Nissan mods the Versa: fuel economy up by 1 MPG
 

Via ABG...

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblogg...a_hatch_11.jpg

Nissan has joined the ranks of automakers like GM (with its XFE models) and others who are returning to existing models to mod them and squeeze out a bit better fuel economy.

The Versa's CVT has been tweaked (software) for one extra MPG.

It's one of 3 transmissions offered:

CVT: 27/33
M-6: 26/31
A-4: 24/32

Compare to:

Toyota Yaris
M-5: 29/36
A-4: 29/35

Honda Fit:
M-5: 28/35
A-5: 27/33

Chev Aveo:
M-5: 27/34
A-4: 25/34

Hyundai Accent:
M-5: 27/33
A-4: 26/35

No one offers a tall top gear. It's ridiculous. I know we've all been over this repeatedly, but most people with enough sense to drive a manual transmission also have enough sense to downshift to pass. I want my engine happily lumping along at 2k on the interstate, not 3.5k.

Why is that so much to ask?

Ditto.

We could easily see a 5-10% increase in highway FE with a simple gearing change.

My biggest gripe w/ CVT is that as soon as you ease up on the gas pedal, it downshifts and feels like you're riding the brake.

I have a bad feeling that the opposite may be true: call me a pessimist, but I'd bet that most North Americans who drive stick don't know enough to downshift to pass or get up a steep enough highway (top gear) grade without lugging.

For this to work, I think the extra tall top gear needs to be an option, not standard equipment. And that raises manufacturing/marketing costs, making it even less likely to happen...

Is there any precedent for a nerd gear option?

That might not actually be true... The automatic is so prevalent these days in the U.S. that the manual is typically coveted by those who can actually use them. There are still exceptions, however.

Can I get that option? :D

Assuming a dumb operator, what would probably be best is a CVT with selectable programming. Just put a fuel economy button on the dash aggressively switching the programming of the CVT toward fuel economy. I guess by now the general public kinda know the basics on driving for fuel economy (at least the kind of person that would buy a Versa). So if they press the fuel economy button I guess they would assume and accept the car behaving differently than with the regular "performance" setup.

well, if they made an extra gear, say for FE, they could just put on the visor to only use it on the highway, at steady speeds and flatland. I mean they still print airbag info on them.
or like tasdrouille said, a button for FE. it could work it automatics as well, keep the TC locked, remap the timing and fuel, only for highway use though. "Manufacture not responsible for your own stupidity" could be printed on the sun visor for that

I think it has to do with the fact that some cars don't have enough torque to get that gear any lower. On an automatic it can be lower but if you were to put such gearing on a manual it wouldn't necessarily increase your mpg. My civic barely makes over hills on the freeway in 5th gear. I drop about a good couple mph. In America everybody wants to have power, doesn't matter what gear they are in. Everybody has been complaining about gas mileage but have you noticed the displacement of engines go up every time they come out with a new model? Hello!

That is what 5th gear is supposed to be, overdrive.



A taller final gear ratio will most certainly increase mileage. If you look at almost any BSFC map you will see this. Many newer vehicles gear their automatic transmissions drastically lower than their manuals. This helps keep their mileage up when traveling on the highway. My guess is they don't do it on manuals because it may cause the operator to have to manually shift on hills like you mention.

IMO loose a few mph on the hill and get better mileage. I wish we had that choice.

Ever since FE hit the mainstream, I had been suggesting to Scion / Toyota to start making bolt on mods to improve FE in the current line of cars. Rather than bust heads on a tranny flash to get 1mpg gain, why not develop a kammback spoiler, a set of wheel skirts, a better front bumper, small more aero mirrors, hell a back seat delete package, anything that has tangible gains without massive retooling.

Hi,

Some new plastic bumper covers and grill pieces could be snapped onto cars. Fairing pieces could be added to side mirrors. Zigzag window trim covers, and hood gaskets, and streamlined wheel covers are easy, too. All these would add 5-7mpg.

Nissan is supposedly going to reduce their cars weight by an average of 15%. I think all cars could be reduced by 20-30% with smarter steel fabrications, smarter use of materials. Narrower and lighter, LRR tires should be used.

On defrost mode, the A/C should only come on automatically at maximum (if at all) and it should always be toggled on/off by the driver.

From what baseline? Talking about gains in terms of "MPG" can be misleading. 5 mpg more to a F-150 driver means a lot more than 5 more mpg to an Insight driver.

Better to speak in terms of % difference, where known.

/ot MPG rant

Hi,

You're right of course! Thanks for the correction.

Sorry - bee in my bonnet about MPG as a measure of efficiency.

Torque isn't as much an issue in larger engines, (I'm sure my father's Bravada could be geared significantly taller, 2K @ 60 is probably not necessary, and same with my mother's Eldorado), but his 2.2 S-10 can't go much lower. The engine starts to lug in the upper gears as high as 1,800 and turns in reduced FE when short shifted.

Similar issue with the Ninja 250 I had, I re-geared from 14/45 to 15/41, and while the take-off was actually better, and the first 5 gears more usable, I had to forgo using 6th altogether as the engine would not hold speed if it was under 7K.

