The Nissan Juke: We Talk About It

  • Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 605 comments
  • 66,730 views
sumbrownkid
Nissan will eventually come around to throw a manual stick into the car.
Click to expand...

They do, but only on the FWD version that comes with the less-sophisticated rear suspension. So, if you want it to handle and ride the best, while also getting the most performance out of it as possible, you're stuck with AWD and the CVT gearbox.

All things considered, however, Nissan has done a pretty good job with their CVT program. After everyone bailed, as far as I can tell, they're going to stick with it.
 
blaaah
A 4WD Juke could get much more power down at speed but can't even at standstill because the CVT is not good enough.
Juke FWD 0-60mph 7.7s 1286kgs
Juke 4WD 0-60mph 8.1s 1425kgs
Only 139kgs difference, but opposite result.
Click to expand...

Oh God! Not 0.4 seconds difference in a 0-60 time that no owner will ever do anyway?! :crazy:

Now try the same thing in the wet.

And you do realise that 139kg in a small car is a hell of a weight difference, right? I'm not surprised the FWD version is quicker. It'd be quicker even if the 4WD was a manual car because in something of that sort of size and weight getting a 4WD off the line usually involves a lot of clutch slipping and/or frying. A FWD of that sort of power will just chirrup the tyres and be away without too much stress on the drivetrain.

Anyway, big deal, it has a CVT. As I've already said, it's hardly a 370Z in the corners anyway so it's not the end of the world that it's fitted with a CVT that has an inconsequential difference in standing start acceleration times. Especially since most manual gearshifts are pretty average anyway. If it was as good to change gear as an MX5 then maybe the lack of manual would be something to complain about.
 
That time difference is probably attributed to the AWD's extra weight.

"At speed," AWD would be irrelevent unless that car had a billion horsepower to wrangle.
 
I'm not so sure, Nissan have given the Juke a torque-distributing system similar to the GT-R. From the tests I've read it's apparently quite easy to feel doing its thang.

Then you have the traction in poor weather thing too, obviously. You're partly right though, it's not so much a performance AWD system, but it's not a basic one either.
 
0a1955b5-cbfe-446c-9ae5-8e1a8a479d3e.jpg
 
homeforsummer
I'm not so sure, Nissan have given the Juke a torque-distributing system similar to the GT-R. From the tests I've read it's apparently quite easy to feel doing its thang.

Then you have the traction in poor weather thing too, obviously. You're partly right though, it's not so much a performance AWD system, but it's not a basic one either.
Click to expand...

Now that I look bad in this thread, Inside Line had an interesting post related to this...

Juke-Owners-manual-thumb-717x538-82642.jpg


Now, I didn't know that you could lock the AWD system in FWD or AWD. I was under the impression that it was a system similar to the Haldex units used by Volkswagen and Saab, not that it was something that you could select on the dash. If so, that is a nifty trick there, Nissan. Granted, I don't know why you'd ever want to take it out of AWD-V mode, but it is nice that they give you the option.
 
Perhaps that is a fuel-saving feature, since as far as I know ( and please correct if I'm wrong ), AWD creates more resistance on the drivetrain and therefore increase the fuel consumption by a tiny bit.
 
Dan_
Perhaps that is a fuel-saving feature, since as far as I know ( and please correct if I'm wrong ), AWD creates more resistance on the drivetrain and therefore increase the fuel consumption by a tiny bit.
Click to expand...

My Subaru Loyale has a selectable 4WD system too, and it uses 15% less gas on FWD mode.
 
nissan-super-juke.jpg


Yes please.

Although, if they were ever thinking of actually doing a "Super" Juke, my guess is that it would get the VQ, sans-turbo, from the 370Z in lieu of the ridiculousness that would come from the GT-R.
 
Don't feed the auto-trolls, it ain't gonna happen: It's the old "'They Get It But We Don't' Revolt" trick.

Then again, they made the Cross-Cabrio-Murano.
 
Last edited:
I think the "super" Juke looks nice. But it seems to be more like just concept car that never comes out.
 
YSSMAN
nissan-super-juke.jpg


Yes please.

Although, if they were ever thinking of actually doing a "Super" Juke, my guess is that it would get the VQ, sans-turbo, from the 370Z in lieu of the ridiculousness that would come from the GT-R.
Click to expand...

As awesome as this is, I don't think another fast SUV needs to be out there.
 
Not really a SUV though, is it? More of a crossover. Jukes are pretty small. Think of it more in terms of a very hot hatch.
 
Everytime I see the advert for this I feel like vomitting! What on earth was the head of Nissan smoking when he accepted a sketch of a frogs face moulded onto the front of a Crossover? I mean come on, seriously! It's worse than most new Peugeot's, and they are bad enough with their huge gaping grin bumpers...

I saw one of these Jukes the other day, and it confirmed to me just how ugly they really are, and just how few there are on the roads round here, thankfully it seems, a lot of people in my part of the world have some degree of standards haha!

