New owner minor niggle questions

Hello! Newb here with a few (edit: what's turned out to be quite a number of) questions about their recent purchase, none of which are likely to be on the standard list...

Or should I say, slightly worried new owner as I've just ended up reading about the issues people have had with their K13s (unlucky number? :) ) and although the franchise dealer I bought it from second-hand offers a 7 day dissatisfaction refund, I need it for a weekend trip and likely wouldn't be able to return it within that period or find an alternative in a timely fashion afterwards... Luckily there is a 12m warranty included at least.

However, just to jinx things good and proper, it looks like, at this point, I might have got a good one. A mid-afternoon Tuesday job, if you will. Handling seems OK, engine and clutch don't do anything particularly weird (though the 3-pot thrum and lightness of the hydro clutch may take a bit of getting used to...), fit and finish is all fine, etc. But, it's not without a few small issues that I didn't pick up on during the test drives and pre-purchase look-arounds and research. Mainly, they concern the stereo/satnav (what a surprise, you may say), trip computer and the ECU.

First up, how easy might it be to add an extra 12v outlet or two somewhere? Somehow we never noticed the lack of a ciggy lighter until I came to plug in a car charger after taking delivery, and whilst almost everything I'd want to run off it does so by first converting that to 5v and piping it down a USB cable, so it could be connected with a straight-thru from the USB jack, that's not ideal. There's only one of them, splitters are unreliable, it takes away the possibility of plugging in a flash drive full of MP3s, and it still doesn't solve the problem of how to power the electric coolbox.

Second, can the maps be updated? Whilst still mostly accurate, the data on mine is now 4 years old and there's certainly been a few changes locally in that time, with some huge ones currently in progress. (And if the answer to that is yes, can the system's firmware be changed too?)

Third... any way to control what track is playing over bluetooth, or is it just start/stop?

4th/ Any kind of compatibility with AAC / MP4, or is that just a dumb misprint in the manual? It doesn't seem to even acknowledge the existence of my AACs right now, though MP3s play just fine.
(and any particular mp3 settings that should be avoided?)

5th/ Any kind of voice commands for the phone dialer or map screen, or am I misunderstanding what the "voice" softbutton is for?

6/ Any chance of speed readout / warnings whilst being navigated, or otherwise?

7/ The thing where you have to (remove and re-)insert a memory stick with the system already powered up in order for it to be registered is a known silliness, yes?

8/ Is the trip computer REALLY supposed to top out at 60.0mpg, in both instant and average mode? That's still a good 4.7L/100km after all. And, any possibility of making it go up to the traditional 99.9 instead? Even my much sportier, thirstier old Megane Sport of some years ago was known to push past 60mpg on some rare occasions...
(and, can it be adjusted to show things like average speed info, actual fuel use, etc?)

9/ ...something of a biggie. Maybe I'm the first to notice this, but the naturally aspirated K13 cars seem to have a hard speed limiter at about 100mph / 160-165km/h (...found after taking it along a handy piece of private autobahn near the end of a lengthy and gradually quicker shakedown & getting-to-know-you run, which ended up being slightly longer and faster once this was discovered), in addition to and independent of the user definable one. Seems a bit out of place in a machine with comparitively tall gears that will happily spin to 6900rpm, whose claimed vmax is 170k, that sits on tyres rated for at least that much and typically 20-40k more, and has a programmable limiter of up to 105mph/cruise control of up to 90...

It's very definitely an electronic limit because the feel of it cutting in is the same as with the driver-programmed one, and it holds the exact same speed in 4th and 5th (about 5500 and 4400rpm respectively), regardless of gradient, exact throttle position (inc "kickdown"/cruise override switch), etc. It's particularly stark if you push hard up through 3rd into 4th then try to keep going ... the engine clearly has quite a bit more left to give (and this is still the case in 5th as well!), but a few seconds after the upshift, there's an electronic yank on the reins and it just sits there at a rock steady speed instead of continuing to accelerate. Between that, the quietly impressive lower-midrange torque, and the tall gearing, 4th is actually something of an irrelevance, they could have got away with a 4-speed...

In daily driving it's something that's unlikely to be much of a problem (for reasons of traffic, safety, license, economy...) but it still irks me. For one I'm not a fan of artificial limits, especially those outside of my control which have no emergency override, set by some nanny-minded bureaucrat who thinks they have a crystal ball. Should I have to do some kind of midnight mercy dash for whatever reason, I don't want to be slowed down because the manufacturer didn't have enough confidence in their vehicle to let it reach its full straight line potential. Or indeed if I ever go to Germany in it and don't want to clog up the overtaking lane too much.

