Anyone getting stated mileage?

[Kev m]

With the now warmer temps (and presumably the disappearance of winter-blend fuels) I've seen a spike in my mileage (under like conditions).

Whereas I was mostly in the 22-24 range for most of winter, my current tankful (with 200 miles on the tank and reportedly nearly 100 more left in the tank) I've been averaging an indicated 27-28 mpg. If that bears out through the calculations at the end of the tank that will represent my best tankful so far, but I expect it should continue, especially into summer months.

If you use awd, the rear end is always engaged. AWD-V allows the rear end to disengage at light throttle and cruise. You'll see an mpg hit using awd (which you should not be using on dry/firm road). You should see a neglible mpg hit using awd-v.

JD - I THINK you may be mistaken about those facts. I've never seen anything from Nissan in print that confirms AWD "locks" (for lack of a better term) the front-to-rear ratio of torque division.

As a matter of fact, the Owner's manual and one automotive blog on the matter specifically say the opposite - i.e. that in BOTH AWD-V and AWD that "distribution of the torque to the front and rear wheels changes automatically [ratio; 100 : 0 (2WD) ---> 50 : 50 (AWD)] and distribution of torque between left and right wheel of rear changes automatically".

I believe the only difference between the two modes is in the amount of torque which is vectored side-to-side on the rear wheels. That in AWD LESS torque is vectored side-to-side because doing so (throwing more torque to the outside rear wheel) in more slippery conditions can actually hurt stability.

[Jersey Devil]

You are right. It's not in the owners manual. It is however in the NISSAN service manual, which I have read front to back.

JD - I THINK you may be mistaken about those facts. I've never seen anything from Nissan in print that confirms AWD "locks" (for lack of a better term) the front-to-rear ratio of torque division.

As a matter of fact, the Owner's manual and one automotive blog on the matter specifically say the opposite - i.e. that in BOTH AWD-V and AWD that "distribution of the torque to the front and rear wheels changes automatically [ratio; 100 : 0 (2WD) ---> 50 : 50 (AWD)] and distribution of torque between left and right wheel of rear changes automatically".

I believe the only difference between the two modes is in the amount of torque which is vectored side-to-side on the rear wheels. That in AWD LESS torque is vectored side-to-side because doing so (throwing more torque to the outside rear wheel) in more slippery conditions can actually hurt stability.

[KyleKidd]

I averaged 38mpg today going for a joy ride around the lake I live at. It was 9 miles, 40-45 constant mph. One stop and go.
I have the AWD but was in FWD mode.

Was just after a bath and vacuuming, maybe that's why =P

[Stryder]

I have to laugh how Canada tests their Highway Mileage

"The highway test simulates a 16-km trip with an average speed of
77 km/h and a top speed of 97 km/h. The test runs for 13 minutes
and does not include any stops. However, the speed varies to simulate
different kinds of highway and rural roads."

Wow!! I do not know anyone who drives an average of 77kph on the highway! Posted speed and Highways (atleast in the Toronto area) is 100kph and you'll be the slowest car on the road if you drive that speed! When are they (Transport Canada) going to wake up and do some REAL WORLD testing!!

[Kev m]

You are right. It's not in the owners manual. It is however in the NISSAN service manual, which I have read front to back.

So the sm contradicts the om?

Care to do us a solid and quote or cite what it says?

[pixelsailor]

I tend to believe that the owner's manual description of AWD was a misprint. There no difference between the two [AWD and AWD-V] even though the tone tends to imply there should be.

[Kev m]

The om doesn't say there is no difference, it only fails to explain the difference. However an automotive writer who reported to have the official word from Nissan wrote a brief web article on it explaining the difference was in the amount of side-to-side vectoring. A link to that article is in at least one of this board's threads.

Though I'm not saying he is proof, just that I tend to believe him until proven otherwise.

Another reason I tend to think there is no "locking" going on is that there are no warnings (at least that I've seen so far) about tire wear needing to be equal or not engaging AWD unless very slippery or risking driveline wear etc. The types of things you see with AWD or 4wd vehicles that have locking components.

[msagustin]

I was under the impression that

FWD = Stays at 100% torque up front.

AWD-V = Starts out as 100% up front and transfers 50% to rear wheels when slippage occurs, as well as torque vectoring left to right and right to left.

AWD = Stays at 50% up front and 50% at rear as well as torque vectoring left to right and right to left.


As Info: It does NOT go in depth.

[Kev m]

Msag - I would have assumed what you are claiming is true based on other AWD systems, however I've not yet seen anything from nissan that confirms that (including that video). More importantly what I have seen specifically contradicts it.

Still I'm open to it if I can find some evidence.

[freddieb80]

I just bought my 2011 Juke SV FWD with the Tech Package and I'm consistently getting terrible gas mileage. I went on a road trip and averaged about 27 mpg on that tank but since then I haven't gotten better than about 20 mpg. Yesterday after I filled up and started driving in Eco mode and was a little shocked to see that my average went down to 11 mpg! Seeing as how it only currently has 1,075 miles on it I'm not fully freaking out yet since its not "broken in" yet but I'm really hoping it gets better. The main reason I chose this car was for the gas mileage.