| special-k |
I know this has been covered in various threads.... but my gas milage on my MO is to the point where I'm considering calling a lawyer about a lemon law claim.
Sticker says 20 city, we all know this. We also all know that that number is an average or estimate of what the EPA feels the majority of these vehicles will achieve. My sticker says actual observed mileage is 17 - 23 city. Seems reasonable. I could live with that.
I do the majority of my driving in "city" conditions, with the exception of occasional trips up to visit the family at Lake Tahoe (about 100 miles round trip, 95% highway) and ski trips, etc.
When I bought the MO and drove it back to Reno from Berkeley the gas mileage was GREAT. I was getting 28-32 in some places according the onboard computer. I got about 500 miles out of that first tank of gas (which is what the dealership told me I could expect for an average tank of gas). It's been going downhill ever since.
I've had the MO for about 2 full months now, I have 2,142 miles on it. I do NOT lead-foot (occasionally of course, but 98% of the time I drive "reasonably"). I also do NOT "granny" it, meaning I don't bog the engine constantly. I also keep the A/C OFF (against the MOs insistent preference!) except when I'm running the defroster.
I understand that oxygenated gas is a factor. I have been burning only premium (91 is the best we can get here, no 93) fuel from Chevron or Shell since the day I bought the MO. According to Chevron's website, the fuel economy should only be affected 2%-3% with oxygenated gas. Hell, let's be overly pessimistic here and call it 10%. Even at 10% loss, I should be averaging about 18MPG city.
Over the last 3 tanks of gas I have averaged a stellar 12.2MPG. This is according to the onboard computer, and roughly confirmed by my own calculations. This is including some highway driving that should have helped boost the average a little. This is RIDICULOUS. I am getting less than 300 miles per tank of gas, usually about 280-ish. At 20MPG, I should be getting at least 400 miles on a 21.7 gallon tank.
I have read the threads where people have said it takes a long time to break in this engine and fuel economy gets better, but I haven't seen anyone with mileage THIS bad. I don't have any extreme circumstances that would explain this poor performance.
The local Nissan dealership has looked at the MO twice already, both times simply saying "there's no codes in the computer, be on your way citizen" and pretty much blowing me off.
So, here I am... imploring YOU, the great MO wizards of mechanical mastery, to please help me figure out what the hell is going on with my MO.
Could a faulty alternator affect mileage? (not being a mechanic please excuse me if I ask something stupid). I have seen a couple threads where it has been mentioned that a larger-capacity alternator can affect mileage as it requires more energy to operate. So, could an alternator that's not working properly put undue draw on the rest of the system to support it? I have not (thankfully) had the full-blown alternator failure, but I wonder perhaps if it's on the edge of death and this is a symptom. Can any of you think of any other factors that might be causing my MO to be guzzling gas like the oversized beasts of SUVs that I specifically avoided buying for this EXACT reason?! |
|
|
| GripperDon |
Good Post. Lots of meat. NO CODES bothers me. That is really stinky milage especially considering your former numbers. Bag Oxygen senso (oh no codes) bad PVC valve ( don't know if it would show a code or not, maybe not) Spark timing has gone to H--- (Would a code show)
How do the exhaust pipe tips look, Clean or Black? Did you modify the intake in anyway CAI or something?
Answerign your question I would not thing the alternator could drop the milage by 1/2, it would have to be locked up to do that. IMO.
Gas milage does drop in the winter, warmups, pushing snow out of the way, added drag, etc. but in 1/2 wow.
I will do some thinking and ans as they say "I'll be back" |
|
|
| Ohio Murano |
| I feel for ya. I have 1100 miles now and only got 16 mpg the last tank according to the computer and I thought that was bad. I just contributed it to still breaking it in but 12 mpg that is ridiculous. keep us informed. |
|
|
| Kris |
I feel for you. I have 30K and am getting 18 – 20 suburbia driving and 24 highway. Always been like this, from the beginning. And the mileage did not improve much after breaking in period.
My FX35 AWD which is driven by my wife in relatively heavy traffic (and she has a lead foot!!) gets 16 mpg. So 12 mpg for Murano stinks……….there is definitely something wrong…… |
|
|
| special-k |
GripperDon
I have not done any modifications to the intake system or otherwise, it's all fully stock. When I go outside to go to lunch in about a half hour I will check the exhaust outlets and see how they look and report back.
I try to minimize warmups so as not to waste energy, and after reading an article in Road & Track about proper warm-ups, I have been sticking to a 30-60 second warm-up period. I would prefer to start 'er up and let 'er run for 10 minutes and get the inside nice and toasty, but I don't. :) |
|
|
| Stoker |
I agree with the above that there has to be something wrong to cause gas mileage to be so bad. Maybe you need to try another dealership as I think that the ones that looked at it first wre only intersted in what a computer said.
Your note does not say that if they look at the fuel injectors or whether or not the transmission was acting normally. I just came through -35C weather and my fuel economy went into the toilet, instead of getting 12-13lt/100 KM I was averaging 20Lt/100Km. The only thing that I could see is that the engine RPM was at 2000 Rpm at 80 KM/h, instead of 1500 RPM, and that was city driving. I believe that the transmission fluid was super cooled with the low ambient temps and with 3 transmission oil coolers it is easy to see how that could happen and causing the transmission not to adjust the belt properly. Since the weather has warmed up (+10C today) the fuel economy is back up to 12.5lts/100 Km
If your fuel injectors are leaking, that I"m sure does not show up on the computer, and if they are it is possilbe you can smell a lot of gasoline in your engine oil.
Hopefully you can find some one that understands the term "TROUBLESHOOTING" as there are lots of things that could explain what the reason is for the poor fuel economy. Keep us posted |
|
|
| Kris |
Stoker,
the TC does not lock up if the transmission temp is low. I believe you experienced this phenomena....... |
|
|
| Stoker |
| Thanks Kris, that is what I saw and I was trying to put a name to it. All I know was the Mo was acting a little weird during that time. |
|
|
| pino |
quote:
Originally posted by special-k
The local Nissan dealership has looked at the MO twice already, both times simply saying "there's no codes in the computer, be on your way citizen" and pretty much blowing me off.
While I am in no way condoning the dealer "blowing you off", there is a certain amount of truth to the "no codes" defense used by the service department. On Board Diagnostic 2 (OBDII) vehicles keep track of so many things related to engine management, it would boggle your mind. All in the name of proper emissions, I might add.
If your vehicle engine management system was amiss, something would surely turn up via a "check engine light".
Having said that, there are many other factors affecting MPG.
How is your tire pressure, for instance? How is your oil level? Do you do an excessive amount of idling? Do you warm the car up before driving off for the first drive? Ambient temperature lower than usual?
The list can go on and on. And the small things can add up.
Please verify that the vehicle MPG information being displayed is accurate as well. Sometimes the best solutions are the simplest!
:2:
PS My advice above is worth precisely what you paid for it:D
Best,
pino |
|
|
| GMTURBO43 |
I'll go with a couple simple things that you can check.
Dirty airfilter? Shouldn't be the case with 2K miles.
Low air pressure in the tires? Set 'em at 35#'ish.
Also, with the leaky injector - it is very possible. If that's the case your oil level will be high and it'll smell like gas. |
|
|
| hfelknor |
Seems to me that with a leaky injector, the O2 sensor would get it and throw a code as the unburnt gas would not only go down in the crankcase, it would also go out the valves.
