Author Topic: Test Drive: 2011 Nissan Juke SL AWD (Read 12326 times)

Autos_Editor · « **on:** March 15, 2011, 04:04:52 am »

The Juke's all-wheel drive 'torque vectoring' system and 'Sport' driving mode make it 'entertaining to charge around in,' reports Chris Chase.

Read More...

JohnM · « **Reply #1 on:** March 15, 2011, 08:12:59 am »

The Juke makes vastly more sense than the Acura or BMW. These vehicles aren't used for cargo anyway.

I guess ugly is in the eye of the beholder but I don't find it offensive at all, just different. The ride harshness could be dialed back somewhat with 206/65 tires. Still more than wide enough for a 3000 lb vehicle.

The RPM at 100km was not mentioned but I'm assuming with the CVT it is outstanding and south of 2000.

I saw one yesterday parked and it looked fine with a pretty decent driving position - make mine FWD only please.

Cheers,
John Meyer

Mike · « **Reply #2 on:** March 15, 2011, 08:35:58 am »

I couldn't wait to check one out at the autoshow as the GF and I are interested in it. She is still very impressed. I was just a little put off as two items stuck out to me.

The back seat could be the tightest I have ever been in a CUV. Legroom and head room aren't bad, but the door itself wedges into my seating area. Not a big deal for me since I rarely have people in my car. The other stumbling block is the interior....very cheap, but then again it is a cheaply priced vehicle full of technology so I guess you get what you pay for. I know this well being a WRX owner

Still, a test drive would be the deciding factor on whether it would be worth replacing the gf's car in a few years.

Jaeger · « **Reply #3 on:** March 15, 2011, 08:41:34 am »

I don't find it ugly, but I can understand why others might - it's definitely different in a decidedly froggy kind of way. It's supposed to be a terrific driver and that's nothing to sneeze at these days. I do wish they had baked in a bit more passenger and cargo space, though.

Jaeger

Winterpeg · « **Reply #4 on:** March 15, 2011, 09:15:44 am »

The Juke is one hell of a looker....good or bad is up to your own taste. I'll have to agree with my blog brothers (and sisters) that it's got some interesting curves with enough room for a pair of empty nesters. Just wish the cvt would go away...

hemusbull · « **Reply #5 on:** March 15, 2011, 09:49:56 am »

Ugly or not is up to the personal taste of the consumer, but Juke is definetly quirky vehicle in my opinion. What is most difficult to swallow for me is the fact that using small turbo motor doesn't benefit the gas mileage. Instead the small ute is far from frugal and I do not understand why they decided to build it with CVT and small turbo combination just making anti favour to the new and still controversial technologies...Or it simply is underachiever?

Loudpedal · « **Reply #6 on:** March 15, 2011, 10:18:07 am »

I dig the Juke, and applaud Nissan for bringing it to market. I question however the placement of the rear door handles. Considering it's a kid sized back seat, the rear door handle is placed at an adult height. While likely not a deal-breaker, it would certainly be an inconvenience.

CanuckS2K · « **Reply #7 on:** March 15, 2011, 10:21:34 am »

I've seen quite a few of these on the road lately and I really like it the more I see it. One of these weekends I plan on taking one for a drive. I bet it's a hoot.

JohnM · « **Reply #8 on:** March 15, 2011, 10:27:21 am »

The reason I think the Juke is more rational is that it does the same job as the others but is 1500 pounds lighter. That said, I doubt the Juke does much that my Echo doesn't and the Echo probably has more room in the back.

I'm sure the fuel efficiency is decent for this segment but a week of city driving in the winter tells you nothing. Too bad Chris did not make the Ottawa - Toronto run.

Cheers,
John Meyer

dirtyjeffer · « **Reply #9 on:** March 15, 2011, 10:47:29 am »

Quote from: CanuckG35 on March 15, 2011, 10:21:34 am

I've seen quite a few of these on the road lately and I really like it the more I see it. One of these weekends I plan on taking one for a drive. I bet it's a hoot.

i drove one a couple of months ago (same loaded model as tested here)...i like it...it drove "sporty", had surprising get up and go (at least, it felt that way, not sure what the official numbers are on it) and i thought the interior was very "techy" looking (the iPod generation would love it's technology look and feel)...my only true gripe was the space...when you are driving this car, you are basically "wrapped" in it, which may or may not be a problem for some (i felt a little claustrophobic in it)...but the rear seat room is almost non-existent...the "cargo" area was also quite small...in the end, i think it would still be a good vehicle for the likely demographic is was made for, which is probably the 20-35 crowd, with no kids and little need for lots of cargo space...i am sure in "normal" driving, the fuel economy would be respectable.

Jaeger · « **Reply #10 on:** March 15, 2011, 10:50:17 am »

Quote from: JohnM on March 15, 2011, 10:27:21 am

The reason I think the Juke is more rational is that it does the same job as the others but is 1500 pounds lighter. That said, I doubt the Juke does much that my Echo doesn't and the Echo probably has more room in the back.
Cheers,
John Meyer

I suspect it would out-handle your Echo by a rather substantial margin.

Jaeger

Bubba · « **Reply #11 on:** March 15, 2011, 11:01:52 am »

Put the Juke's powertrain in the Cube. That would be cool.

Dante · « **Reply #12 on:** March 15, 2011, 11:10:58 am »

I like the concept of the car, but not so much the execution - I cannot warm up at Nissan's designs at all. Save for the CVT, the powertrain in great and the concept is even greater.
I would buy this vehicle as a sub-compact/compact hatch so I would not expect much cargo or passenger space. However, the lack of cargo, especially behind the rear seats, is excessive though. 10 cu.ft. puts it in the lower side of the sub-compact hatch crowd.
Suzuki SX4 hatch would be the closest competitor IMO, with the Mitsu RVR being a more distant one.