Also, I was under the impression I'd bought a 170k-on-the-flat car, not a 160k-in-most-conditions one, so claiming the higher vmax smacks of false advertising... if I wanted something with a similarly just-about-tolerable 0-100k (13.3s barely qualifies) yet a 100mph vmax or less I'd have got a C1 or Sirion or something. This actually makes it technically the slowest car I've ever owned, pipped even by an early 90s 1-litre VW Polo. It could only manage 90mph on its own, but with downgrades and outer lane motorway slipstreams it could keep pace with the stream of BMWs and Audis maintaining 95+ and peaking at 105-ish here and there, making an awful racket as it neared the rev limiter, but doing it all the same... Don't typically drive anywhere near as fast any more (and from my play-around with the cruise so far, probably even less so now, as it does seem to make holding a steady, lower speed a lot easier and more psychologically tolerable), but it'd be nice to know the facility was there should it be needed.

10/ And, for entirely separate reasons... how much would a basic OBD reader / port adaptor for a smartphone (etc) be these days? And is there any particular recommended software for the phone/laptop/etc adaptors? If nothing else it'd be handy to see if there's any hidden faults the dealer didn't mention, and maybe use my phone plus a dashboard holder to provide electronic substitutes for the missing coolant temperature (& etc) gauges.

((oh, PS, recommendations for a roof rack / bars / box? places for chipping, if that's necessary to remove the limiter (may as well improve the 0-100k at the same time, and maybe sharpen up the currently very gentle cruise control "resume" profile, probably about the same cost)? and/or adding a bit of actual visual flair to something that's otherwise the equivalent of a 4-wheeled dishwasher? I've never bothered with that sort of thing on any of my cars before, over the last 12+ years, but this time I'm sorely tempted, even if just some vinyl stick-ons to emphasise those interesting mouldings in the roof panel))

Thanks for any help you can give...
-T :)
 
Hello,

The Micra is a city car and don't expect to get you on the Autobahn at more than 140 kms/h. The official max speed is 161km/h.
It has no speed limiters, just the engine has not enough power to push the car further due to the laws of physics. What you feel is not a limiter but the fight between the Engine Management and the wind resistance on keeping you at top speed.
Also keeping the K13 at high rpms you will just shorten it's life. If you're on market for a car that will need to drive you over 140 km/h then you should look at other models with a bigger engine.

Now for the other details.
1. You can add a 12V lighter. I've installed one in my car and I can give you the details on how to do this if you will decide on keeping the car. It's very simple, you connect the wires on the fuse box at the position where the lighter should have been fitted from the factory. I've mounted the lighter in the inner shelf between the glove compartments.

2. Depending on the country you can get map updates. See the following link for costs:
http://nissan.navigation.com/produc...014-2015/sku/T1000-23323/en_GB/NissanEMEA/EUR

3. You can control the BT playing track from the steering wheel or from the Nav next-previous buttons.

4. The Nav will play only mp3 files. Also the NAV system tends to freeze if the vehicle is started on the USB settings. Switch off the ignition while the NAV is in FM mode. If it's in USB might cause problems the next time you switch the ignition on.
You can also fit a subwoofer if you hook the amplifier on the speaker lines (High-in Amp's option).

5. Never tried the voice commands, but you can preset yours for various tasks. More information can be found on the user guide of the vehicle.

6. No speed readouts on the NAV.

7. The Nav reads the USB and creates a log for faster browsing later on. The CPU used is not powerful and having it to browse more than 1000 songs is difficult, therefore an index is created. Most factory systems work in the same way.
For better experience, just remove the factory NAV and install an aftermarket one. If you change just some songs on the USB stick then the loading time will take less (2-5 secs). No need to remove it often though... purchase a 32GB, fill it up and leave it there for the next 2 years.

8. If you will ever get a 60mpg fuel consumption then probably the car is not ok and it will not even start. The max fuel consumption I ever seen was 20 l/ 100k while sitting outside in heavy traffic with the AC on for 30 mins. Otherwise the fuel consumption is around 5.5. MAx on hardcore driving is 7-8.

9. No limiter. Just laws of physics. You're expecting too much from a 1.2 car designed primarily for city driving.

10. OBD ELM 327 - 5euros + Torque Pro is everything you need for live data readings. If you need diagnostics the Nissan Consult 3 is needed, 300 Euros +.

11. Don't temper with the car electronic. There is nothing you can do to make it faster, economical or any other things. All you can do is install a coil-over kit or lowered springs and larger rims for better looks and stiffer suspension feelings.
The car itself was released without a margin of tempering with. I've done these searches and anything available was too expensive and not worth the fuzz.

The car itself is pretty reliable but it doesn't like to be pushed around or slammed on the breaks. It's a car designed to be a comfortable light cruiser from point A to point B.
I used to have 2 Micras, sold one and got a sportier Lancer but still everyday I use the Micra to work. Better A/C, can squeeze in traffic, more comfort, lighter steering wheel, economical, and the list can go endlessly. Even the cargo space (with rear sits folded) and rear passengers leg room is very decent and even better than proper saloon cars. Expect to roll hard on cornering though as the suspension is soft.
Any extra equipment will affect the fuel consumption and the drag, making you even slower. 3 years now no issues (except a suspension strut that failed as new under 300kms).