While agreeing that 12 MPG is terrible (I did about 16 in town when my Mo was new and I was breaking it in (Which meant varying the RPMS but NEVER accelerating hard),
here are some thoughts.
Somewhere between 9,000 and 12,000 miles my MPG went from 16 city/23 HWY to 18 City/ 23 Hwy. Note that Hwy did not improve. I drive at 75 or 80 MPH on the hwy. My "city" has a stop light every mile, not every block.
I didn't burn oxygenated gasoline. I didn't burn ANY gas that had anything in it other than 'normal" cleaners, octane enhancers, etc.. Isn't it 7-11 that sells a gasoline that has Corn Squeezins in it?
My ambient temps were always between 60 and 90 degrees during this time.
My tires were always at 33 Pounds cold.
I checked it daily at every corner for the first couple of weeks and then once a week.
I STILL check the pressure once a week, over a year later.
My altitude was at sea level, plus or minus 27 inches.
Florida is Flat.
Doesn't Reno have some roads that go straight up?
Like being told that you are going to die, but there is nothing that they can do............wouldn't you get a secoind opinion?
Homer
:D |
|
|
| GripperDon |
ROGFMAO ( think that the right letters. for "Like being told that you are going to die, but there is nothing that they can do............wouldn't you get a secoind opinion?"
Homer you are the Man!
:2: |
|
|
| malaycobra |
| I do a mix of highway and New York City Driving ( a range of about -1 to 90 miles an hour..and thats just 5th avenue :D ) and I get 13-14mpg. I am exteremly fortunate that my company pays for my gas so it never really bothered me....but should I really be getting 18+? |
|
|
| Gonzo |
I don't know about the majority of people... I have about a 15 minute commute on the highway with maybe 25% of the time on that highway in slow traffic. I typically am light on the gas pedal but drive between 70-80MPH. 30 seconds warmup time and use premium gas... since I've had the MO the avergage gas milleage is 19.4 MPG... my high MPG was 22 MPG and the lowest has been 16.5 MPG.
Has is alway been low even in the summer/warmer months? Have you tried a different gas station? Like others have said, check your tire pressire. Nissan tells us to inflate to 33 PSI. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Don't forget that tail tips inside check. :D |
|
|
| hosps |
There probably isn't anything wrong with your MO but rather with the Gas you are using. NV is a state which uses a "Winter Blend" gas (mix of regular gas and Ethanol) which WILL kill your gas mileage.
What has probably happened is the dealer filled you up from a tank they had in the back, which could have been from the summer, and now that you are filling it up around town, you are using the winter blend gas.
Here in CO, my average gas mileage in the summer is around 22 (mixed city and highway) but in the winter, it drops to around 17. If I am heavy on the pedal or it's been really cold out, it will drop to as low as 14.
Check the pump where you fill up at to see if this is the case. If so, you might want to wait until they switch back to a summer blend before worrying about problems with the engine or anything.
In CO, they typically start using the Winter blend around Oct-Nov and stop using it around April. |
|
|
| b0xdesigns |
| My tpms was showing 34psi ATWA...and 17-19 mpg highway on the estimator. I bumped up the pressure to 38 cold. Now i'm getting 20-25mpg mixed driving. And I "have" a lead foot. I'm coming up on 17,000 miles and have had it for about 5 months. So i'm pretty sure Its broken in. The first 10,000 I was getting horrible milage. This was before my mods 14-16mpg. Luckily It got better. Hope this helps |
|
|
| GripperDon |
The government says this:
"The U.S. Department of Transportation says that most drivers can improve fuel mileage by at least two percent by keeping their vehicle tires at the maximum recommended pressures. You can find the carmaker's recommended tire pressures in your owner's manual and on a tire decal or placard in the glove compartment or on the driver's door post, near a hinge. Today, most vehicle manufacturers recommend pressures that are equal or close to the maximum pressure molded into the tire sidewall. When you buy new tires, your best inflation pressure guideline is the maximum pressure molded into the tire sidewall. "
So I guess under inflation to the absolue max could give 5 to 10%
If you have 12mpg that would help you get up to 13.5Mpg. Does this float your boat? Not mine. I would continure to look for more causes, not to suggest not to take adavantage of the improvement form more tire pressure. |
|
|
| MightyMo |
I'm going to take possible issue with this line: "I also do NOT "granny" it, meaning I don't bog the engine constantly."
One of the things that was very counterintuitive to learn when I first got my Mo was that acceleration was happening even if the RPMs were not rising. I would just naturally keep dipping deeper and deeper into the go peddle to keep the RPMs rising as I accelerated.
I wasn't wailing on the poor thing, but there is simply no reason to spool her up to 3-4KRPM when accelerating up to any target speed unless you're in a hurry.
Once I learned to keep it in the 2-3K range (or even less if I'm really out to post high MPG numbers) and let the CVT do it's job and bring me to my target speed instead of with the engine, I gained back *several* MPG. |
|
|
| special-k |
Well... let me say "thanks" to everyone who has posted suggestions and ideas. There are far too many posts to reply to indivicually so let me try and summarize my replies...
First off, MOreen (that's what i named 'er... lol) is back at the dealership this morning for another round of diagnostics. The first service writer I spoke to was incredibly unhelpful. He pretty much shrugged and said "too bad, unless there's a code we have nothing to work with." That irritated me. The second guy I talked to said "Oh, it's the altitude." OOOOkay, I can buy that a LITTLE. Reno is at 4,500 feet. However, I won't accept that elevation is causing me to get 40% lower mileage than advertised. *NO* other vehicle that I have ever owned has suffered THAT badly from the moderate altitude of Reno. Another service writer said "Oh... well... you can't go by the stickers. It says 20/24 but that doesn't mean anything. The V8 Titan says 14/18 and it usually gets about 10." Well, I'm certainly not going to accept that as an answer either.
GripperDon before I took it in I checked the exhaust tips as you suggested. They're not shiny clean but they're not overly built-up either, IMO. Just a little black in there. Engines do tend to run a tad rich at this altitude since the air is thinner... I had to rejet my motorcycle a couple of times (what a PAIN in the arse...) before I got a good balance. Perhaps a CAI kit would help balance things out a little by getting more air into the motor?
To those who suggested another dealer -- I'm in a tough spot. Reno has ONE Nissan dealership and no Infinity dealer. There's another Nissan dealer out in Carson City but that's inconvenient... I'll take the MO out there if I have to.
MightyMo I certainly understand what you're saying about how the MO accelerates. I'm not hammering on it to get the RPMs up high... I accelerate moderately in the 2K-3K area. By "not grannying it" I meant that I don't put around town at 1500rpm, which is entirely possible with the CVT. :)
I would hope/expect/assume (I know... I shouldn't assume anything...) that if the engine was running overly rich and wasting fuel, that the computer would detect this and either compensate or throw a SES light to have adjustments made. I would hope that the O2 sensor would detect if there was a leaky injector(s), as was mentioned, the fuel would be going out the valves wouldn't it?
I know that oxygenated gas has an effect, but like I previously posted it should not affect mileage THIS much. Chevron states 2%-3%, and I burn Chevron premium (which is 91 octane here not 93) and occasionally Shell. Nothing else has ever touched the MO since I bought it. This page shows our ethanol season and expected adverse effects on mileage.
The tires are 34psi cold. I checked this morning before heading to the dealership. I guess I could bump them up to 36-38ish, but as GripperDon said it probably won't help THAT much...