SaskSpecV · « **Reply #13 on:** March 15, 2011, 12:09:09 pm »

As a lifelong Nissan fan who was in the market for a small wagon/hatchback/crossover, I was really hoping the Juke would work for me. 6-speed manual transmission? Check. (FWD only, but that's fine for me). Good power/weight ratio and (reasonably) fuel efficient? Check. Sunroof and heated seats? Check. And when looking at the Juke in person, I was indifferent over the styling - I wasn't in love with it, but I didn't hate it either. Which is probably not the response the designers were looking for - I think they would be happy with a polarized response to the exterior styling. I could even live with the firm (aka harsh) ride and lack of IRS in the FWD model (coming from a Spec V, everything's a Lexus in comparison). But there were a couple of serious demerits - as mentioned earlier, the very tight rear seats, the small rear opening (with handles that young children can't reach), and the sharp angle of the rear hatch (no room for the dog in the back unless lying down). And the lack of a driver armrest/centre console is inexcusable - I expect that will be fixed for the next model year. Taken together, it was just a little too far down the "sporty" side of the sporty-practical spectrum for me, at least as a primary family vehicle. And the price is OK (23500 + freight + tax), but not a screaming value either. But according to my local Nissan dealer, they can't keep them in stock because they sell so fast...somebody obviously likes them!

Mike · « **Reply #14 on:** March 15, 2011, 12:19:51 pm »

Quote from: SaskSpecV on March 15, 2011, 12:09:09 pm

As a lifelong Nissan fan who was in the market for a small wagon/hatchback/crossover, I was really hoping the Juke would work for me. 6-speed manual transmission? Check. (FWD only, but that's fine for me). Good power/weight ratio and (reasonably) fuel efficient? Check. Sunroof and heated seats? Check. And when looking at the Juke in person, I was indifferent over the styling - I wasn't in love with it, but I didn't hate it either. Which is probably not the response the designers were looking for - I think they would be happy with a polarized response to the exterior styling. I could even live with the firm (aka harsh) ride and lack of IRS in the FWD model (coming from a Spec V, everything's a Lexus in comparison). But there were a couple of serious demerits - as mentioned earlier, the very tight rear seats, the small rear opening (with handles that young children can't reach), and the sharp angle of the rear hatch (no room for the dog in the back unless lying down). And the lack of a driver armrest/centre console is inexcusable - I expect that will be fixed for the next model year. Taken together, it was just a little too far down the "sporty" side of the sporty-practical spectrum for me, at least as a primary family vehicle. And the price is OK (23500 + freight + tax), but not a screaming value either. But according to my local Nissan dealer, they can't keep them in stock because they sell so fast...somebody obviously likes them!

Oh yeah, I forgot about that "And the lack of a driver armrest/centre console is inexcusable". Not a fan either. The gf and I had to install one in her SX4 (Dealer Accessory). Also, there is no telescopic steering wheel which doesn't help my long monkey legs.

aaronk · « **Reply #15 on:** March 15, 2011, 01:00:47 pm »

Quote from: JohnM on March 15, 2011, 10:27:21 am

The reason I think the Juke is more rational is that it does the same job as the others but is 1500 pounds lighter. That said, I doubt the Juke does much that my Echo doesn't and the Echo probably has more room in the back.

I'm sure the fuel efficiency is decent for this segment but a week of city driving in the winter tells you nothing. Too bad Chris did not make the Ottawa - Toronto run.

An Echo vs a Juke? To say a Juke 'doesn't do much more' than an Echo is exaggerating to say the least, although I won't slight the Echo for being good at what it's designed to do. I'm sure if you drove one you might find a thing or two the Juke has improved on, whether or not you care about those things is a different matter. Amazingly enough, you are correct about interior volume. I put both cars side-by-side on MSNAutos and was shocked to find the interior volumes of the cars go like this:

Echo Juke
Passenger Volume (cu. ft.) 87.40 85.40
Cargo Volume (cu. ft.) 13.60 10.50

dirtyjeffer · « **Reply #16 on:** March 15, 2011, 01:10:53 pm »

yea, space is one of the main reasons we bought our Elantra Touring...it is a very practical vehicle.

JohnM · « **Reply #17 on:** March 15, 2011, 04:45:31 pm »

"I suspect it (the Juke) would out-handle your Echo by a rather substantial margin."

It might take me in the turns but I'd pit less often and for shorter periods.

But the Juke does look like a really good effort and I'm sure it is a pleasure to drive. Nissan deserves credit for bringing some innovative alternatives to the market. Juke, Cube and Versa. These might not be everyone's cup of tea but they liven up the market and probably hit the nail on the head for quite a few folks who can define their own needs very clearly.

Cheers,
John Meyer

ArticSteve · « **Reply #18 on:** March 15, 2011, 08:05:49 pm »

But according to my local Nissan dealer, they can't keep them in stock because they sell so fast...somebody obviously likes them!

Yes they are selling out without incentives. Waiting list at our store. Hope those 1500 Nissans that were swept out to sea were actually Infinitys.

Jaeger · « **Reply #19 on:** March 15, 2011, 08:18:33 pm »

Quote from: articsteve on March 15, 2011, 08:05:49 pm

But according to my local Nissan dealer, they can't keep them in stock because they sell so fast...somebody obviously likes them!

Yes they are selling out without incentives. Waiting list at our store. Hope those 1500 Nissans that were swept out to sea were actually Infinitys.

I didn't ever see one at my Nissan dealer - they must be moving fast.

Jaeger