If I missed something then let me know. :)
 
OP
OP
T
Hi Ade, thanks for the reply, hope you don't mind me doing the preamble first then attacking the others all in one broken-up go, I'm trying to bang through it quick as I can without getting lost.

Hello,
The Micra is a city car and don't expect to get you on the Autobahn at more than 140 kms/h. The official max speed is 161km/h.
It has no speed limiters, just the engine has not enough power to push the car further due to the laws of physics. What you feel is not a limiter but the fight between the Engine Management and the wind resistance on keeping you at top speed.
Also keeping the K13 at high rpms you will just shorten it's life. If you're on market for a car that will need to drive you over 140 km/h then you should look at other models with a bigger engine.

Nonsense, mate. I'm not sure if you read everything I put there :)
First up, the top speed listed for my car is 170km/h, or 106mph, and ordinarily I'd expect that to mean what it can achieve on the flat in still air with a driver and no luggage or passengers, in the gear that takes it closest to peak power. If it's got 170 listed in the brochure, I'd expect it to be able to reach that, at least downhill, at some point, especially at only four years old with under 40,000 miles on the clock.

It may be a small car, but that doesn't mean that 140k should trouble it - it's got a very slippery shape, and a reasonably powerful engine, plus fitted with tyres that are good for 190. I had a boxy 1-litre Polo with barely more than half the peak power and torque of this one, and it was happy enough at 130-140k and could see 160 often enough, and felt perfectly stable at those speeds on considerably lower standard tyres. We're not talking about pokey early 80s golf buggy cars here, but a highly refined product of the 2010s. Even the driver-adjustable speed limiter goes up to 105, but when I tested it again a few days ago on encountering an empty patch of road, it consistently topped out at a speed that the limiter reported as "103" after I pushed the "set" button, and I'm pretty certain it's over-reading. Though I'll have to get a separate GPS going to check it.

As I said, it's unlikely that I'll need to do that kind of pace very much at all, but it would be nice to know that if I have to ask the car to give its all for some reason, it won't let me down by kowtowing to some artificial nanny-circuit. The thing is my property and I'll treat is as gently or as harshly as I like, and it's none of Nissan's business which of those it is. It's not even in warranty any more, so they officially shouldn't care. The vast majority of the time it'll be the former, but if the latter couldn't be precluded then I wouldn't have kept ~70hp/tonne / 13.5s 0-100k as a minimum requirement. I didn't even buy on actual top speed, but I figured 170k would be "enough".

For another couple things ... this is far from the first car I've owned, in fact it's the sixth over about 13 years now, and it's joint third-most-powerful. But it's the one with the second lowest Vmax (and, with the reduced run-up to steep hills, lower potential average as well, which is most important if you need to scream your way somewhere), less than the other, slightly larger 80hp one, less than the decidedly larger 69hp one with poorly chosen gear ratios, and when downhills are considered, less than the 45hp one that was shaped like a brick and definitely way past its max power rpm in top gear when it reached triple figures mph. In something that shape and weight, 60hp should be sufficient for 100mph, never mind 80hp.

Plus, if it was the air resistance causing problems, then the speed would vary, both with gradient, and with gear. At the rpms being pulled in each of those gears - neither of them super-high, as it can rev much higher before getting anywhere near the redline and some competitors, especially lower powered ones, are geared decidedly lower (and, if that was the worry, why don't they both limit at the same rpm rather than different ones? and why allow 3rd gear to go right up to 6900, and nearly 100mph itself?) - the maximum that should be theoretically available in 5th (assuming max torque is held to ~4600rpm) is about 67hp, and in 4th the minimum would be about 75hp (assuming torque at ~5600 has already fallen to the same level as at max power), a difference that's a good 10% of the maximum potential, which you'd expect to cause a noticeable difference in speed, even if only 1 or 2mph. Going uphill, if it was pegged-out on the flat, the speed would start falling immediately rather than when it gets to a certain steepness, and it would speed up quite a bit on the descent. But no, either gear, up gentle hill and down some quite steep dales (enough to make my ~65mph bike slow to less than 60 one way and allow it to nudge nearly 80 the other), the needle stays absolutely steady. Same as if you set a lower figure on the driver-controlled speed limiter. More consistent even than the actual cruise control. Totally supernatural, like it's a maglev or something.

Like I said ... you can feel it, the sudden invisible hand pushing you back that's characteristic of an electronic speed limiter. You can feel it with the driver-controlled one, and I've felt it before in commercial vehicles at 100km/h and so-on. If you only need low-60s hp to maintain that speed, the drop off from high 60s can be felt a little, and the one from mid 70s very much so. The engine has plenty of oomph to fight physics, and if it was allowed to rev further, it would produce even more. The rated top speed is only a little off the rated max power rpm when you do the maths, and I would expect that even that is maybe artificially limited as I'd suspect it'd be more capable of about 110mph (~175k) bang-on or a little above peak rpm in 4th, considering what other 80-ish hp cars can typically do. I wouldn't have minded that so much, as they probably need something to differentiate it from the DiG-S model (which should be able to push 190 or even 200k, but would suffer the same 180k default limiter as any japanese car), but having it cut in 5 or 10k lower seems excessive.