Someone mentioned Reno having roads that "go straight up".... LOL well it's not that bad. Reno isn't flat like Florida or my former home of Las Vegas, but it's no San Francisco either. We have a few moderate hills but really nothing severe.
If I missed anybody's suggestions I'll post more later. I'll let you know what I hear from the dealership when they call me.
Thanks again everyone. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
special-k If you think I would ever talk about rich and poorer not better gas econlmy at altitude you are needing to think again. I had a running argument here for days, withevery body telling me I am not a fuel injector design exper and stuff my patents etc. and that altitude improves milage. I finally decided to "let it drop"
So That what I am doing now. Sorry I can't help you wish I could. |
|
|
| special-k |
Well here's a quick update...
The MO stayed at the dealership overnight. The service writer called yesterday at 5:30pm, once again saying "Well, there's no codes. Without codes, there is nothing wrong." He said they would keep it and drive it again in the morning and see if any codes showed up on cold start. *sigh*
I had also asked that they fix the alignment while it was in there... it's been off (like many of you have suffered) since they day I got it. Not severe, but noticeable. Get this -- he wanted to CHARGE me for it. *AND*, he didn't want to give me a rental car even though they were keeping the car overnight. Needless to say I informed him of Nissan's 12mo/12,000 mile adjustment period and insisted they give me a rental, which he reluctantly did.
I also *specifically* asked him to check the items that you all have suggested to see if ANY of them were faulty:
fuel injectors
fuel injector controller
check oil to see if gas present
O2 sensor
Timing
PVC valve
air filter
tire pressure (even though I check this myself often)
Another friend of mine who isn't on this forum suggested they check the knock sensor, too, as a faulty knock sensor could be causing the MO to adjust the timing to the point where it thinks it's compensating, but since the computer thinks it has compensated properly it doesn't throw a code. He admitted that he's not terribly familiar with new car computer systems, he builds and works on mainly older cars with no computers.
I also pointed out to the service writer the black residue in the exhaust pipes. GripperDon said that his exhaust pipes are almost clean upon running your finger inside them... there is a definate noticable black residue in my pipes, although previous to this thread I had thought that was normal. Shows what I [don't] know! :) With only 2000 miles on the MO I can certainly appreciate that the exhaust should still be relatively clean.
Basically the service guy told me that he wasn't going to "waste a technician's time" checking those items if there was no code indicating a failure!
Where does this leave me? As I've mentioned, there's only one Nissan dealership here and no Infinity dealership. My only other option is to go to Carson City, or much further out of town to Sacramento or something.
My frustration is turning into anger now at their complete unwillingness to help. |
|
|
| MightyMo |
| Could you drive a test route in your Murano and also one of the Mos on the dealer's lot? That real-time MPG gauge is nice for some things...:D |
|
|
| special-k |
quote:
Originally posted by MightyMo
Could you drive a test route in your Murano and also one of the Mos on the dealer's lot? That real-time MPG gauge is nice for some things...:D
Hmmmmm... that's a great idea. I may have to try that! Thanks!
Is the computer's MPG calculation real-time or is it a running average? |
|
|
| MightyMo |
| Running average. Press and hold the button to reset it at the start of your test run. |
|
|
| special-k |
quote:
Originally posted by MightyMo
Running average. Press and hold the button to reset it at the start of your test run.
Yup, that's what I figured.
Also, I just got off the phone with the Carson City Nissan dealership, and the service writer there was MUCH more agreeable to helping me. I gave her all the info, she talked to a couple techs there and they said that there is definately something wrong. I also told her of what the Reno Nissan service dept. has been telling me and she was quite upset with their attitude. She actually went into 2 MOs that were in for oil changes, one with 1800 miles, and one with 500 miles (*I* personally don't change the oil at 500 miles, but to each their own :) ) and pushed the button and said one read 22 and the other read 19.8. Carson City has the same elevation and driving conditions as Reno...
If Reno Nissan isn't willing to help, at least it seems that Carson City Nissan is more about doing things right... maybe there's hope for me yet. |
|
|
| MightyMo |
| At the end of all this, don't forget to send a flame mail to Nissan USA about Reno's lack of support... |
|
|
| CVeeT |
To really compare apples to apples, click the TRIP button, it gives the reading of AVERAGE SPEED you have been running your MOreen.
I thougt I was 70% hwy and 30% city untill I discoverd my average is only 26 MPH. At that kind of speed I am pretty happy to get 20 MPG. |
|
|
| MightyMo |
| That's a damn good idea CVT, hmmm... |
|
|
| special-k |
| Good idea CVeeT, when I get the MO back I'll check it. |
|
|
| Eric L. |
| For what its worth, I find I get about 14-15mpg in all city driving, and 20mpg on the highway driving about 70mph. I drive pretty conservatively, and have not been too happy with the Murano's mileage. In the winter months, my short commute doesn't allow to warm up for a long time (about 15 minutes city driving) so I get very bad mileage in town. I do agree that 12mpg is defintely wrong, unless you make a lot of short trips. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| FYI, I have been told that the same outfit (JERKS) that own the PINNACLE NISSN, here in Scottsdale are the ones that own the one in RENO, It's is supposedly where they brought my 04 down from. |
|
|
| troof |
I take three short trips a day of about 2 miles for each leg, and I only get about 12 mpg. According to the trip calculator for the last 1000 miles, I've averaged 15 mph.
I figure its worth it, considering I'm not doing the same thing in the crappy saturn four-banger that would only get about 18 mpg.
And that is with premium (93) gas, tires set 33 all the way around. My Mo has just under 3000 miles, so if it gets better as it breaks in, thats gravy.
What kind of gas mileage do other 4000 lb suv's w/245 hp get in the city? |
|
|
| special-k |
quote:
Originally posted by troof
What kind of gas mileage do other 4000 lb suv's w/245 hp get in the city?
I'll give you that.
However, that's pretty much the same rationalizaton that the service dept. gave me and I told them the same thing -- I don't consider that a valid argument against what is advertised for the Murano. When the sticker says "20 city", and one weighs that factor heavily in the purchasing decision, when the vehicle does not perform as advertised that seems misleading to me. The sticker doesn't say "gas mileage slightly better than other 4000lb 245 HP SUVs", the sticker says "20 city", and that's how I expect the product to perform -- AS ADVERTISED. If I wanted something that gets 12mpg I could have gotten something with a 300+HP V8. My parents' 310HP, 5000lb GMC Sierra (5.3L Vortec V8) gets 12mpg in the city.
Sorry, I'm not attacking you -- just incredibly frustrated with this situation. Dealership just called me back and said once again, "no codes, no problems." Looks like it's off to Carson City with the MO for a few days. |
|
|
| CVeeT |
Two mile trips are terrible for any vehicle, the engine does not get hot enough to burn clean, and fuel economy goes south.
Just remember, if you are not moving you are getting 0 Miles/gallon :14: |
|
|
| troof |
quote:
Originally posted by special-k
When the sticker says "20 city", and one weighs that factor heavily in the purchasing decision, when the vehicle does not perform as advertised that seems misleading to me. The sticker doesn't say "gas mileage slightly better than other 4000lb 245 HP SUVs", the sticker says "20 city", and that's how I expect the product to perform -- AS ADVERTISED.
I hear you, it would be nice to get better gas mileage, but for the trips I make and the average speed for those trips, it wouldn't make sense to get the EPA estimates.
