11 gallons = 29.09 mpg

Errors should average some over, some under, but regardless it's very unreliable when you start with an innacurate formula right out of the starting gate.

As for the sticker, I will repeat, 30/36. The Versa is the ONLY car not performing within the parameters of the bold numbers on top. No other car out there has to depend on your defense of "read the fine print and ignore the numbers on top." Why does the Versa?

[Bubs360]

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.

For a second I thought you were responding to me, but then I realized I never posted in this thread after all.

As for me, I have a 2008 HB with the six-speed. I generally get 30-32mpg. The worst I have ever gotten was 25mpg, but I would consider my driving during that tank to be hammering on it - 4-5000RPM sort of stuff. With that being said, as long as I'm driving regularly I am more than satisfied with the fuel economy I get with my Versa.

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »1. If you linked thrugh to sign up at True Delta through the sticky thread at the top of this forum, it is Michael Karesh who provides the link and description of his site. He comes in from time to time to "re-invite" people to participate in his site.

Michael and I have traded emails about the flaw in his gas mileage calculations and to the best of my knowledge they still haven't corrected it. They do not take the total miles driven and divide it by the total number of gallons used. They only average all the mpgs reported per tank.

To demonstrate the flaw:Tank 1: 300 miles, 10 gallons = 30.0 mpgYou top off the tank after city driving: 20 miles, 1 gallon = 20 mpg

True Delta calculates the car at getting (30.0 + 20.0)/2 = 25.0 mpgActual calculation should be 320 miles / 11 gallons = 29.09 mpg

Errors should average some over, some under, but regardless it's very unreliable when you start with an innacurate formula right out of the starting gate.[/quote]Which goes to prove my point of many of these sites or databases being inaccurate thus invalid, unreliable and to be used just for anecdotal purposes.

Quote »As for the sticker, I will repeat, 30/36. The Versa is the ONLY car not performing within the parameters of the bold numbers on top. No other car out there has to depend on your defense of "read the fine print and ignore the numbers on top." Why does the Versa?[/quote]It's no defense. I'm not defending anything. I'm telling you the facts. Your car gets the rated mileage. Because you refuse to believe it or don't want to hear the truth doesn't mean it's any less true.

The Versa DOES perform within the parameters. There are many Versa owners who get between 30-36 mpg, including me. Which is exactly why the sticker states that "Actual mileage may vary..."

Because you see two big numbers and refuse to understand that there are four little ones that are just as important, just not as big, does not make my point any less valid.

They are saying that you will get between 25 and 42 mpg. You are getting 28 mpg. You are wihin the mileage stated on the sticker.

[srellim234]

When every database results, regardless of methodology, all report the same thing, it smacks of the truth regarding a car, even if you don't have faith that the numbers are perfectly correct. Even accepting your insistence that all of our cars are performing to standards, there is no denying that the average Versa performs worse than all of the others on the scale. The Versa is still the only one not reaching the larger city number on the sticker.

Totally accepting your standards, we're back to an engineering flaw or manufacturing or assembly inconsistency. A well maintained Versa, in the hands of an experienced, proven driver, driven in good conditions and in a manner to maximize mpg, should not get 15, 20, or 25% lower mpg than another. The mileage is inconsistent enough to indicate something on the car is underperforming from one car to the next.

You're not changing your mind and I'm not changing mine. We've beaten this subject to death over the last 2 1/2 years. Lets give it a rest.

[Bubs daddy]

Quote »You're not changing your mind and I'm not changing mine. We've beaten this subject to death over the last 2 1/2 years. Lets give it a rest.

[/quote]LOL. That we have.

I agree, let's give it a rest.

[OR STATE]

I'm curious what people with a stickshift are getting out there with the 1.8 litre engine. I purchased my 1.8S hatch with 6 speed stick and my first tank which was entirely freeway at exactly the speedlimit (ranging from 60 to 70mph with no traffic) was 35.3mpg. My second tank was not freeway driving for the most part, but rural highway with city/town driving interspersed. Even on that tank I managed 32.1mpg. I shift at about 2100 rpm.

I avoided the CVT because of people having mileage concerns. Having recently driven a 2010 Altima with CVT (long term rental), I can say that if you feather the pedal, the CVT in that car delivers awesome mileage. I was getting around 29mpg in the Altima, but keeping the Revs down is key I think. I will say, that if you are in a highly urban area with stop and go traffic all the time, I don't know how any purely gasoline car can deliver decent mileage. Hybrids would seem to me a better alternative for the purely urban driver.

[V-Man]

After the 13 mpg's that my 2007 Honda Ridgeline gave me, I don't complain anymore. Anything close to 30 is great. Everything is relative in this life.

[TheVersaMan]

I have a six speed 2007 Versa with 124,000 miles. Most of those miles have been freeway driving. When I bought the car with the 185 mm tires, I was getting about 1.5 miles more to the gallon. I have upgraded to 205mm for better traction, especially because the car doesn't come with independent wheel suspension. Overall, the car has gotten decent highway mileage (29-33mpg), but is somewhat disappointing for a manual transmission with a six speed. I don't take off at the lights, and yes, I will occasionally drive it at 75-80 on the freeway when I have long distances to cover. I have had other Versa owners complain of the city mileage. In the end, it's not bad for the money and its safety for a compact. While the Civic is in another class-- it's a better car-- I'm glad I have this Versa.