My mustang has a very high 5th gear overdrive. (same with the corvette and Camaro). I drive it at 1500rpm to cruise at 60 mph. The vette, with better aero, sits just above idle on the highway. It would be nice to see gearing like this in smaller cars!
I agree, sadly. One of my friends was driving my mustang on a road trip (she had a 5-spd accord) and she didn't know what to do when the car started lugging while hill climbing at 50 mph in 5th.
However, this problem would be solved within the first few times a person drove the car, as they learn about torque/hp at different rpms through experience.

More Versa tweaking:

ABG reports Nissan will be offering a 1.6L engine (107 hp) in place of the 1.8L (122 hp) in a new "stripped down" version of the car in the US, at least.

Unfortunately, the only manual transmission available on the 1.6 is a 5-speed, where the 1.8 gets 6 cogs.

The EPA ratings for the different engines now look like this:

1.6L M-5: 26 mpg (US) city (+0.0%) / 34 mpg (US) hwy (+9.7%)
1.8L M-6: 26 mpg (US) city / 31 mpg (US) hwy

1.6L A-4: 26 mpg (US) city (+8.3%) / 33 mpg (US) hwy (+3.1%)
1.8L A-4: 24 mpg (US) city/32 mpg (US) hwy

1.8L CVT: 27 mpg (US) city/33 mpg (US) hwy

Interesting news if only because it makes me unreasonably hopeful that Honda and Toyota might follow suit with smaller engine options in the Fit & Yaris...

The horsepower wars are over! Everybody lost! ;)

I drive a car with a tall overdrive and to the average person its a pig. Peak torque arrives at 70mph @2450 rpms in 5th. It labors on the interstate. With 2-3 people and some luggage it gets worse. Requiring a downshift to 4th on average hills to maintain the speed limit. The average driver simply would rather have a little more power in place of 5-10% bump in FE. If I could install a longer overdrive for FREE i wouldn't do it in this car. Its right where it needs to be. If it was in taller it would hurt FE.

MetroMPG -

I don't mind the loss of a gear as long as the last gear is the same in both trannys.

I have the same 5th gear as lovemysan, and it's definitely at it's limit. But, since I use it as a commuter on the flat most of the time, I don't have to resort to 4th as much.

CarloSW2

The 2.4L engine in my wife's Matrix AWD has only 4 forward gears. Everytime I drive it, I feel that there is enough torque there for a tall 5th gear.
Also about the Matrix, I think it would be nice to have a switch to let the driver choose to start the car in the 2nd gear. There should be more than enough torque there to accomplish the task, at least on a flat surface.
I hope to see the manufacturers shift their design philosophy more toward FE. I think Nissan is in the right direction about their Versa.

What's so bad about downshifting?

I don't get it either. Downshiftphobia apparently runs rampant. It's always trotted out as an argument against taller gearing.

If you don't want to shift... buy a what?

---

I just did a 1500 km journey that took me through the northern part of the Appalachian Mountains. The loaded-down re-geared Flea was frequently trudging uphill in 4th gear, below the speed limit with the 4-way flashers going. Right along with the big trucks. Several times I had to downshift to 3rd. Big deal! I'll take 75 mpg, thank you.

ok, you're a pessimist. Now that's out of the way... ;)

In an era when many cars with proximity sensors on the rear bumper, GPS navigation systems in every other car, multi-screen DVD systems, etc, all that's needed is new thinking.

Car makers could impliment a simple yet well enginnered driver interface system would educate/guide the driver as to which gear to choose, some feedback as to "which gear am I in" and maybe a little clutch management to smooth out jerky starts. One man's opinion.

My tiny 1.6L civic, with a peak 106 hp, is geared way to short. 2750 rpm at 60 mph. I'm usually in 5th at or before 30 mph. Then I'm wishing for a 6th and 7th gear.

Not enough torque? Completely FALSE.

If I could swap my auto for the 5 speed manual for free, I'd do it in a heartbeat. In 4th gear I'm doing 60 @ ~2100 rpm. With 130 peak HP (125 ft/lbs torque), it might handle a 6th gear as well.

Yep, with my tiptronic I always start in 2nd gear unless im at a REALLY steep angle.

Problem is, I want to make it not even go to first, because everytime I stop I have to manually push it up again to 2nd... I dont even want first!! GRRR... but I have no idea how to change that :(

Nothing!

Even today's most asthmatic "underpowered" cars could do well with taller gearing. What happened to the days of 90hp V8s with mushy three-speeds? Oh yeah, we realized that was stupid, because 0-60 in 30 seconds is too slow even with this crowd.

It's not like we need gears so tall we have to be push-started salt flat style, but there's no need to have an engine revving at peak torque when cruising on the highway at a constant speed.

In-gear-acceleration is not just overrated, it's unnecessary, and is a big part of why cars are generally over-powered.

On RWD cars like my bmw 318i you can swap out the whole differential in about 2 hours. My car left the factory with an idiotic 4.11 limited slip differential. I picked up a 3.64 differential from the JY for $50 and I couldn't be happier. Whats more, I sold the 4.10 for $250. Not only was the 4.10 diff annoying on the highway, but driving around town I found myself using 4th gear around 25mph and 5th over 30. When Accelerating from a stop light I would have to shift to 2nd before I even made it across the intersection. Really really annoying.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/231/5...dc947c06_o.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/190/5...13535d9f_o.jpg

The beauty of these old cars is you can find about 10 differential ratios in the JY between 2.79 all the way up to 4.45