Fuel Economy Test Schedules
The EPA estimate for city driving is based on a 31 minute, 11 mile trip that averages 20 mph, and has 23 stops. If you aren't going as far, or averaging near that speed, the mileage isn't going to be as high. |
|
|
| Tyler_Canada |
For what it's worth:
I have 78,000 km (48,000 miles) on my Murano.
I use synthetic oil.
I drive 65% city by distance.
I have a pop charger.
I run 34 PSI in my tires.
I usually rev to at least 3000 RPMs while accelerating.
I average 17-20 mpg. The pop charger made my mileage worse by 1 mpg.
The above are by no means the entire set of factors that influence mileage.
The fact that my mileage is proportionate by engine size to the 4.0L Jeep I had makes me happy, especially since this engine has a lot more power. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| You said it all in a nutshell, Good Post, Don :) |
|
|
| Tyler_Canada |
| Ok, it's not as good as I thought. I was using imperial gallons, not U.S. gallons. My actual mileage is more like 17mpg - 20mpg. But I do drive hard. I don't see any way even a new Murano should be getting 12mpg. |
|
|
| Gonzo |
No 12 is not acceptable. It will be interesting to see the outcome of this. Without codes what will Nissan do? I hope something and not just send you on your merry way.
Is there a way to check the codes of the dealership itself? :p |
|
|
| Eric L. |
| Interesting article Grip (I love about.com), but the MO doesn't have a distributor. Its a direct ignition "coil on plug" computer controlled setup. :p |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| I very obviously "know that" but the point is to try and point out that "No Codes don't necessarily mean no problems |
|
|
| Dalite |
This is probably no help whatsoever, but.... Here are some raw data logged by a CarChipEX from Davis Instruments in a new '04 SE Murano.
The Data below was captured between 400 and 500 miles on a new vehicle under varying conditions.
I don't know if you can apply this to anything they are reading from your vehicle.
I have reformatted the first few entries to give an idea of the separation between columns.
View / Trip Log / Trip 135 / Table
Columns 1 - 7
1-Elapsed Time Interval
2-Elapsed Time (in 5 second increments)
3-Speed (MPH)
4-Engine Speed (RPM)
5-Throttle Position (%)
6-Timing Advance(deg)
7-O2 Sensor Voltage [B1, S1] (V)
***************************
1--0:00:00---0----688-----0.39----8.00--0.26
2--0:00:04---2----775-----2.35-- 26.00--0.30
3--0:00:09---6--1,063----0.39--16.00--0.30
4--0:00:14--10--1,263----1.96--36.00--0.29
5--0:00:19--12--1,275----0.00--11.00--0.31
6--0:00:24--11----750----0.39----6.00--0.29
7--0:00:29---0----763----0.39----7.00--0.30
8--0:00:34---0----738----0.39----9.00--0.29
9--0:00:39---2--1,950--10.98---24.00--0.31
10 0:00:44 16 1,063 0.00 11.00 0.29
11 0:00:49 1 775 1.18 10.00 0.29
12 0:00:54 1 788 0.39 7.00 0.29
13 0:00:59 0 763 0.00 9.00 0.29
14 0:01:04 0 725 0.39 9.00 0.29
15 0:01:08 0 700 0.39 9.00 0.29
16 0:01:13 0 688 0.39 10.00 0.28
17 0:01:18 0 1,088 5.49 28.00 0.27
18 0:01:23 2 750 0.39 10.00 0.22
19 0:01:28 14 4,513 81.96 19.00 0.13
20 0:01:33 44 2,550 8.63 34.00 0.30
21 0:01:38 50 1,363 7.06 25.00 0.28
22 0:01:43 47 1,313 0.00 -7.00 0.76
23 0:01:48 41 1,313 12.16 11.00 0.29
24 0:01:53 45 1,338 11.37 24.00 0.29
25 0:01:58 47 1,325 0.39 -7.00 0.81
26 0:02:03 45 1,338 0.39 -7.00 0.88
27 0:02:08 42 1,300 0.39 -7.00 0.85
28 0:02:12 29 1,250 0.00 -7.00 0.90
29 0:02:17 19 963 0.00 10.00 0.42
30 0:02:22 6 838 1.57 30.00 0.29
31 0:02:27 11 1,600 9.02 23.00 0.31
32 0:02:32 24 1,263 5.88 24.00 0.30
33 0:02:37 30 1,300 7.84 18.00 0.32
34 0:02:42 35 1,388 10.20 24.00 0.27
35 0:02:47 39 1,500 15.29 18.00 0.31
36 0:02:52 44 1,613 21.57 15.00 0.30
37 0:02:57 47 1,338 2.75 33.00 0.30
38 0:03:02 45 1,325 0.39 36.00 0.30
39 0:03:07 43 1,338 1.18 36.00 0.28
40 0:03:12 43 1,350 1.96 35.00 0.28
41 0:03:17 45 1,363 7.45 25.00 0.29
42 0:03:21 48 1,338 8.24 16.00 0.27
43 0:03:26 50 1,438 11.76 19.00 0.29
44 0:03:31 51 1,413 9.02 24.00 0.30
45 0:03:36 52 1,463 7.06 28.00 0.31
46 0:03:41 52 1,388 0.00 -7.00 0.83
47 0:03:46 47 1,363 1.18 36.00 0.30
48 0:03:51 45 1,363 12.55 16.00 0.30
49 0:03:56 50 1,400 8.63 23.00 0.31
50 0:04:01 52 1,463 11.37 19.00 0.31
51 0:04:06 53 1,500 11.76 19.00 0.30
52 0:04:11 53 1,475 10.98 20.00 0.30
53 0:04:16 52 1,425 4.71 30.00 0.31
54 0:04:21 52 1,438 7.84 25.00 0.30
55 0:04:25 53 1,488 10.20 23.00 0.30
56 0:04:30 57 1,613 14.12 19.00 0.29
57 0:04:35 60 1,638 9.41 27.00 0.32
58 0:04:40 60 1,663 9.41 27.00 0.30
59 0:04:45 60 1,700 12.94 21.00 0.30
60 0:04:50 62 1,713 10.20 25.00 0.29
61 0:04:55 62 1,700 8.24 30.00 0.31
62 0:05:00 62 1,688 6.27 33.00 0.29
63 0:05:05 60 1,625 3.53 35.00 0.29
64 0:05:10 57 1,675 10.59 27.00 0.30
65 0:05:15 58 1,588 8.24 28.00 0.29
66 0:05:20 57 1,575 7.06 28.00 0.29
67 0:05:25 58 1,613 9.80 26.00 0.30
68 0:05:30 60 1,638 6.67 31.00 0.30
69 0:05:34 59 1,600 2.75 33.00 0.29
70 0:05:39 57 1,538 5.10 32.00 0.31
71 0:05:44 57 1,538 7.06 29.00 0.29
72 0:05:49 56 1,538 0.39 8.00 0.31
73 0:05:54 52 1,413 4.31 31.00 0.23
74 0:05:59 50 1,338 0.00 -7.00 0.73
75 0:06:04 47 1,438 5.88 25.00 0.32
76 0:06:09 48 1,488 27.45 15.00 0.27
77 0:06:14 48 1,350 0.00 15.00 0.28
78 0:06:19 43 1,313 0.39 -7.00 0.86
79 0:06:24 32 1,238 0.39 -7.00 0.86
80 0:06:29 16 1,163 0.39 11.00 0.29
81 0:06:34 7 863 0.39 5.00 0.28
82 0:06:38 4 750 0.39 9.00 0.30
83 0:06:43 0 713 0.39 10.00 0.30
84 0:06:48 0 725 0.39 9.00 0.29
85 0:06:53 0 713 0.39 10.00 0.31
86 0:06:58 0 713 0.39 9.00 0.29
87 0:07:03 0 725 0.39 10.00 0.30
88 0:07:08 0 738 0.39 9.00 0.31
89 0:07:13 0 725 0.39 10.00 0.30
90 0:07:18 1 1,200 7.06 30.00 0.27
91 0:07:23 11 1,200 0.39 11.00 0.29
92 0:07:28 13 1,113 0.39 11.00 0.30
93 0:07:33 11 1,463 11.76 18.00 0.23
94 0:07:38 17 1,375 10.20 24.00 0.30
95 0:07:42 24 1,275 14.51 14.00 0.30
96 0:07:47 31 1,263 5.49 25.00 0.30
97 0:07:52 36 1,513 11.37 21.00 0.29
98 0:07:57 41 1,338 29.02 14.00 0.28
99 0:08:02 45 1,525 20.00 20.00 0.29
100 0:08:07 48 1,650 41.18 17.00 0.32
101 0:08:12 53 1,463 4.71 29.00 0.29
102 0:08:17 54 1,488 4.71 32.00 0.30
103 0:08:22 55 1,513 7.06 25.00 0.32