The Super juke would look more appealing if it lost those garish lights in the bumper, and made it look more aggresive...... R35 GTR shoehorned in? hmmmmm :P
 
VQ seems a bit optimistic. They'll probably drop a suped up DIG-T engine in it. That is if they plan to realise this concept, and I have my doubts.
 
The Juke is pretty good in standard trim but the concept makes it look slightly more GTR'ish which is cool.
 
It's a Rally Car with an engine that's not legal for WRC, is what it is. put dirt tires on it, and it's practically Group B.
 
Does anyone else think that the Juke is a pretty cool car to look at? My brother says that the thing is just visual pollution and it makes him feel sick whenever he sees one but I actually really like it.
 
YSSMAN
They do, but only on the FWD version that comes with the less-sophisticated rear suspension. So, if you want it to handle and ride the best, while also getting the most performance out of it as possible, you're stuck with AWD and the CVT gearbox.

All things considered, however, Nissan has done a pretty good job with their CVT program. After everyone bailed, as far as I can tell, they're going to stick with it.
Click to expand...

I cannot stand CVTs, they feel so...robotic, soulless...You know?

Maybe I'm just too much of a purist.
 
sumbrownkid
I cannot stand CVTs, they feel so...robotic, soulless...You know?

Maybe I'm just too much of a purist.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I drove a 2.5 CVT equipped Altima Coupe in Florida as a rental car and hated it. Well, loved the car but hated what was under the hood. Then I had a 2.0 CVT equipped Sentra rental car in Atlanta and hated that too.
 
The Super Juke is a bit like every Super GT, GT3 and DTM car, ever. Take what is otherwise not a great-looking car, strip it, widen it and stick some aggressive aerodynamic body parts on it and, voila, it is now sexy. Like a 'butterface', it just distracts the viewer from a still unfortunately hideous front-end. A viable approach for pretty much every car in existence, bar perhaps the laughable offerings from Mitsuoka and previously designed Ssangyongs.
 
Jondot
Mmm, I tend to think of it more as a Ford Fiesta that someone's drawn a large squiggle around.
Click to expand...

Against all odds it's a less contrived design than the Fiesta too. At least the Juke is meant to look like it does (I quite like it). The Fiesta gives me the impression that they designed a car and then injected the whole lot with collagen to give it bumps and creases in odd places.

Quite like the Juke GT-R thing. Would raise an eyebrow if they managed to fit that engine under that bonnet though. We're talking about a car based on a Micra essentially. Not a big car and a GT-R's engine is a lot of metal.

The other thing I guess is how much that engine would be like a boat anchor in a car that's half a tonne lighter. Lot of weight to put up front under a high nose.
 
I think the Juke and SuperJuke (Really? They should call it the Juke Nukem) would look pretty darn good if they got rid of those awful bugeye headlamps and eyebrow turn signals and just put the light housing inside of and on the edges of the big wrap-around grille there.
 
homeforsummer
Against all odds it's a less contrived design than the Fiesta too. At least the Juke is meant to look like it does (I quite like it). The Fiesta gives me the impression that they designed a car and then injected the whole lot with collagen to give it bumps and creases in odd places.
Click to expand...

Even then, the European Fiesta looks better than our slightly Americanized version. I'd say the interiors are on an even keel, despite the Fiesta having a few more buttons and switches than I'd like.

They're apparently working on semi-crossover versions of the Fiesta and Sonic that would compete directly against the Juke. Color me excited.
 
YSSMAN
Even then, the European Fiesta looks better than our slightly Americanized version. I'd say the interiors are on an even keel, despite the Fiesta having a few more buttons and switches than I'd like.
Click to expand...

The best of the bunch is the Fiesta ST they previewed at Frankfurt, but then that has problems all of its own, such as the basking shark grille Ford now uses to mark out its sporty stuff.

The Fiesta is like the embodiment of the term "dynamic" used in the most awful marketing-speak way possible. Dynamic at the expense of actually looking good.

They're apparently working on semi-crossover versions of the Fiesta and Sonic that would compete directly against the Juke. Color me excited.
Click to expand...

I'd heard that too. Having seen the Sonic though my own money would be on the sedan, because it's just about the first compact sedan I've ever seen that actually looks genuinely good.
 
I'm rediculously excited for the Sonic, which says a lot about my changing sensibilities in automobiles. The great news is that the press loves the thing, from top-to-bottom. The price is fantastic (less than $17K for a well-equipped LT with the 1.4T, 6MT hatchback), the performance is quite good (quick-ish, 40 MPG), and the looks aren't half-bad.

If they can apply 88% of that to some kind of crossover... thing... I'd be really happy. You know, Volkswagen "Cross _____" style. I'd expect it to use some kind of fancy electronic AWD system, but now that I think about it, I don't know if they would want to jam the rather-expensive XWD system under there... Hmmm.

Still... I think I've said it in here before, but if any automaker (not you, Suzuki) offered an affordable, small-ish, fuel-friendly crossover it would sell like hotcakes here in the Midwest and other parts of the country that occasionally receive crappy weather. I'd buy something like the Panda 4X4 in a heartbeat.
 

Latest Posts

Back