Nissan unveils its new Sentra tonight in Dallas as part of its new product onslaught. Objective: Regain market share in the U.S. The Sentra is “the third of five all-new vehicles being introduced in a 15-month period,” as the company is proud to say.
Getting with the worldwide weight-loss program, the new Sentra is 150 pounds – or five percent – lighter than the current model, despite growing in overall dimensions and interior room. With a more fuel-efficient 1.8-liter engine, and a Xtronic CVT, the car has a 13 percent improvement in EPA combined fuel economy.
With the FE+ models, Sentra achieves up to 40 mpg on the highway. Other CVT-equipped models are rated at 39 mpg on the highway. All CVT models have a combined EPA rating of 34 mpg.
I like the electric blue color on this car. How long is the warranty on the CVT? I understand that Nissan makes the best CVTs, but I keep cars a long time.
Based on these photos, color me impressed.
mid sized cars rated at or near 40mpg? blow me away. who would have thunk it a few short years ago.
vw better get its act together and update the 2.5L engine in the passat (jetta and golf too but they are not midsize) or their 30-32 mpg hwy rating will seem awfully noncompetitive.
dont know if the planned switch to a 1.8L turbo will make that change or not. if it is the old style 1.8 probably not.
This competes in the compact class, so the fuel economy figures are class competitive.
The Altima is Nissan’s midsize car.
I agree that VW needs to work on fuel economy.
I understand the in-line five is out and their version of the TFSI Four is in for the Jetta and Passat. That will help. Plus they will keep selling TDIs to the hihg-mpg crowd…
You’re right about this being a size class smaller than Passat.
But for what it’s worth, the new Altima is rated 27/38 mpg.
Sentra is not a mid-size. Sentra is a compact jumping into the mix against Corolla, Civic, Cruze etc. A 40 mpg model is a requirement in that segment now.
Wow that’s a huge improvement, but kind of a bummer for the Maxima and Altima owners whose more expensive cars look very similar to a Sentra.
exactly what I thought when I looked at the first picture!! It looks more like a smaller version of the 2013 Altima, which itself is a smaller version of the Maxima !
Remember BMW did the same in the past with the 3,5, and 7. Each was very similar to the other on the outside…I was OK with that but Bangle apparently was not…
It would have been fine if Nissan’s new design language was attractive, but it is not w/ that mini “pinched” grill and too many lines going in different directions.
Nice car. I hope the CVT is improved. I rented an Altima for a week, The CVT my right foot and my brain were never totally connected. Trouble smoothly transitioning into a faster lane. Finally ended up just flooring it moving over an slowing down. Maybe it’s just me. The rest of the car was very nice, with a 6 sp. auto it would be great.
I wonder how this will stack up to the mazda 3 in terms of driving dynamics.
Given the awful suspension on the current model I wouldn’t get too optimistic. Driving dynamics are not really Nissan’s focus in this market segment – its more about frugality and affordability.
It used to be.
The Nissan SE-R used to be seen as the “poor man’s” 3 Series – ut those days are long gone.
If they’re retaining the Torsion Beam rear suspension setup from the previous generation, then in a word, lousy.
Mazda3 is really the only <$20,000 compact that's designed for driving dynamics. The Focus pulls it off, but it's going for "faux luxury," which seems to be the trend.
I would be shocked if this was better to drive than a 3 or a Focus.
Forget about Focus. Lets put it this way – is the new Sentra better than Dodge Dart? It is not so difficult to surpass Corolla and Civic though.
Same sausage though.
Whoa, this is really nice looking. I hopefully there’s an SE-R in the pipeline. I would hate for Nissan to give up on it because the last one was kinda bleh.
Nissan is my favorite.
this car looks real nice.
Why is it not offered with a manual transmission?
It will be offered in a manual transmission….why would you think it won’t?
yes, you are correct.
I saw that on another car blog.
the 6 speed manual would be the version I would look at if shopping in this segment.
Because of Nissan… http://www.nissanusa.com/st/nissan/pdf/compare/2013/2013_Nissan_ALT.pdf
If there’s a manny tranny hiding in there, the print is awful fine.
@truckducken….that is a link to the Altima. This post is about the Sentra.
@ant…Nissan has to have a stripped down model. They will probably price it around $14999 so that can have a bunch of ads for the ‘all new Sentra starting at $14999.’ Then, they will have it at about 3% of their production mix.
They do the same thing with the Versa.