104 0:08:27 57 1,850 23.14 18.00 0.30
105 0:08:32 62 1,763 18.82 18.00 0.29
106 0:08:37 65 1,825 13.73 22.00 0.29
107 0:08:42 66 1,788 2.75 36.00 0.28
108 0:08:47 63 1,713 5.88 34.00 0.30
109 0:08:51 62 1,775 11.76 25.00 0.28
110 0:08:56 63 1,788 12.94 22.00 0.29
111 0:09:01 65 1,825 9.80 27.00 0.30
112 0:09:06 66 1,838 12.55 23.00 0.29
113 0:09:11 67 1,850 10.20 27.00 0.29
114 0:09:16 67 1,850 8.63 32.00 0.29
115 0:09:21 67 1,838 8.24 31.00 0.30
116 0:09:26 67 1,850 7.84 33.00 0.29
117 0:09:31 66 1,838 12.16 24.00 0.27
118 0:09:36 65 1,775 10.20 25.00 0.29
119 0:09:41 65 1,800 9.41 23.00 0.30
120 0:09:46 66 1,863 13.73 21.00 0.30
121 0:09:51 68 1,913 11.37 25.00 0.30
122 0:09:55 70 1,925 7.45 34.00 0.29
This represents just under 10 minutes of driving. After 10 minutes, the time figures triggered smileys in the message. |
|
|
| Eric L. |
quote:
Originally posted by GripperDon
I very obviously "know that" but the point is to try and point out that "No Codes don't necessarily mean no problems
I figured you did, just wanted to point it out to other readers. :) |
|
|
| special-k |
OK everyone here's an update. Got the MO back last night from the dealer.
Was once again told "there's no codes, there's nothing wrong." Service writer also told me that they tested all the sensors and such, but my service reciept simply shows "could not duplicate problem". After being blown off so many times, I really think he just told me that to hopefully shut me up.
Service writer told me that without codes, they can't do further diagnostic work because Nissan won't pay for the work, and the dealership would have to eat the cost of all that work, or *I'd* have to pay for it if I really want it done.
GripperDon-- I pointed out the residue in the exhaust pipes when they brought the car around... service writer looked at it and said "oh that's totally normal... especially at this altitude and the cold mornings -- the engine runs really rich until it warms up completely and that's why you're getting that carbon buildup" *shrug* I don't know what to believe anymore from these guys. The only other MOs around to compare it to were essentially brand new and had less than 50 miles on them so... apples and oranges...
I drove the freeway on my way home and reset the MPG computer... after about 8 miles at 70-75mph it told me I was getting 18.4MPG. The engine was fully warmed up by this point as I had been driving for about 20 minutes at 35mph or so through the city before I got on the freeway. When I got off the freeway I reset it again. After about 4 miles of 35-45mph and 2 stoplights it told me I was getting 10.2MPG.
I currently have 131 miles on this tank of gas and it's just about to the half-empty mark. bleh!
This is, of course, in contrast to when I was driving the MO home from Berkeley when I bought it and was doing about 80mph the whole way and I periodically reset the computer and checked after about 10 miles and it showed anywhere from 27 to about 32MPG.
When I tell the service writer that my mileage has been getting progressively worse since I bought it, he just looks at me like I have a banana sticking out of my ear.
On the up-side of this whole process, I asked that they check the alternator (since they won't just replace it with the better unit unless it fails...) and it tested 14.14V idle and 14.14V under load, he said it's perfectly fine. Let's just hope it stays that way. Also, they DID fix the alignment, so I guess it wasn't a total bust! :)
I will be compiling all the info from this thread (thanks again everyone you've been a big help) and will probably let the Carson City dealership have a crack at it since they seemed much more willing to go a few extra steps and test things out even if there were no codes... I will post an update if/when I get a chance to leave the MO in Carson for a few days. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Only thought, left, Check mileage over longer distances (say 40miles so the display computer can really average it correctly), after fully, warm, correct tire pressure, Make sure air filter is not dirty, Not in traffic mileage but truly Durban driving, doesn't have to be freeway. Finally as a proof of the pudding, fill up at a specific pump at a specific gas station, run the tank 1/2 way, return to same pump. Take mileage and pump records, calculate and carry to new dealer. :) |
|
|
| special-k |
quote:
Originally posted by GripperDon
only thought, left, Check mileage over longer distances (say 40miles so the display computer can really average it correctly), after fully, warm, correct tire pressure, Make sure air filter is not dirty, Not in traffic mileage but truly Durban driving, doesn't have to be freeway. Finally as a proof of the pudding, fill up at a specific pump at a specific gas station, run the tank 1/2 way, return to same pump. Take mileage and pump records, calculate and carry to new dealer. :)
The Carson City service department mentioned doing a "fuel consumption test" if/when I brought it in... basically doing exactly what you described. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| GOOD Nice to have a dealer service department that is on the ball, who know maybe they actually have an Engineer working there. Not that a trained Tech would not be just as good. :) OR if they are really lucky a member of the Murano.org forum |
|
|
| Gonzo |
Gripper is right... you can't make an accurate MPG calc based on 4 miles... make a weekend event of it... have fun.
Good luck. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Gonzo, You need to be carfull when you tell someone who lives in Reno to "Make a weekend of it and Have Fun" I can hear it now "But I was only doing what they told me to do on the Murano forum" :D |
|
|
| special-k |
quote:
Originally posted by GripperDon
Gonzo, You need to be carfull when you tell someone who lives in Reno to "Make a weekend of it and Have Fun" I can hear it now "But I was only doing what they told me to do on the Murano forum" :D
Darn... I was planning on using Gonzo's instructions as an excuse when my fiance grilled me.