All I can assume is that someone made a cock-up somewhere and installed the limiter code for the CVT instead of the manual gearbox (maybe the 2-stage output system can't withstand more than a certain shaft rpm itself?). As the different variants have different rated maximum speeds which, in km/h, are all divisible by 5, it suggests it's been artificially engineered, and in which case there must be some way of reprogramming it. It's just a number buried somewhere in the FlashROM after all...

Even if it was that the 4th gear limiter remained, or was raised to 5750~6000rpm (or in other words, 170~175k), and 5th could rev up to 5000rpm (=180k) it wouldn't be so bad, as it could at least then hit a more natural fast cruising speed in top, and be dropped down to maintain 99% of it on slopes that were just a little too steep. And it would still be doing its job of preventing massive engine wear (as experienced in that Polo when maintaining basically redline speeds for a combined total of many thousand miles - had to overhaul it myself, change piston rings etc) and preventing the tyres from going pop.

>>> "please enter a message of less than 10000 characters" ... oops! part 2 follows.
 
OP
OP
T
As for buying something with a more powerful engine ... I've been very limited in what I can buy, having to satisfy hard limits of budget, insurability/taxability and the space in which I have to store it (3.95m length *MAX*), with the desire for a certain level of performance, interior room, and additional features. The list wound down to have only a limited number of possibles, which also meant there wasn't a huge number on the local market to pick through. I could have had a Vauxhall Agila/Suzuki Splash or Hyundai i10 which were marginally faster, but with less luggage space, fewer features and an overall much tackier feel, for about the same cost at the same age and miles. Or dealt with the insurance hike and social stigma and got a Honda Jazz. Or a Chevy Spark (ugh, awful thing to drive, no torque in the engine at all), Daihatsu Sirion/Mitsubishi Colt or Mirage (hen's teeth), older shape Fiesta (very nice car, but strangely rare and even more so in good condition with a decent engine), Mazda2 (insurance disasterzone again), Mini Clubman/Merc A-Class (still too expensive at present), Citroen C3 (the very vast majority being hideous low-powered base models), Kia Rio (oh lawd), non-"Grand" Renault Modus (rare, and rather too much like the Clios which have given me no end of trouble), Hyundai Getz or old shape Suzuki Swift and Toyota Yaris (go on, you find me one with less than 75,000 miles), Fiat Panda (ones in Dynamic trim with the JTD engine and five belts seem about as common as rocking-horse ****) or at a push a heavily optioned up VW Polo (it and the Fiesta being about the only ones where the most commonly available drivetrain results in a slower 0-100k than the Micra).

The Clio itself is out, the Corsa is out, ditto the Punto, i20, Peugeot 20x's, most Skoda Fabias, the newest Fiesta is very borderline... etc, etc, etc. Basically out of the few that were available, affordable, and that I could get to in order to test drive/buy/take delivery of within the deadline I had for getting a replacement car (basically, "by friday just gone"), the Micra just about pipped it, over an i10 on the same lot. Naturally, although I was able to confirm that it had decent low-midrange torque on the testdrive, and was reasonably quiet at ~4000rpm (which I figured would be the fastest common motorway rpm), I couldn't really put my foot down and take it screaming to the redline or take it out on the public motorway in the daytime and push the envelope.

(And I would *totally* have had the DiG-S, if any of them came up, at all, while I was searching. I don't know whether they were massively overpriced in the UK or what, but hardly anyone seems to have bought them. Who wouldn't want the combination of the same low-end pull, much improved midrange and top end power, even better economy/tax band, and that fun supercharger whine? People buying brand-new city cars and balking at the price premium, that's who. There's basically no Teknas either, but an absolute ton of Acentas...)

In any case, this isn't a question of what I should have bought instead and the pros and cons of such ... I have the car now, it can allegedly be remapped, so is this something that can be altered during the remapping process?
(Hmm, I guess I also need to get it up to speed then dip the clutch to see if the revs stay steady, or if they shoot up as soon as that cruical last 1mph falls off... ie is it a general in-gear rpm limit, or just a road speed one?)

One suspicion I do have is that this may have previously belonged to Dominos Pizza, in which case the limiter would have been deliberately installed as a corporate option ... though one might have suspected more than they'd have gone for 70mph or even less...
 
Hi!

Then something might be wrong with the car. I have the CVT and indeed for mine is 161 km/h max speed and in your case 170. My mistake. Yesterday I was able to reach 190 on clock, 182 on GPS on a downhill so I am pretty sure there is not a limiter in there, at least not for mine. I could even go harder but I was unsure on the tires, pot holes, and wouldn't like to crash it lol.
Maybe the previous owner limited it somehow or... I really don't know what to say.
The other Micra I had was also a CVT and despite the fact that was bought in the same time with the one I still have, the cars were totally different. The tungsten colored one was faster, nippier and thirstier while the silver one I kept was slower and more economical. Same specs, same serial number, even day of manufacture and very different. Maybe your is one of the special cases also.