Man, I forgot the Sentra still existed! Thanks for straightening that out.
Definitely, not as frumpy looking as previous Sentras. Given a choice between the current Corolla and this Sentra – Nissan has a winner.
It’s nice that Nissan still offers a six speed manual, but I doubt if my local dealer will stock them.
Love Nissan. Still leery of the CVT. For me, buying a new car is a 5-10 year investment. I understand CVT means bring money when it’s repair time. How about a plain old automatic transmission.
A modern six-speed auto will be big money if it has to be repaired out of warranty, as well.
There are many, many repair shops that maintain, repair, and rebuild conventional automatic transmissions. From what I’ve read, the owner takes their CVT equipped Nissan back to the dealer for fluid changes and basically nobody local repairs CVTs. Instead CVT repair consists of remove and replace.
Hopefully Nissan fitting LEDs to the Sentra is a harbinger of the end of this embarrassing fad. Now that there’s nothing premium about it, maybe the fashion leaders can move onto something less useless and gimmicky.
It’s not a gimmick. DRL’s are a perfect place for LED’s. You can’t (for now) use LED’s for your headlights because LED’s are too narrow-spectrum to help you see well. But the DRL is there for others to see you. For that application LEDs are perfect. Just like for taillights and signal lights. Bright, long lived, and energy efficient.
If they’re so energy efficient, why do I need at least nine of them per side? Claiming energy efficiency in a decoration is purely ridiculous. How about the energy and materials that go into making this tacky gingerbread?
Full LED headlights are already in production cars by Audi and BMW.
The LED lamp units used in current cars (most efficient ones at least) would draw only around 10% of the power that a regular bulb would do, regular savings are about 50%. They’re a lot more efficient.
I’m an electrical engineer working in the auto industry, so I know a few things about this.
The main drawback is that the way the light units are built, you can’t replace single LED’s that went bad, you must replace the whole light unit.
Other issues with Low power LED lamps is to accurately diagnose them (in car), since they draw to little current, it’s harder to get clear thresholds functional conditions
Here’s a quick read.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2011/05/osram-20110527.html
Replacing either array for my DRLs will surely cost hundreds of times what I’ll have saved in fuel in exchange for not having cheap bulbs doing the same unnecessary job. Do you know how I could save even more fuel and money? By not having 9 bulbs per side illuminated at all times as a form of Audi advertising to people that shouldn’t laugh at the idea of trading Manhattan for some shiny beads.
Nissan was passed by Hyundai/Kia this year in total US sales, a fact which would surprise many people.
Nissan’s new product releases should help tighten the race.
This Sentra looks nice – a little bland – but better than a Corolla. I hope it has lots of interior room; that could really be distinctive.
I continue to be baffled and amused at the obsession the automobile press/mags/blog community has with the EPA highway number. I would think that the really relevant number should be the city number. Granted that salespeople, reps, delivery people etc. make business decisions based on the highway number since that is a cost borne by business, but for a vast majority of individuals who don’t do that for a living, that number seems pretty silly to be basing a buying decision on that number alone.
Of course we all want higher mileage for our vehicles, the higher the better, but in real world driving conditions, city, farm or urban, I would think that most people should be thinking more about the city number in forming a buying decision. No matter the situation, all EPA numbers tend to be exaggerated on the high side unless you are one of those hypermiler people who want to brag about your mileage.
Gee, some automobile makers are even being sued by people who are disappointed with the advertised number as being too low. Granted these are largely uniformed folks who don’t really grasp the intent of the EPA numbers in the first place. The point that I still cannot comprehend is why so many in the auto media continue to “advertise” that highway number in their reviews/commentaries/road tests when they darn well know that those numbers are exaggerated and not “real world”. Isn’t that being disingenuous?
You have a point. But in the world of marketing, more is better. And being able to advertise a super high (and extremely unattainable) MPG gets your product noticed – yes by the uniformed people you spoke of.
The difficulty is getting the car makers on board with that. Who’s going to be the first to stop advertising their highway MPG, only to make their car “appear” totally uncompetitive against their competition who continue to still do so?
Until laws are in place to remove the Highway MPG rating entirely from all advertisements and window stickers, expect it to stay.
…..Until laws are in place to remove the Highway MPG rating entirely from all advertisements and window stickers, expect it to stay…..