:2: |
|
|
| quikkik |
i feel you man. after reading your post, i went and hit the 'fuel econ' button and it read 11.2. wtf?
damn....all this talk is getting me peeved:3: |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Don't get peeved. First make sure. Measure the actual milage over a tank and also what the computer says for that full tank. :D |
|
|
| Gonzo |
| Yes and make sure you take a long ride... something over 40 MPH in non-stop traffice.... and don't have fun while doing it either. (There how was that.) |
|
|
| Tyler_Canada |
quote:
Originally posted by Tyler_Canada
For what it's worth:
I have 78,000 km (48,000 miles) on my Murano.
I use synthetic oil.
I drive 65% city by distance.
I have a pop charger.
I run 34 PSI in my tires.
I usually rev to at least 3000 RPMs while accelerating.
I average 17-20 mpg. The pop charger made my mileage worse by 1 mpg.
The above are by no means the entire set of factors that influence mileage.
The fact that my mileage is proportionate by engine size to the 4.0L Jeep I had makes me happy, especially since this engine has a lot more power.
Oh and I forgot to mention that I use 94 octane, that is oxygenated (10% ethanol). |
|
|
| Stoker |
quote:
Originally posted by Tyler_Canada
For what it's worth:
I have 78,000 km (48,000 miles) on my Murano.
I use synthetic oil.
I drive 65% city by distance.
I have a pop charger.
I run 34 PSI in my tires.
I usually rev to at least 3000 RPMs while accelerating.
I average 17-20 mpg. The pop charger made my mileage worse by 1 mpg.
The above are by no means the entire set of factors that influence mileage.
The fact that my mileage is proportionate by engine size to the 4.0L Jeep I had makes me happy, especially since this engine has a lot more power.
Tyler
In this note I saw that you usally rev up to 3000 RPM, in my experiance with my MO, if you lighten up on the pedal you will find that your fuel consumption will go down. However this is my personal choice and you have yours, it is just my opinion on this. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| TYLER Do you suspicion that the reason the POP charger made your mileage worse was you like how it feel and sounds more and that you drive a little differently now. |
|
|
| Tyler_Canada |
In response to the last two messages, I have to say that I either rev to 3000 until I'm at the speed I want, or floor it until I get to the speed I want. I do this because I don't care about my gas consumption, and I like going fast. The reason the pop charger made my mileage worse is because I actually use the extra power available made available by it (more air + more gas = more power). I have always driven this way.
:runaway: |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Tyler_Canada I think you have stated you mileage problem rather well. :2: |
|
|
| Ohio Murano |
Special-k,
did you ever take it to another dealer and have it checked? It been awhile so I was just wondering. Thanks. :cool: |
|
|
| jds |
I'm late to this thread but thought I would add my experiences.
My Murano is 4 months old, has around 2200 miles on it (just had my first oil change). I mostly make short trips within Seattle (hilly, and MANY stop lights) and my city MPG has also been around 12. Early on my freeway driving got around 19 MPG but recently it's been around 21, averaging probably 75MPH and I do have a ski rack which adds some amount of drag, probably accounting for 1-2 MPG depending on how fast I am driving (I don't consider this a factor in my city MPG). Generally speaking I could be considered to have a lead foot, although I wouldn't say I always do. I always fill with 91 octane. Tires are at 34-35#. Seattle is virtually at sea level.
Now after reading this thread I fear I may have some problem causing low MPG. I had always thought it was due to a) new engine breaking in and b) the conditions of my city driving. I have a long trip coming up this weekend and will definitely reset the meter to see how it fares. |
|
|
| Eric L. |
| Your mileage sounds reasonable to me. Short trips and stop and go driving will kill your fuel efficiency. Your highway mileage sounds close enough to what I am getting (also ~20mpg) so I would not worry about it. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| I agree with Eric, not unreasonable at all. GRIP :D |
|
|
| special-k |
I've pretty much resigned myself to accept that the mileage that my MO is getting and accept that there's nothing really wrong with it. It's just not living up the hype (20 city, 24 hwy), that's all.
After doing lots of tests and careful observations over the past few weeks, as suggested by many here, apparently the characteristics of my daily commute are mostly to blame. Stop and go, a couple hills (minor...), and inadequate time to fully warm the engine up even though it appears to reach operating temperature fairly quicky. When I drive on weekends, I've been resetting the computer and have been averaging about 16 city, 20 hwy. On my trip to Linda, CA (outside Sacramento) last weekend to look at model homes, I averaged 25MPG on the way there, and 23MPG on the way back.
So... while the sticker values are a bit liberal and optimistic, I suppose there really isn't anything that can be done about it. My original fear was that something might be malfunctioning with the MO for it to be giving me results so far below advertised values, but it seems it's just "real world vs. advertised values."
For what it's worth, in measured tests the MO's actual performance in my conditions deviates from the advertised values significantly more than my other vehicles.
Measured by doing the same commute in each vehicle for 1 week:
2001 Pontiac Grand Am GT: 3.4L V6, 30,000 miles:
advertised: 20 city, 29 hwy
actual: 17 city
deviance on city values: 15%
2003 Saturn ION 3 Sedan: 2.2L 4-cyl
22,000 miles:
advertised: 24 city, 32 hwy
actual: 22 city
deviance on city values: 8.33%
2004 MO:
2600 miles:
advertised: 20 city, 24 hwy
actual: 12.2 city
deviance on city values: 39%
For the scientific minds out there, neither the Saturn nor the Pontiac have a MPG computer and I did not rely on the MO's MPG computer (though it was fairly consistent with my measured values), I calculated the values myself by recording exactly how much fuel was used vs. miles driven during the test period, filled from the same pump each time. In each case, I limited the test vehicle to ONLY making the daily commute to/from work so as not to introduce error in the measurements. Any driving outside of the to/from work direct commute was done with a different vehicle during the test period.
All these vehicles are subjected to the same elements and conditions, such as elevation, temperature, relative humidity, etc., and were driven on the exact same commute in consistent traffic conditions every day. The MO's values are WAY below advertised, while the other two vehicles were much closer. Perhaps it's the characteristics of how the MO's engine operates, maybe its induction or exhaust systems, maybe the fact that it's not quite as aerodynamic as it looks... whatever... all the complaining in the world isn't going to change any of it... so time to focus on more important things I suppose. |
|
|
| PhatBoi |
I purchased a Brand New 2004 Murano last November. I am thoroughly satisfied with this car. I havent had the chance to read every single post in this thread... but it seems like everyone is going in circles over the mileage issues...
Let's not forget, half the time you're in the car, it's at a Red StopLight... especially if you are in a City like Sacramento where every next light is turning red on you. Stop lights will eat away at your effective mileage on a tank of gas.
The Murano is rated at 25MPG on the highway... I believe my murano does actually get close to that WHILE ACTUALLY DRIVING ON THE FREEWAY (between 23-25mpg)... however once I get off the freeway, it drops, which makes sense. I've been meaning to run a few math models to see if I can extrapolate the actual fuel economy based on my driving habits.
My computer currently reads 21.6MPG and I'm at about 3400mi odo reading. Granted the bulk of my driving is freeway (50mi a day), I still do a good bit of running around/errands/partying on the weekends.
It's a 2004 SE 2WD. I got the SE for the sport tuned suspension, and 2WD because the AWD had more road feedback which made for a slighly less smooth and stiff ride. The mileage should be the same for AWD, however I believe in reality it's a little less. I'm currently getting about 400mi on a full tank of gas (20GAL) of Premium Chevron (the only gas I use). I got cloth seats beacause I didnt like the black leather alternative in the 2004s. I would have liked the Navigation and little extras, but couldnt justify paying $10K more for the same exact car with just a few add-ons that I would never really need... plus I want to get a "toy" in the near future.