I'll give it a better read later on on the story and see if something might pop.
 
OP
OP
T
Hello,

Now for the other details.
1. You can add a 12V lighter. I've installed one in my car and I can give you the details on how to do this if you will decide on keeping the car. It's very simple, you connect the wires on the fuse box at the position where the lighter should have been fitted from the factory. I've mounted the lighter in the inner shelf between the glove compartments.

Cool, sounds easy enough. I've had to wire one up before, to a 12v transformer, to run some car accessories off a bare battery, and whilst that was a bit kludgy I'm sure I can make a more aesthetically pleasing attempt. Heck, I actually have a lighter-socket extender/splitter which can probably be sacrificed to the cause :)


2. Depending on the country you can get map updates. See the following link for costs:
http://nissan.navigation.com/produc...014-2015/sku/T1000-23323/en_GB/NissanEMEA/EUR

Figures that it would cost, even though most Satnav manufacturers offer free updates for life 9_9
*checks*
€189 Euros?!?! I can just BUY a new Tom-tom for that! Three of them, in fact.
Or just a heating vent mount for my phone. Although the car GPS is decidedly more reliable ... so maybe I'll just resort to programming the same route into both, and going with the built-in system if they both report the same total mileage and similar drive times.
Jeez Louise. I wonder if anyone else has a cheaper third party offering?

3. You can control the BT playing track from the steering wheel or from the Nav next-previous buttons.

Nope, all I get is pause/resume and all-stop. Presumably it's one of those things that varies by handset or something. Oh well, it's not that bad. Basically that's a second vote for a vent holster. Then I can control the music AND GPS off the phone screen. Not that the A2DP quality seems particularly great, but it's better than the last FM transmitter I had and on a par with a less brilliantly encoded mp3. If it comes to it I'll just figure some way of hooking up my standalone clip-on mp3 with a 3.5mm jack, or reformat my old phone and jam a maximum capacity microSD card into it (that one can be used as a flashdrive, the new one can't)

4. The Nav will play only mp3 files. Also the NAV system tends to freeze if the vehicle is started on the USB settings. Switch off the ignition while the NAV is in FM mode. If it's in USB might cause problems the next time you switch the ignition on.

Well, fingers crossed, so far the only hiccup I've seen with it is that it doesn't realise the drive's plugged in if you start up with it already inserted. If it goes wrong in the way you describe, however, I'll take to doing that. Not the first time I've seen someone talk of that method. Bit of a pain when it's more convenient to just leave it plugged in permanently, but if it has to come out anyway, it may as well do so as I exit the car and go into my pocket. Maybe put it on one of those mini-carabiners so it can be clipped on and off the car key fob.

Any idea about WMA files? A lot of my stuff recently has been converted to AAC to make better use of the space on my newer clip player without compromising on quality, but until I got that all my players were just mp3/wma compatible so I've got a fair back catalogue I can directly copy across (mp3s made by myself, wmas acquired by other means...), and I have the uncompressed sources for the few AACs that weren't originally in an older format. The compression artefacts aren't quite as sympathetic as MP3's, but I have found it's slightly more efficient at medium-low bitrates, so I might in fact choose that as the in-car option.

(The manual says it handles MP3, WMA, and "M4A", or in other words AAC... derp :) )

You can also fit a subwoofer if you hook the amplifier on the speaker lines (High-in Amp's option).
Heh, well, unlikely to do that, but it's nice to know the opportunity is there. I've got an old cheapie home cinema one lying around that happens to run off a 12v transformer...

5. Never tried the voice commands, but you can preset yours for various tasks. More information can be found on the user guide of the vehicle.

Oh, neat. I must have blanked that somehow. I have a feeling I don't quite have all the documentation. There's the main handbook, the service book, a couple other pamphlets about stuff that basically doesn't apply once the warranty period is up, and that's it. No stereo guide, even though the user manual specifically refers to such a thing. I'll re-read it, and if there's nothing in there, will try googling for the stereo manual.

6. No speed readouts on the NAV.

Tch. Sloppy, sloppy, Nissan! My mum's old tomtom can do things like that by default. What's your excuse? :)
Oh well, at least I know. Third vote for a phone holster. Relegate the Nav display to music / phone call control and showing a live You-Are-Here map, which is useful enough just by itself.

7. The Nav reads the USB and creates a log for faster browsing later on. The CPU used is not powerful and having it to browse more than 1000 songs is difficult, therefore an index is created. Most factory systems work in the same way.
For better experience, just remove the factory NAV and install an aftermarket one. If you change just some songs on the USB stick then the loading time will take less (2-5 secs). No need to remove it often though... purchase a 32GB, fill it up and leave it there for the next 2 years.

