SilverMax_04

The EPA is now admitting that their sticker estimates for fuel economy are overstated versus what people get in the real world. According to the TV news tonight, the highway speeds in the old estimate were rarely over 55 MPH and averaged less than that, while the new estimates have more realistic speeds (they did not say what they were).

Here is the site for more realistic EPA estimates for the 2004 Maxima (the other years are also available elsewhere on this site):

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calcu...n&model=Maxima

Bottom Line, the new estimates match more closely what people on this site say they are getting -- once the car is fully broken in (and according to the site burning regular gasoline in 2004):

2004
Trannie __ Old Hwy __ New Hwy __ Old City __ New City
6 Speed ___ 29 _______ 27 _______ 20 _______ 18
5 AT ______ 28 _______ 26 _______ 20 _______ 18
4 AT ______ 27 _______ 25 _______ 20 _______ 18

On occasion I have gotten 29 to 30 MPG on the highway in my 6-Speed, but the wind had to be at my back to do it. The 27 MPG is a better estimate for what I usually get on the highway. I frequently get 20 to 22 MPG in town -- but I don't live in a big city where there is more stop and go driving (even on the expressways). I always burn regular in my Max, so that is consistent with the EPA estimates.

If you go here, you can get the 2007 Maxima estimates (these burning premium gasoline):
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calcu...n&model=Maxima

2007
Trannie __ Old Hwy __ New Hwy __ Old City __ New City
CVT ______ 28 _______ 25 _______ 21 _______ 19

Stevied23

What, if anything can be done if they find out it's even lower than that??

Fastmax05

iTrader: (17)

Sweet... im getting like 19.3 miles to a gallon around town.. I have 30k miles so im sure mine is broken in now...

not like my civic i used to have but its close hahahah NOT!

I guess to have 300 hp u have to get worse gas millage than a civic hahaha O WELL

eclipticrider

iTrader: (1)

thats kinda of funny because I do mostly city driving in Tampa fla. and get 20.3 mpg...

but before I inflated my tires for winter I was getting 18 and some change mpg and after I inflated them i started getting 20.8 - 20... but I think I drive kinda aggressively and accelerate pretty hard and that hurts my mpg I think...

*BTW* my car is 2k4 auto 5 spd

CanadianMoFo

Weird numbers. I would have thought that the CVT would get better highway mileage than the 6 speed due to its "infinite" gear ratios. Though I see it is better in city driving.

CM

SmokeNismo

hmmm, i think the old numbers look a bit more realistic to me. I can average 27-28mpg all the time on mostly highway driving. I've driven it hard and around town only before and I got 19mpg as my lowest. Go figure.

SilverMax_04

Theoretically the CVT will get better mileage. But in the real world, the CVT produces too much waste heat to do so. The CVT needs a special ultra-high-temp lubricant and 2 trannie coolers while the 6-speed needs none of that. The CVT also allows the VQ to turn at lower RPMs on the highway -- which should also give better mileage. If the engineers can eliminate the waste heat, watch the efficiency of that engine-trannie combination improve.

Pronto

The new figures are much more like my mileage is. I drive a short hop 5 days a week. Never even really gets warmed up so I know that kills any mileage I get.

jcalabria

CVT is of little advantage in steady-state highway crusing, and SilverMax_04's thermal issues are probably a bigger piece of the pie while cruising and the infinite ratios are of little or no use.

The CVT ratios are a much bigger advantage in urban/suburban stop & start driving. Now that it is well broken in, my '07 CVT is better around town (virtually all of its mileage) than my '03 (22 vs 20), but just about the same on the highway (~27).

Kashanova

im getting 8.5 driving from work and back

MDS

Great website Silvermax! Did you notice the website applied the identical formula to every car across the board? They didn’t actually test each car. (The site provides access to their conversion calculator.) It seems all cars suffer equally from the same industry malady.

At 75 to 80 mph, I average 27 mpg, which is exactly what the new numbers claim I should expect on the highway. My average is 24 mpg. Going back to previous threads, for a sub-15 second, full sized family car, that’s okay. Had I opted for a 4 cylinder Altima, Accord, Camry etc, I’d get 3-4 mpg more. I’m not certain if that’s enough to offset my cost of “liquid entertainment.”

ecks

man that really makes me hurt.. deep.

lightonthehill

I saw this somewhere (newspaper) a few weeks ago, and IIRC, the window stickers for the 2008 and 2009 model year vehicles will carry both the new system figures and the old system figures in order that buyers will have a way of relating the new numbers to the estimates they have been used to seeing over the years.

I think this is a good change that probably should have taken place years ago.

MaxFan

Or get yourself a Honda and see your mileage goes thru the roof. Well I heard they didnot "calibrate" the speedometer...so it's a bit faster than actual...so they will compensate owners for: faster expiring warranty, wrong impression on mileage, wrong impression on reliability (man I didnot have my 1st problem until 100K..not). I think this is a major case but our government will let it go easy with some small fine. I remember back in the '80s they got fined for "forgetting" to turn on the SES light in the firmware. Think about the impact on the environment.