[pimpedarse]

Just finished one of my best tanks... 32 mpg rounded up. Drove almost all freeway. Just about 360 miles and filled up about 11 and a half gallons. I drove to Hungtington beach on Friday, then Santa Barbara the next and got back all on one tank which kinda surprised me.

I guess I'm satisfied with this gas mileage, especially hearing someone get 11 mpg ahaha

[WeirdFishes]

Some points:

Longo, while your VERSA got terrible gas mileage, there are a lot of people who get fantastic mileage. On my first tank, I got 27.1 mpg with mostly in town driving. On my second tank, I got 31.5 mpg with half highway, half in town. I have about 780 miles right now. I'm on pace to improve upon the 31.5 mpg I got for my second tank. Once my engine breaks in completely, and I go through a couple of oil changes, I wouldn't be shocked if I got 35 to 40 mpg on the highway.

I never go faster than 70 on the highway and I obey all speed limits in town. I just won't speed anymore. Got a $130 ticket for going 32 in a 25 mph zone in Cambridge, MA..

The guy who got 11 mpg delivering papers? Well, that's a s***-ton of stopping and going, getting out of the car and idling, and then going, and then hitting red lights and crosswalks and pedestrians and potholes. Did he turn off the car for fear of someone getting in and driving off? Many factors to consider. The 11 mpg shouldn't be shocking.

Congrats on your TDI. The previous generation Golf, Jetta, and Passat made up the Holy Triumvirate of Unreliable. The current gens seem to be okay, though. Personally, I'll never feel comfortable with the knocking sounds of a diesel. And a major magazine recently b****ed about the Jetta TDI heater not getting hot even after 20 miles on cold winter days.

[WeirdFishes]

"I guess I should mention a couple of final points, first of all, I bought a low milage, mint condition used 2006 Jetta TD similar to the one in the You tube video for $12,950."

Low mileage, mint condition, 58 mpg real world, and the car sold for only $12,950 in an age of $3.00 gas? Did the previous owner have a heroin addiction? Were mobsters threatening to remove his pinkie?

I'm not saying that this is cowpie, but it definitely doesn't pass the smell test.

[Jerky_san]

Soo I thought I'd throw my 2 cents in.. I've complained about my own car getting pretty piss poor mpg to say the least.. As stated in another thread my car was getting low 20's like 24 and less most of the time.. About 4 weeks ago I decided I was going to try to find out what was wrong..

The only thing I could tell from looking at the fluid levels and such on my car was that my versa's radiator fluid was low(which I actually knew about since it was at the midway point when I bought the thing and it had gotten to the actually "low" marker). I had bought a bottle of radiator concentrate but never got around to mixing it so I decided that I should do that.. I filled it up to max while it was cold out(around 40F).

I drove on that tank for 2 weeks continuing my general driving habits.. I got a amazing 28mpg which for me was basically like a hot damn moment. This next tank appears to be following the same trend as well.. It has 209 miles on it and its still not below the 1/2 tank marker. I also noticed even though the temperature is around the same when I go to work in the mornings. The car appears to warm up quicker though I don't understand why since you'd think more water = more energy but whatever I'm happy if it keeps getting this consistent mpg or higher..
Modified by Jerky_san at 4:09 PM 3/24/2010

[Promise Land]

[QUOTE=Jerky_san]The car appears to warm up quicker though I don't understand why since you'd think more water = more energy.QUOTE]

It will warm up quicker because you have more fluid in the system (instead of air). The fluid will transfer heat a lot faster as it will absorb it much better than air. You can always change the ratio of water/coolant to change the speed at which it will heat up.

[Shad0wXCalibur]

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.

There are also people with Honda Fits who don't get great mileage. Same with every econo car out there. There are too many variables as to why one car will not get as good of mileage as the next. I got lucky and average 30 mpg but I didn't start getting that until almost 10,000 miles. I don't know how many miles you have but that's something to think about. I mean come on, there are even people with V8 trucks who get out of the norm mileage getting 20+ mpg combined when the epa rating is 16 city or so and then you have the guy with a v6 Honda Ridgeline that only gets 13 mpg.

[Rand0m0sityxX]

1. If you linked thrugh to sign up at True Delta through the sticky thread at the top of this forum, it is Michael Karesh who provides the link and description of his site. He comes in from time to time to "re-invite" people to participate in his site.

Michael and I have traded emails about the flaw in his gas mileage calculations and to the best of my knowledge they still haven't corrected it. They do not take the total miles driven and divide it by the total number of gallons used. They only average all the mpgs reported per tank.

To demonstrate the flaw: Tank 1: 300 miles, 10 gallons = 30.0 mpg You top off the tank after city driving: 20 miles, 1 gallon = 20 mpg

True Delta calculates the car at getting (30.0 + 20.0)/2 = 25.0 mpgActual calculation should be 320 miles / 11 gallons = 29.09 mpg

Errors should average some over, some under, but regardless it's very unreliable when you start with an innacurate formula right out of the starting gate.