Ehhhh, I'd only want to do that if the replacement could be properly integrated with the steering wheel controls. I mean, it is at least separate from the other displays and systems in the car, unlike the last few I've had, but I don't want to be leaning over all the time to adjust volume / skip tracks / pick up calls and so-on. I know you can get double-DIN stereos with built in navigation, but they always seem to stand out a mile and often leave the controls completely useless.

I'm reasonably well used to mp3 players taking a good amount of time to rebuild their internal lists with a lot of files to plough through, so it's not that much of an issue. Like you say, prep what you want to have available "offline", upload it all in one go, then insert it at a point where you can stand to have it sit grinding through them for 15+ minutes, with the payoff that it'll be much faster later on. Funnily enough my own mp3 is about 40gb (8+32), so is my phone, and the USB I had bought during an online sale just for additional backup space and am now using to trial the car stereo is 32 as well. It seems to be something of a magic number. And it will certainly be enough for me for a while seeing as the first mp3 player I used long-term only had a 20gb drive in it, and I've generally been used to having only a couple dozen tapes or maybe 25 CDRs in the car at any one time. Even if it only works out to be the equivalent of 15 CDs in the end (which it definitely won't, as you can get 8-10 albums even on a single MP3-CD!), the convenience and safety advantages far outweigh the negatives of having a smaller collection or having to wait for it to sync.

(Funnily enough, one question I realised I forgot to ask was what the max capacity was, whether e.g. it's a 64gb memory stick or a 2tb hard drive... and if the USB port can even power something like the latter ... guess that's my reply without the question needing to be asked! Stick with the smaller USBs and maybe line-in!)

8. If you will ever get a 60mpg fuel consumption then probably the car is not ok and it will not even start. The max fuel consumption I ever seen was 20 l/ 100k while sitting outside in heavy traffic with the AC on for 30 mins. Otherwise the fuel consumption is around 5.5. MAx on hardcore driving is 7-8.

Heh, you're getting the two standards mixed up. MPG works such that more = better, vs L/100km where less = better. 60MPG is approx 4.7L/100km, and I've beaten that here and there in at least a couple of petrol cars before (and smashed it in diesels), including a heavier/larger one with a bigger engine and lower gearing, although admittedly that was with deliberate eco-driving. However, even if I'm unlikely to max out the average display, the instant mpg one (which the trip comp keeps defaulting back to) regularly goes over it. You know, down into the teens or even single figures (ie 20-30L/km) when accelerating hard, then dropping right back when you ease off into a cruise, and skyrocketing to infinity when you're slowing down as the fuel cutoff takes effect. When running along on cruise at about 40-some mph (~70km/h) on city expressway roads, it was very nearly pegged at 60mpg with only some very brief fluctuations. I'm just interested in whether that's wavering around 65mpg (4.3L), or more like 80mpg (3.5L), etc. Apparently some Canadians have been measuring their version of the car (with a 1.6L engine and crazy-low gearing) and seeing up to 85mpg (3.3L) at steady low-speed cruising around 50-60km/h, which is pretty good for any car, never mind a petrol of that capacity, particularly as VW was promoting a deliberately low-tuned 1.2 diesel Lupo as the "3L" version not THAT long ago. Be nice to confirm if the UK one matches or indeed significantly improves on that.

(10k!)
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
T
(phew...)
9. No limiter. Just laws of physics. You're expecting too much from a 1.2 car designed primarily for city driving.

I know entirely what the limits of a 1.2L city car are (most of them are less capable than this one!), and it's pretty clear this is being artificially capped. Comparitive case in point, a couple years ago I did borrow a previous model Micra, also a petrol 1.2, for a couple of weeks whilst my own car was having some work done. It was also a little flyer, not quite as fast as the diesel Clio it was standing in for, but impressed me quite a bit (hence why I was happy to look at this one; the only disappointment was how "tinny" it felt, a problem that since seems to have been addressed). That would very happily run up to 110 or more with no complaints and a much more "organic" lead-up to the vmax (a gradual loss of acceleration until it stabilised, and faster downhill/slower uphill), and it only had a couple of extra horsepower (85hp IIRC, and needing to be revved harder to access them, so it also got buzzier gearing), more weight, and a rather less aero-friendly body. I was rather expecting something like that, just maybe 5% slower on max acceleration and 2-3% slower flat-out...
(I was in a rather less happy place lifewise then and ended up having to bomb around an awful lot just to make my engagements on time... that's not so much of a problem any more, and it's far too expensive a thing to do just out of habit, but I do have the memory of it once being something I was challenged by and have no desire to deliberately handicap myself)

10. OBD ELM 327 - 5euros + Torque Pro is everything you need for live data readings. If you need diagnostics the Nissan Consult 3 is needed, 300 Euros +.

Ouch. Maybe I'll stick to the "get fault codes through making the engine check light flash" accelerator pedal cheatcode, and looking them up in that PDF that someone posted elsewhere in the forum.
But I have seen that utils like Torque or Scangauge can show you e.g. actual MPG (with no scale limit), calculated power output (so you can see if it's suddenly dropping off at some point), etc, which would be nice to see. As well as coolant temperature, voltage, actual idle rpms and so-on.