Otherwise... I love this car. CVTs should be more prevallent. I still do have some reservations about this cars actually achieving a fuel economy of 25MPG on the freeway. |
|
|
| MightyMo |
Just another data point to throw in the mix, one tank worth of my daily 7 mile mixed commute & other errands gave me an average of 30MPH and 18.8MPG.
I run my tires hard, 44psi hot (about 40 cold).
I run Mobile1.
My tires are bigger than stock (Kumho STX).
And I've got a CAI.
YMMV :D |
|
|
| Dalite |
FWIW, if you will drive under 2000 RPM, the car will get close to 25 MPG.
You can easily merge into highway traffic while maintaining low RPM.
The hardest part to getting stated gas mileage is to learn not to drive the car like it has an industry standard automatic transmission.
It is difficult to learn to keep the RPM down during acceleration, but it does make a large difference in the MPG, both measured, actual, and as indicated by the distance to empty display...
Every Murano I test drove, and the used one (29K miles ) I originally kept overnight (before going back to buy a new one) showed 17 to 18 mpg as average on the display.
It took me 3 tanks of gas before learning to keep the RPM down.
I still don't have 2500 miles on my Murano, but have averaged 23 to 25 MPG the last 3 tanks; both city and highway driving. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
| Way to go! GRIP :D |
|
|
| njmo |
| I too am learnig how to drive with the CVT. Not racing or revving the engine must make a big difference! It is such a smooth ride when RPM's stay at 2000 or below. |
|
|
| special-k |
Maybe it's the fact that I'm at approximately 5000ft here, but keeping it at or below 2000rpm just doesn't provide enough acceleration power. I'm not trying to be a race car driver here, but if I kept it below 2000 I'd get rear-ended or a lot of middle fingers.
Maybe a CAI would help me produce a little more power since we're kind of starving for air here...
For what it's worth.... :) |
|
|
| vfr |
quote:
Originally posted by special-k
Maybe it's the fact that I'm at approximately 5000ft here, but keeping it at or below 2000rpm just doesn't provide enough acceleration power. I'm not trying to be a race car driver here, but if I kept it below 2000 I'd get rear-ended or a lot of middle fingers.
Back here at "C" level. riding beyond 2K RPM(after warm up)in traffic will have me running into the back of others. But then again, this is the South.:D |
|
|
| GripperDon |
Right on, Have to hit the old "Shunshine Parkway" and hike it up towards Gainsville for a Gator weekend!!
Go Gators!:cool: GRIP :D |
|
|
| MightyMo |
What? No huge high vs. low altitude MPG debate??? ;)
Around here in the SF bay area accelerating at 2K from stop lights is no problem, but getting on the freeway usually requires some more kick. |
|
|
| vfr |
quote:
Originally posted by GripperDon
Go Gators!:cool: GRIP :D
NO NO! That's go Seminoles. |
|
|
| GripperDon |
I am sure you know what the Gators call them Semih....
He He GRIP :2: :2: :2: :2: Give me an Orange, Give Me a Blue!! |
|
|
| special-k |
quote:
Originally posted by GripperDon
NO, NO, NOT AGAIN EVER!!!!!!
GRIP :D
LOL... sorry, sometimes I just can't resist an opportunity to make someone cringe and scream. It's in my nature.
:D |
|
|
| vfr |
I had posted this on the Edmunds site in answer to some doubts. Thought it may be of interest here.
OK, so This report is only nearly two weeks later but I have serious doubts things will change. My last 275 miles of driving on a full tank of regular(yes,regular) were just replaced with 11.46 gals of premium. I gave the pump another pull after it tripped to make sure it was full. The tank was registering at just under half full prior to fill up. The MPG average was reading 24.1 against an actual of 24.0(yes, I rounded up 4 thousandths of an MPG). This was all in town driving, no highway. The distance to work is about 14 miles and I figure I stop completely 8/9 times and slow down another 9 times for corners. The return trip is in moderate to heavy traffic with 20 full stops and plenty of turning, creeping and surging. Still, That is probably more moderate than EPA city testing.
These results do not completely surprise me as the engine never revs above 1500 RPM after warmup and usually runs at about 1200. Much more than that and I will be running into traffic. I do notice that the indicated MPG drops rapidly during warmup so short trips will definitely drink more gas. The
miles till empty readout seems quite inaccurate as I have seen it lose 20 miles in two miles of driving then sometimes recover some
I think Nissan needs to buy this vehicle back from me and figure out what they did right with the programming. I in turn would get a more exciting color like Merlot or polished Pewter.
On the 2.5 mile trip home from the gas station I did get the indicated mileage down to 20.5, but not without a few runs to 6000 RPM WOW!!
It still baffles me why there is such variation in consumption. In order for me to get 18 MPG, I would have to be quite abusive if It would even get that low.
As I said above , the engine never sees above 1500 RPM in town and that is with acceleration to keep with traffic. and then it backs to about 1200 to maintain a speed of 45-50 or less. It therefore does not surprise me with the mileage as the engine is operating off idle.
Is everybody else's engine/ transmission behaving this way? |
|
|
| Eric L. |
| It takes very little pressure on the gas pedal for me to rev the engine to 3000 rpm on a normal basis. If you are indeed keepign the revs below 1500, you should get wonderful gas mileage. |
|
|
| vfr |
For me to get to 3000RPM I really have to romp on the throttle. It seems to me that there may be some CVT programming differences .
During breakin, the RPM's would remain in such a low and narrow range that I had to shift into "S" to get the revs up to 3000-3500 RPM as recommended by most sources for engine break in.:confused: |
|
|
| Dalite |
Possibilities to ponder:
Ambient temperature makes a big difference in the time needed for the transmission to warm to optimum operating temperature. (overall, the Murano seems less optimized for cold climates than warm, and this seems to show up in a wide range of items from CVT, seat motors, CD player, mirrors, ...). Operation in the winter months in some climates may never yield the level of efficient operation that can be obtained in warmer climates.
Operating under 2000 RPM makes a big difference. (I just completed another 25MPG trip of 130 miles at highway speed. The miles to empty indicates the tank will yield 520 miles.)
The accuracy is greatly improved toward the low range of the fuel gauge (the overall average has more historical data and can make a more accurate guess than when the tank is first filled or the MPG has just been reset - this assumes that you reset the MPG every fill-up)
The programming for the economy calculations is very amateurish. The weighting for time at idle and time at highway speeds seems to be equal. With fuel flow, miles traveled, engine load, fuel level, engine rpm vs speed and other variables that I can't even imagine, the programming seems to have the depth of completion obtained by a 6 grade level understanding of mathematics.
Compared to fuel economy systems of other cars, the one used in the Murano makes use of approximately 20% of the technology utilized by 1998 models of other manufacture.
I am still very thankful for the difference in smoothness of ride and the overal quietness of the Murano, compared to what I have owned before.
However, since it was $15K more than anything I have ever owned before, I am more than a little dissappointed in the lack of interior quality and the overall crudeness of paint finish, interior quality, programming completion level and the amount of shortcomings in the level of upgrade potential of stereo (lack of MP3 capabilities, poor crossover points on the "component" speaker system, Center console boondogle), nav systems, lighting programming (fogs on with headlight only) power distribution (power outlets switched only, even the one to the cigar lighter iwhen the smokers kit is installed.)