As for the sticker, I will repeat, 30/36. The Versa is the ONLY car not performing within the parameters of the bold numbers on top. No other car out there has to depend on your defense of "read the fine print and ignore the numbers on top." Why does the Versa?

Not everyone can use the Total miles to total gas. I bought my Saturn with 80k, wanna tell me how i'll know the total amount of gallons put it? So I use the Miles on the trip to the gallons on the pump. I get about 2mpg below the epa. Which to actually look at it, I have never had a car that got the epa.

I do not do highway driving I deliver in the city so all this is city driving.

98 Honda crv- epa is 22.. I got 28 when I first bought it. It dropped to 24 when the transmission started going bad. 01 Chevy Cavalier- epa is 23. I got 25mpg in it. 08 Versa S- it got 26/27mpg when I owned it, but it also had under 10k on it, it may or may not have been broken in. 98 Chevy Metro- 44, I got NO WHERE near this, mine got 28mpg, and it was a base model.

You also have to consider that the EPA is always the average, with base and manual models getting more, its not going to be accurate for all. And it does say actual mileage will vary with driving conditions, etc etc. people who are upset about it should take it up with the EPA because your not getting the epa.

[srellim234]

1. Your total average is the number of miles on the car minus the number of miles that were on the car when you bought it divided by the number of gallons you've put in. Unless you're logging every fill-up somewhere you might have an idea of what your average is but you really don't know what that figure is with any accuracy.

2. The EPA figure is NOT average. The EPA figure is what was achieved by the auto manufacturer when conducting a test with very narrow parameters and using professional drivers who have virtual no deviation allowed from the test. They also don't require the test using multiple transmissions so a lot of the time there is no other figure to create an average with.

For vehicles that had their numbers revised downward, the EPA applied an arbitrary formula arrived at through negotiations with the auto manufacturers and no tests were formally conducted.

[Rand0m0sityxX]

yeaa.. I'd have to find my title to know what I bought the car with. I fill up and divide the number by the trip every fill up and write it down. I've always done that with my cars. Never with the total amount over the life of the car. I usually come up with the same amount, give or take a few when weather changes and other stuff that will cause it to change. I also write it down so that when I see it drop big I can check what I haven't already replaced, Tho i try and change everything on time so it doesn't do that. I do need to get spark plugs for my car, dunno when they were changed last.

[srellim234]

I key in my fill-ups at both

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do

and

http://www.fuelly.com

That way I always have those figures without having to look it up in my log book. Your starting mileage will always be there, even if you only start tracking from this point forward. I didn't start tracking my used 2002 Buick there until last summer.

The fueleconomy site lets you download everything you've keyed in as a spreadsheet file so I just let Microsoft Excel autosum my total gallons column and use either the calculator or Excel to do the mpg calculations. Very easy.

By keying it there it also allows other people doing research to consider my figures in their decision process.

[Rand0m0sityxX]

I'll have to check out those. I joined the true delta thing, but my car is limited on it, so theres not much I can post for it. I'll bookmark these two.

[alberich]

Just a reminder to Canadians that the MPG figures quoted are generally US figures.
Canada uses Imperial gallons.
I Imperial/Canadian gallon = 1.2 US gallons (near enough)

[versanewb]

i have a '07 S sedan and my milage isnt good either! i used to get about 300miles(25mpg) a tank on 93 octaine.....now im getting about 280 (23mpg) miles a tank! no change in driving. i recently drove from san diego to texas, even then i only got 330 miles(28mpg) a tank(topped off to yellow empty light). versa has about a 12 gallon tank. had brand new tires and just did full 30k maintance done. where is this "32mpg" Versa at?? what am i doing wrong

Put a bottle of STP gas treatment in with a full tank every few months. This will keep the injectors clean which will increase your fuel economy.

[versanewb]

bought the car used from a old retired cop. He had all highway milage on it and said he got fine milage. I only recently started driving it in town with a new job I got here.

22 mpg is just ridiculously low. It makes no sense at all. Ill try 89 octane though.

Change your air filter, inflate your tires, put a bottle of STP fuel injector cleaner in your gas tank on a regular basis. All these things will improve your mileage.

[versanewb]

Also, don't forget that most gas stations use 10% ethanol mixture in their gas. This further reduces gas mileage.

[iluvmyVersa08]

Also, don't forget that most gas stations use 10% ethanol mixture in their gas. This further reduces gas mileage.

I'm using a fuel injector cleaner. The car is over 2 years old and I haven't done that yet. I bought a bottle that you use so much of it at "every other fill up".

I'll be filling up sometime this week and using the cleaner.

[iluvmyVersa08]

Ok so today I filled up, I got 550 kms on the tank. I filled up when the fuel light came on. I got an avg of 32.9 MPG on that tank

[versanewb]

Ok so today I filled up, I got 550 kms on the tank. I filled up when the fuel light came on. I got an avg of 32.9 MPG on that tank

Awsome! Great to hear that!!