11. Don't temper with the car electronic. There is nothing you can do to make it faster, economical or any other things.

That's sounding a bit Nissan-corporate if you don't mind me saying. I know that when it comes to petrol city cars you're unlikely to see big power gains, but I have had the torque delivery smoothed out some before by putting a cheap enthusiast-created ROM in my Polo's ECU (had some flatspots, presumably deliberate ones for passing emissions / sound production limit tests etc) which helps with driveability, and it is at least possible to tweak up the fuelling and timing to give a tad more power when the pedal is hammered right down by trimming the economy/anti-knock/catalyser protection margins a bit, if you can guarantee the fuel quality and the range of ambient temperatures it will be run at (and maybe improve the breathing some?). The crazy tall gearing means getting off the line and up to highway speed is a little more relaxed than it might otherwise have been, so it could do with any help that's available, even if it's just a few percent. Plus there seems to be a few fluctuation in ultimate torque whilst accelerating up through the midrange, which might be something to do with the VVT, or maybe just regulations as per the Polo - smoothing that out wouldn't do much for performance but it would feel nicer. And of course when you're on minimal throttle the mix could be leaned out a little more than standard to save a bit of fuel without seriously overheating and endangering the cat, if the fuel and timing is still OK. The main aim of it would be to nix that damn limiter, however.

There's enough people offering them, and some others talking about their fitment, so if you actually have decent proof that it's a massive scam in this case, it would be to your credit to show us that and we could start a class action suit against the suppliers!

All you can do is install a coil-over kit or lowered springs and larger rims for better looks and stiffer suspension feelings.

Ugh, no ;)
The wheels are fine, and I really can't be having with spending that kind of money to almost certainly further degrade the appearance of a car that already wasn't bought for its looks. Bit of vinyl flashing, maybe, but that's cheap and a fun unique thing that can be applied and removed fairly easily. I might buy some plain steels in a suitable size to fit full winter tyres onto, but that'd be about it.

The suspension, so far, is fine, without anywhere near as much of the classic Micra / 2CV body roll (experienced as a passenger in a K11, and driver in a K12) - comedic up to a point, but terrifying beyond it. This one seems to handle much like a "regular car" - possibly one good thing that's come out of the Renault partnership, because whilst they made a lot of mistakes over the past ~15 years, one thing they've always been absolutely 100% on-point with is handling. Three different generations of Clios, a Megane, and a Kangoo, I've had the experience of, and even the latter didn't feel like I was wrestling a whale... but the Megane was like wearing a large metal ballet shoe, totally sublime. If they transferred just a bit of their knowledge in that regard to Nissan, then the K13 shouldn't really need any mechanical adjustment.

The car itself was released without a margin of tempering with. I've done these searches and anything available was too expensive and not worth the fuzz.

There's always some margin, to account for manufacturing variability, different fuel quality in various areas, climate, altitude, etc. One of the things with tuning a car is fitting what you do to the individual vehicle. There might not be very *much* available in a car that pulls that much power out of that capacity without a compressor, and still manages to keep its CO2 down to 115g/km, but there should still be some. What I've typically seen quoted is about an extra 5-10% power and torque (and I bet if you promised to only run it on Super, they could free up even more), which although it's not masses, is still worth at least 0.7s off the 0-100k (making it quicker than the old diesel Clio) and a couple of extra mph vmax, if not more.

The car itself is pretty reliable but it doesn't like to be pushed around or slammed on the breaks. It's a car designed to be a comfortable light cruiser from point A to point B.

True, but most cars won't respond well to having that kind of treatment continuously unless they're specific "sport" models built to withstand it. But I would hope that any given modern car would at least allow you to run up to the quoted top speed, and occasionally cane it down a rural back route, without falling to pieces. None of the others have professed a difficulty with that so far (other than an occasional unpleasant smell from friction linings), so long as I didn't make it a 24/7 thing and cruised gently as much as possible in-between. Oddly enough the one which raised the most fuss was my mother's late 90s Punto which I borrowed as a teenager, and ended up boiling the brake fluid on a spirited run along the A444.
The main problem with the Polo wasn't so much the amount of throttle needed to maintain a decent speed, as the gearing - in standard form, top gear was lower than 4th in the Micra, so maintaining even a high cruise speed was punishing on it, turning 5000+rpm continually. Once I realised the problem, I actually switched out the gearbox for a longer-ratio one which dropped motorway rpm by about 20% (or down to 4000-ish, making it a much nicer place to sit, for one thing, without losing very much speed, and more economic), but it happened too late to prevent it starting to burn oil.

I used to have 2 Micras, sold one and got a sportier Lancer but still everyday I use the Micra to work. Better A/C, can squeeze in traffic, more comfort, lighter steering wheel, economical, and the list can go endlessly. Even the cargo space (with rear sits folded) and rear passengers leg room is very decent and even better than proper saloon cars. Expect to roll hard on cornering though as the suspension is soft.