In the late 70’s during the early days of EPA ratings, the City number had to be emphasized by law. I remember an and for a Caprice with a circle around the city rating. I’m not sure when that changed; no doubt it was scuttled as a cutting of “needless” regulation of the auto industry…
Panayoti,
I drive 25k miles a year – 23k highway and 2k city. On my current DD I exceed the EPA highway by 1 mpg and that includes the 10% city driving. I have never hypermiled and have always achieved or exceeded the EPA highway numbers. I try not to exceed 70 mph except for down hills or coasting.
The EPA numbers are, at their best, a comparison tool. For NA engines, it does work pretty well. Once you throw in boosted, small displacement engines, things get murky. EPA numbers assume you never use the fuel-eating turbo under the hood but the 1400cc engine makes boost a necessity for everyday situations, which hurts real world gas mileage. Even small NA engines suffer from this. Look at the Honda Fit – great car if you’re going under 70mph. You have to torture the engine just to maintain highway cruising speeds.
“EPA numbers assume you never use the fuel-eating turbo under the hood but the 1400cc engine makes boost a necessity for everyday situations”
The EPA doesn’t assume anything. They strap the car on rollers and start running it. For sure the turbo will boost up during the testing.
Not if you take the time to read the protocols used in the test. The dictated accelerations are glacial. The test could have been designed to inflate the fuel efficiency of turbo motors. That probably isn’t the case though. They are always designed to be within the capabilities of the slowest vehicles on the market. Otherwise, they wouldn’t allow comparisons of all vehicles. In the ’70s, that meant VW buses or Renaults. Today, that means what, Smart cars? The old test where turbos never achieve boost are still factored into the window number and they’re all that is used for CAFE.
The accelerations used in the tests are about 0-60 of 18 secs, or about what a diesel chevette achieves when floored.
IIRC, the largest acceleration event required is actually 0-37 mph in 29 seconds, although it is followed with a 20-60 mph acceleration in roughly one minute. The maximum acceleration spikes in the city and highway test are 3.3 mph/sec and 3.2 mph/sec, neither sustained. Top speed for the highway test is 60 mph. No, none of this has much to do with typical driving conditions, which is why turbos forced to use boost to run with traffic are further from their ratings than naturally aspirated cars. Basically, politicians can’t change physics. They can only pervert it in ways that waste resources.
Really nice redesign and leagues better than its lazy looks predecessor. It’s a very elegant design. But will it translate when given a bit of SE-R treatment?
Seriously? Define elegance.
Looks a lot better than before.
But also looks disturbingly like the unlamented Lexus HS250h.
So I guess it does look better – but still cannot lay claim to looking “good”
Nice car. But Nissan lost me as a result of the fiasco with the radiators leaking into the transmissions of 2005-2010 xTerra, Frontier and Pathfinder. Not unreasonable to expect a transmission or radiator to last longer than 80k miles. Skipping the new Altima we were eyeballing and going with the RDX as a new ride for the Better Half.
it’s really interesting where the compact sedan segment is going… with all the major players releasing new models in the last year or two. And they are also growing in size reducing the gap between this and the mid-size sedan segment.
1.8 only? No mention of a SPEC V? If to be lets hope it does 60/40 split backseat and no stupid, overdone brace in the way. Lets hope rear drums are history Nissan. I hope there’s enough headroom with moonroof option unlike Civic.
=Bertel first new Sentra you get pull down the driver visor and see if it clips the rearview mirror outta wack.=
And it would be nice to have an orange selector marker on the automatic to know what we’re in instead of looking for a symbol in a gauge to confirm P D or OD or R.
I’d take Nissan mileage claims with a big pinch of salt.
I’m not sold on the design language of Nissan’s sedans, but I think the Sentra looks better and more refined than the Versa, Altima, and Maxima. I’d give the Sentra a serious look if I were shopping for a new compact.
Monitor screen still looks too small. Repeaters in the door mirrors, more chrome accents around the lower side windows. Are those Focus-style opening slats beneath the grill?
Maybe SER/Spec V will be domain of new Versa hatch?
Wow…WAY impressive. But…….I’d take my 2 door, baby blue, vinyl seats, 5 spd, no hub caps, black bumper, p155/80r/13 tires, only options: A/C and cassette player, factory installed sunroof, ’87 Sentra. To date: BEST CAR I’VE EVER OWNED!!!!!!!!
Oh boy. Initially interested. A CVT? No thank you. I don’t care if it gets a couple more mpg. Come on guys. Vote with your wallet. Personally would only consider a manual tranny. If not so inclined, would prefer a standard 6 spd auto. Disappointing!