Nissan Juke

The place to discuss everything else..
Post Reply
ShinyAndy
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:13 pm

Post by ShinyAndy »

Just had a hire one for the last three days as had to do a 1500km business round-trip. I'm guessing it was a new n-tec given the lack of miles on the clock. It was diesel, had nice big wheels, a Normal/Sport/Eco setting on the display, a map from about 2001, rear camera, cruise control etc. Phenomenal economy (I was in Eco mode, and initially kept having to check if the handbrake was on!). I filled up twice and the tank was tiny! Not sure I could live with the lack of power though (even in Sport) so glad I got the 1.6dci. Handling was a little worrying at anything above 120kph and luggage/rear seat space was pitiful so the QQ was definitely the right choice for us!The Connect system was miles better though, any idea why the Juke gets all the phone linked stuff like Weather & Fuel and the Qashqai only gets Send to Car and Facebook??It's not till you spend a decent amount of time in something so similar that you then miss all the nice new features on the QQ. Auto handbrake, auto dip lights (non-LED lights seem so orangey and nasty now!), 360 camera with audible sensors make you so lazy that I basically seemed to have forgotten to survive without them!

deks36
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:04 pm

Post by deks36 »

Wait and try the new Juke as it too now gets safety shield projector or xenon headlights Not sure why you say lack of power 115 ps standard on DCI and closer to 140 with a little bit of tweeking tank is woefully small and a pain on long runshandling I find fully acceptable for the car it is and thats on 17'sThe connect you feature is the connect 2 which first appeared in a QQ i believe cant comment on current status as the Juke has now changedbtw for any one interested the ntec Juke got dropped last month
ShinyAndy
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:13 pm

Post by ShinyAndy »

Due to the amazing mpg the tank being small didn't seem to matter on the runs I was doing (over 600km on a tank), I would've had to fill my QQ up for the same mileage but instead of it costing 45a‚¬ to fill it would have been more like 80a‚¬! Still don't understand the Connect thing, if that is the latest Connect that's on the QQ then why don't we get the fuel and weather buttons?
Deleted User 759

Post by Deleted User 759 »

I test drove the Juke when I was looking for a new car, and I found it quite a fun drive. Punchy acceleration and seemed to handle quite well... Only downside was that we found the interior smaller than our K13 Micra!! With the little ones Group 0 car seat, the wifes seat had to be so far forward, her legs were right up against the dash!
ShinyAndy
Posts: 165
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2014 7:13 pm

Post by ShinyAndy »

[quote="SplanK"] Punchy acceleration and seemed to handle quite well[/QUOTE]

I guess it's all relative, if you were comparing against a Micra I guess it would seem that way. I was comparing to my QQ and the lack of torque on the hilly, twisty, bumpy motorways here would drive me insane and it really felt quite fidgety and slightly unstable on high speed corners. Horses for courses though of course, I guess the Juke is more of a short run/city car than motorway mile muncher
Deleted User 759

Post by Deleted User 759 »

I was comparing it against the supercharged Micra! IIRC it was the 1.6 I test drive rather than the 1.6DIG-T. The 1.2DIG-T I have in the QQ is not as quick or as urgent but I would say it was smoother and a more refined drive.
Post Reply