Heh, well if you're comparing it to Lancer no wonder it seems slow and bouncy :D ... I'm rather more used to the whole small car thing, so it seems about average to me. Not brilliant, but certainly not at all bad either. It strikes a good balance for a car that will be my only transport outside of a basic commuter moped.
(oh, man, another 10k?)
 
OP
OP
T
Any extra equipment will affect the fuel consumption and the drag, making you even slower.

Well, yes, I'm used to the disadvantages of having something on top, it's not something I'd plan to leave in place all the time (my garage door doesn't have enough clearance to allow that, for a start - it's something I'd have to install and remove outside instead). But it's a very convenient and generally safe way of adding capacity, especially as the car can't have a towbar fitted (allegedly), and a box is less of an aerodynamic problem than a bluff-sided rack that things then get directly tied onto. For what it's worth, the old Polo would still achieve about 72-75mph (115-120km/h) with a pile of stuff on the roof, though it took full throttle and very early downshifts to maintain that. I figure a car which has roughly as much power at 3000rpm as the VW did at 5200 will still punt along nicely enough at 70-80 with a streamlined roofbox on, and it's a situation where I'd be unlikely to be tempted to thrown any wild manoeuvres or try to break the sound barrier!

Though, really, it'd be nice to know what sort of kits are more recommended, and which ones should be avoided, so I don't make a costly mistake.

3 years now no issues (except a suspension strut that failed as new under 300kms).

Applause.gif :D ... sounds like a good recommendation to me. You always get some infant mortality like that in any field.

Anyway, thanks for the replies, even if I choose not to agree with all of them, it's most helpful. If anyone else can offer a second opinion, please, feel free ;)
 
OP
OP
T
Hi!

Then something might be wrong with the car. I have the CVT and indeed for mine is 161 km/h max speed and in your case 170. My mistake. Yesterday I was able to reach 190 on clock, 182 on GPS on a downhill so I am pretty sure there is not a limiter in there, at least not for mine.

How curious! I thought it might have actually had a deliberate limit for the CVT version to stop people causing too much carnage by just sitting down, dropping it in D and flooring the accelerator, but sounds like you're able to considerably exceed even the official speed of the DiG-S manual, and it would be much easier (and more obvious, with the sudden rpm drop that would result) to apply the limiter to an auto, so it can't be that...

I do have a couple leads as to the identity of the original owner, so I might send a letter to the last address that's on file and ask them if they can tell me anything unusual about the car that I might need to know, see if I get a reply...

(the Dominos thing is based off seeing a picture of a white k13, possibly even in Acenta trim, with a big Dominos vinyl logo stuck across it - something that wouldn't leave a particularly obvious permanent stain on white paint vs, say, red or blue - going through the drive-thru of a local branch of a rival fast food chain ;) ... I'll have to see if I can find the pic again and see if the registration plate is visible o_O ... corporate damage-limitation is one particular reason I can think of for it, though maybe they meant for it to be "100km/h" and someone got confused?)

I could even go harder but I was unsure on the tires, pot holes, and wouldn't like to crash it lol.

Yeah, no worries, I'm quite amazed at the dedication in fact! Once you start getting up to those speeds things begin to get blurry no matter what you're in. I don't think I could handle a 210+k machine without having some high speed driver training to get used to it. Just ramping it up very briefly to 170 would have been enough!

Maybe the previous owner limited it somehow or... I really don't know what to say.
The other Micra I had was also a CVT and despite the fact that was bought in the same time with the one I still have, the cars were totally different. The tungsten colored one was faster, nippier and thirstier while the silver one I kept was slower and more economical. Same specs, same serial number, even day of manufacture and very different. Maybe your is one of the special cases also.

Odd... you definitely weren't comparing a plain one to a supercharged, were you? I'm not aware of e.g. any "eco" editions.
I'd understand what was happening if I found there was an "ECO" button on the dash that I'd somehow missed (and in any case, it still accelerates and revs normally), but I haven't seen one so far. Maybe it's been miswired and what I actually need to do is press the button that would normally shut off the ESP system?

I'll give it a better read later on on the story and see if something might pop.

Well, that's the puzzling thing. I've found nothing else at all about it online so far, which is why I was moved to ask. Particularly as this is a sort of tuner forum, I figured if anyone was going to run into a problem like this it'd be you guys! But google literally has nothing. Maybe there's a fault and the CEL has been unplugged (will have to double check it comes on at ignition later), or it's been ignored enough times that it's stayed off but kept the fault occurrence archived. I'll also have to take a peek and see if the ECU has seen any obvious tampering.

In any case, sort of glad of it for the time being to ward off the temptation to blast everywhere at high speed, and just rely on the cruise (max setting: 90mph, rather more stable at 60-65) and adjustable limiter instead. The rear tyres are the original Bridgestones, but the front ones are pretty cheap-looking and I'll probably replace them as soon as I'm able.
 
Top