The Nissan Club banner
1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
04-05 Pedal Insert
Joined
·
5,804 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Filled up today car took 15.812 gallons.........dte said 42..........I had 299.5 miles on the tank.

I averaged 18.9mpg--(old school method of calc.)

Based on that, the reserve is more like 2 gallons

I am not happy with the mpg............ SUCKS ASS! I do not slam the car either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
Yeah that DTE is pretty close.

You must be driving 'all city", because I'm getting about 24-26 with about 80% highway...

Not knowing you personally...

I'd try being really smooth, both on braking (letting up early and doing more coasting when you see a read light, or traffic) and accelerating to improve that MPG.

You can add some NISMO stickers for 30+MPG if you're in a hurry to see improvement.:D
 

·
04-05 Pedal Insert
Joined
·
5,804 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Oh two

I am as smooth as diarrhea!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I baby the bioooooooootch...........u r right mostly all city.........but my Explorer did that good
 

·
Man with Car
Joined
·
228 Posts
Willy,

My 3.5 sees about 80 percent short-trip city driving and 20 percent highway. I average between 20 and 21 mpg in the car. While I agree that 18.9 mpg is pretty puny, it's still good for a 240 horsepower V6. A lady at my job drives an Excursion that I rode to lunch in a while back (in the far back seat -- I could barely see her up front!) and I asked what kind of mileage she gets.

"Oh, nine or 10 around town. We hit 13 once on the highway," she replied.

20 mpg sounded pretty damned good all of a sudden. ;)

Jarrod K. Wright
'02 3.5 SE 5-speed
'02 G20 Sport 5-speed
 

·
04-05 Pedal Insert
Joined
·
5,804 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
jk

JK if the Altima weighed what the Excursion weighs it woud get about 5mpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
224 Posts
I agree with you Willy, that does suck. The EPA on the Auto is 19/26 and that is backed down to around 80% for complaint reasons. That would come out to 23.75/32.5. The argument that it is pretty good for a car with 240 hp does not stand up. These are EPA numbers that should mean something. Also Nissan can contend these numbers and put lower numbers on the car if they wanted. I think the EPA reading are without the drag spoiler though. :)
 

·
NO LIFE POSTER
Joined
·
252 Posts
I am getting over 500 miles per fill up. Last 2 tanks averaged 29-30 miles per gallon and this tank is 27.2 (because I have installed the WAI and have been going thur the gears) I am very pleased with my gas mileage. I also checked it the old school way miles divided by gallons of gas and the dte was on the money.
 

·
Future Z Driver
Joined
·
215 Posts
tytalian said:
My dte is close but my mpg is always on 23.7 it doesn't matter if I baby it to stomp the gas. It always say 23.7 anyone else having this problem?
The MPG thing calculates from the last time you reset it. If you haven't ever reset it, then you're not going to be able to make it budge by driving aggressively even for lots of miles.
 

·
04-05 Pedal Insert
Joined
·
5,804 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
gas

my mpg on comp always says 22 and some change. It cost me 25 bucks to fill up........ouch!

O2silver, wow, that is great, but that is what 60 less hp will get you. That is almost double what I am getting
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
20 gallons less 15.812 gallons is 4.188 gallons left in the tank - that is a pretty big reserve.

My fuel light comes on when my DTE is at between 30-40 and I usually fill up shortly thereafter - the most I have ever put in as around 16.5 gallons. I just can't stand the blinking DTE and fuel light :(
 

·
04-05 Pedal Insert
Joined
·
5,804 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
As I said

rao said:
20 gallons less 15.812 gallons is 4.188 gallons left in the tank - that is a pretty big reserve.

My fuel light comes on when my DTE is at between 30-40 and I usually fill up shortly thereafter - the most I have ever put in as around 16.5 gallons. I just can't stand the blinking DTE and fuel light :(
that was with 42 miles on the dte, which on my car at 18 mpg translates into a 2 gallon reserve, after I drive my 42 miles.........is that more clear?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Damn man...Both my Altima and my Scorpio w/supercharger get better mileage than that....And I drive the piss oputta both.....Are the brakes dragging or something? I think it's time to visit your local friendly stealer, er, I mean dealer.....Tires way low, boat on the back????J/K...
 

·
Man with Car
Joined
·
228 Posts
e-squared said:
I agree with you Willy, that does suck. The EPA on the Auto is 19/26 and that is backed down to around 80% for complaint reasons. That would come out to 23.75/32.5.

What the heck kind of logic is that? I don't know of any similar engine setup that gets 32.5 mpg on the highway (GM 3800 V6 nothwithstanding). And what does "complaint reasons" mean? Who would complain to whom for what? Did you just make that up on the spot? :p
The argument that it is pretty good for a car with 240 hp does not stand up. These are EPA numbers that should mean something.

EPA numbers have been a meaningless joke for years. They don't mean squat. The European urban and extra-urban ratings are far more accurate, but being that we're in the United States, that's a different discussion entirely.

Anyway, e-squared, could you enlighten me on how my 240 horsepower argument is flawed? We're talking about three things here:

* A 3000 pound curb weight;
* A relatively large displacement V6; and,
* A relatively high peak horsepower output.

Those ingredients aren't exactly the recipe for a Geo. Our 2.4 liter 150 horsepower '98 Altima SE averaged around 23 mpg in 80/20 urban driving, while my old 2.0 liter 140 horsepower SE-R scratched out about 24 mpg in the same scenario. Willy's 19 mpg, while on the low end of the scale, hardly seems out of line.

Jarrod
 

·
04-05 Pedal Insert
Joined
·
5,804 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
jk

The sad thing is......the Vette gets better mpg than I am getting, or about the same. That is a BIG Powerful engine! 3.5 should do better than that in my opinion.
 

·
Man with Car
Joined
·
228 Posts
Willy,

I do agree the 3.5's gas mileage is disappointing. And when you compare it with the GM 3800 I mentioned above (didn't you and I talk about Peter Egan's "Side Glances" on this engine a while back?), or even late-model six-speed Corvettes/Camaros/Firebirds with that lugger sixth gear and one-to-four skip-shift feature, it's even more horrendous. No question. GM knows how to squeeze a gallon of gas with its pushrod engines.

But when you keep the 3.5's mileage relative to the rest of the recent Nissan lineup, it's neither bad nor good. Nissan engines in the last ten years or so haven't been very fuel efficient. (We had a '95 Neon SC with a 2.0 liter engine similar in output to my SE-R, and that thing got 30 mpg -- around town! On the highway I got 44 mpg on one lonely Lubbock-to-Dallas trek at 75 mph the whole way. The best I ever did with my SE-R was 35 mpg.)

So my take is this: Yes, the 3.5's fuel efficiency is disappointing, particularly when coupled with its need for premium gas. But relative to other Nissan products, it's about what I'd expect.

Jarrod
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top