I guess every "early adoption" candidate gets the chance to shed a little blood from the jagged edge of technology, and this certainly isn't the first thing I have owned before it was "fully baked"; it is merely the most expensive.
/mini-rant |
|
|
| hfelknor |
I need to get more involved.........
Look, I know there was a thread about the fog lights and headlights and I didn't say anything, but lets clear this up now.
ALL factory foglights require the headlights to be on believe.
All that I have had up to this point have been.
Why?
Because it is the law.
Maybe not where you live, maybe not even where I live, but it is the law in many places.
All auto manufacturers strive to meet the laws everwhere they sell autos.
One of the major problems with the infrastructure in this great land is that every state has different, and sometimes opposite, laws.
So it may still be dumb in your opinion, but quit blaming Nissan for this.;)
Homer |
|
|
| Dalite |
quote:
Originally posted by hfelknor
I need to get more involved.........
Look, I know there was a thread about the fog lights and headlights and I didn't say anything, but lets clear this up now.
ALL factory foglights require the headlights to be on believe.
All that I have had up to this point have been.
Why?
Because it is the law.
Maybe not where you live, maybe not even where I live, but it is the law in many places.
All auto manufacturers strive to meet the laws everwhere they sell autos.
One of the major problems with the infrastructure in this great land is that every state has different, and sometimes opposite, laws.
So it may still be dumb in your opinion, but quit blaming Nissan for this.;)
Homer
Apparently Chrysler is still in the dark over this issue :)
The 2002 PT Cruisier and 2003 PT Cruiser that I owned both allowed the fog lights to be used with parking lights on.
This goves the driver the option of having daytime running lights without the decision being made for you by the manufacturer.
The 2 most critical times for flexible illumination options are the hour preceeding dusk and the hour after dawn. In both cases, non-glare inducing lighting is the safest for both driver and other drivers.
If the industry does mysteriously adopt the "standard" of having fog lights only available with headlights, it won't be about safety. |
|
|
| hfelknor |
Interesting.
Did you know I also owned a Chrysler before I bot my Murano?
And my Chrysler, a Town andCountry Limited would not allow the fogs to be used independently. NOR with High beams.
Seems like Chrysler is conflicted about this.
Neither would my Miata.....nor my Mustang GT........
But the discussion wanders......
There are 50 states and that means there are 50 different laws about Fog lights.
It wouldn't surprise me to see it perfectly legal in some places to have the Fogs independently controlled and used that way.
In other places I would also not be surprised to find out it is illegal.
But here, for example is the law in Tennessee.
Here, I suppose your PT cruiser was legal, but you USING these lights independenly would be against against the law.
Check out
http://www.tennessee.gov/safety/dlh.../Manual_50.html
Note where it says
"3. It is also illegal to have auxiliary lights or fog lights on by themselves........"
Rather straightforward.
You cannot use your fogs independently in Tennessee.
I leave it to you to check the other 49 states.
Homer |
|
|
| dklanecky1 |
quote:
Originally posted by Dalite
Apparently Chrysler is still in the dark over this issue :)
The 2002 PT Cruisier and 2003 PT Cruiser that I owned both allowed the fog lights to be used with parking lights on.
This goves the driver the option of having daytime running lights without the decision being made for you by the manufacturer.
The 2 most critical times for flexible illumination options are the hour preceeding dusk and the hour after dawn. In both cases, non-glare inducing lighting is the safest for both driver and other drivers.
If the industry does mysteriously adopt the "standard" of having fog lights only available with headlights, it won't be about safety.
Isn't the PT cruiser based on the neon?
Neon is worst performer: The Neon has "major problems beginning with its structure. This car is a disaster," Lund says. "The structure is poor, and both dummies' heads were hit by the barrier during the crash test. High forces were recorded on the head, torso, and pelvis of the driver dummy. If this had been a real driver in a real crash, it's likely it wouldn't have been survivable."
While combination head and torso side airbags for the front occupants are available on the Neon, DaimlerChrysler did not ask for a second test with the airbags.
"With a poor structure, the company probably didn't think side airbags would make a big difference in the Neon's performance," Lund says. Pointing to the Neon's marginal rating in the Institute's frontal test, he adds that "if safety is a priority, the Neon is a small car to be avoided."
http://www.iihs.org/news_releases/2005/pr030605.htm |
|
|
| Dalite |
I know I am leading this discussion further away from the subject, but....
The PT Concept, the PT Cruzer Concept and the final PT Cruiser Concept cars were based on a Neon Chassis out of convenience.
The actual production was a different chassis, and the Toluca, Mexico plant was pretty much dedicated to PT only production.
I am not overly impressed with DCX, and the last PT made my mind up to never buy anothe DCX product; not due to anything t5hat was PT-oriented; but rather the "deletions thay made on the 2003 model as compared with the 202 model, and then still showed a price increase.
DCXs' decision to not treat Mopar Performance parts as production in terms of overall warranty went against the Moss Magneson Act, and the final straw came when they released the overly hyped "Stage I" computer that was not CARB approved.
Next year the PT will evolve to a Mitsubishi platform, and rumored to be 6 cyl RWD. |
|
|
| b0xdesigns |
tested this out tonight for the first time....I usually drive with a lead foot. And average 19-20mpg
tonight I tried diffrent speeds for 10 miles each on fpretty strait and flat strech of freeway....and got these results....
55mph: 30.2 mpg
60mph: 28.5mpg
65mph: 26.6mpg
I'm usually driving above those speeds.....Anyhow...This was with my snowboard rack up top creating more drag...so i'm betting i can do even better. |
|
|
| Fresh |
| I keep my rpms below 2000 and i get average 16.7 mpg in the city. Its really getting to me becuz i drive like a granny and im constantly putting gas in. By the way its a 03 murano se |
|
|
| Eric L. |
quote:
Originally posted by Fresh
I keep my rpms below 2000 and i get average 16.7 mpg in the city. Its really getting to me becuz i drive like a granny and im constantly putting gas in. By the way its a 03 murano se
Even when I babyfoot it, I get around that as well, driving all city. |
|
|
| Murano_driver |
quote:
Originally posted by Fresh
I keep my rpms below 2000 and i get average 16.7 mpg in the city. Its really getting to me becuz i drive like a granny and im constantly putting gas in. By the way its a 03 murano se
I am getting the same (on the same Mo), but i driving the way I want it. Just free yourself......:D |
|
|
| kk2 |
Just a possible thought on a much earlier post regarding guy's progressively worsening fuel economy.
NTB06023
Nissan has determined that some 2003-2006 model year Nissan Murano vehicles may have a defect which relates to motor vehicle safety. If the front tires run over a small, sharp object in the road, there is a possibility that a front tire may propel it towards the rear of the vehicle. Due to the location of the fuel tank, the object may strike the forward portion of the tank. This could result in a puncture in the tank and a fuel leak. If an ignition source is present, a fire could occur. To prevent this condition from occurring, Nissan is conducting a Voluntary Safety Recall Campaign to install protectors in front of the fuel tank free of charge. See this bulletin for further detail. |
|
|
| dborla01 |
| I guess we got a good one, 03 SE awd. By 5K it was getting 24 mpg under optimal conditions, ie: no more than 65mph on the flats on I-5 and premium name-brand fuel. :cool: Darrell. |
|
|
|
