The Nissan Juke: We Talk About It

  • Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 605 comments
  • 66,703 views
niky
Suzuki knows. However, a real micro-SUV is too crude a creature to make it in the US
Click to expand...
OK, Suzuki still remembers. Overseas. :lol: They are worthless over here. I guess you can make an argument for a model of theirs or two, but bottom line, Suzuki is a brand that nobody wants, these days. They'd actually be considered cool if they had Samurai(or whatever that is in the pic), Swift & Wagon R. I don't have to tell you, because you are up on this stuff, but they were like Daewoo of America for awhile there.
 
It's the Jimny. The modern replacement for the Samurai, available on a wider platform.

The Swift is great. Awfully cramped and plasticky, but great to drive.

Suzuki is actually doing great globally... with year-on-year sales increases, a huge presence in Japan and India, and a small but growing following thanks to the success of the Swift, the new Alto and their jWRC venture.

And they're still pretty big in motorcycles. Being big in motorcycles and big in ultra-cheap microcars gives you a wide customer base to build on if you decide to start going upmarket into mainstream compacts and midsizers.

In America, they were Daewoo... which is the whole problem. GM was using them to sell Daewoo rebadges that were being sold under the Chevrolet nameplate elsewhere. That move didn't do too much good for either brand's errh... brand image.
 
80Y 2C2
I don't think the Jimny was sold in auto, and I think I remember a statistic saying only 20% of Americans can drive manual.

Could be (and probably am) wrong on both counts though. 👍
Click to expand...

Don't think it was sold with an auto in either the UK nor Oz, but more than likely was in Japan.

Jimnys are awesome though. As Niky says, it's a proper, genuine off-roader. Like a Defender that shrunk in the wash.

As for the Juke again, I reckon it's probably very colour-dependant. Dark red doesn't suit it (doesn't suit a lot of cars, actually). The other car in their press photos is silver and it works much better. White might be even better, and black would be better still because it'd hide the uncomfortable grille treatment and those lights would look pretty mean I reckon.

I'd be quite interested in driving one once it hits the showrooms.
 
I drove one a few years back that was a 4AT 4x2. You can get one in 4AT and 4x4

If the Juke drives as funky as it looks, I'd be hooked. Because it looks like it'd be right at home jumping over tree stumps and going sideways in the mud... it has a kind of "Motard" vibe to it. (like the Toyota RSC concept)
 
My only concern with the Juke is that only the very top model will come with AWD. I'm sure it'll be great fun, but I'd like to see the option of having one of the diesel ones with AWD too so you can have AWD for utility as well as performance. I'm sure it'd be quite useful for those who'd like the extra security but also wouldn't mind a possible 60-odd to the gallon too as I know the diesel they'll be plonking in it is capable of.

A Juke with a lazy, torquey, economical turbodiesel and AWD would be very appealing to me. If I want a petrol engine I'll have it in a sports car or super saloon. Diesel suits me just fine for everything else.

Actually, it'd be the perfect place to bung an electric motor in. It's small so it'll spend most of it's life in the city. Sod the slightly dull Nissan Leaf, I'll have an electric Juke. When you charged it at night you could say you were plugging in your Juke Box.
 
I just wish companies would offer AWD on the lower level cars. Does AWD and top-of-the-line go hand in hand? Would it really hurt to put AWD on the entry level models? (Subaru does it, and Suzuki offers it, for the base models).
 
What gets me about the Juke is that for the AWD one they've even had to design completely new rear suspension for it. All the FWD Jukes use a torsion beam at the rear, and the AWD has multi-link. You think if they'd gone to the trouble of designing a new multi-link for a platform that's been designed with a beam in mind (as used by the Micra/Renault Clio etc) they'd make more use of it.

I can understand why they're leaving the base models FWD (after all, I'm probably in a minority when it comes to wanting the diesel/AWD combo... and at the end of the day, I can't afford one anyway so my view is essentially irrelevant...) because most people will never come close to needing to use AWD anyway, but it'd be nice to at least have the option.
 
Depends. In the Northern parts of the US, I'm sure the AWD models would sell like hotcakes (that's if it were to sell well in the first place). All the CUVs offer AWD, and they probably would be needed only as much as any other AWD car.
 
buickgnx88
Depends. In the Northern parts of the US, I'm sure the AWD models would sell like hotcakes (that's if it were to sell well in the first place). All the CUVs offer AWD, and they probably would be needed only as much as any other AWD car.
Click to expand...

I donno. Here in Holland, the mix of cars doesn't seem much more AWD biased than what we have in Seattle. That's aside from more SUVs here, but that's probably just Michigan, not the snow.

Although the number of AWD BMWs is probably a bit higher here.
 
Meh it's a tossup. I really think it's due to the lack of cars that come with AWD, much less on the more affordable models. I usually see plenty of Subarus and AWD Chargers, but cars like those are mixed in with all the older FWD rust buckets. :lol:
 
Jim Prower
It'd help if you didnt' hotlink every single car picture from netcarshow. I had to look at the urls in order to figure out which car you're talking about.
Click to expand...

NetCarShow was just convenient. The post was sort of a suck.com-style verbal beatdown of the poor design. You could just as easily read the text straight through if you kept your attention span in check.
 
The FWD torsion rear is partly for reasons of cost-cutting and allows them to appeal to buyers who might not want the fuel economy compromise of AWD with a much cheaper car... but yeah... having two entirely different rear ends doesn't do much for economies of scale... I wonder why they didn't do it like the compact crossovers (CR-V, Escape, etcetera) do it... have the exact same rear end, except without the differential. Doesn't seem to add anything to the cost.
 
spongebob.jpg


All it needs is some yellow pant.
 
buickgnx88
I just wish companies would offer AWD on the lower level cars. Does AWD and top-of-the-line go hand in hand? Would it really hurt to put AWD on the entry level models? (Subaru does it, and Suzuki offers it, for the base models).
Click to expand...

maybe they, as in all car companies, know that AWD isn't and shouldn't be a necessity for anyone.
 
niky
The FWD torsion rear is partly for reasons of cost-cutting and allows them to appeal to buyers who might not want the fuel economy compromise of AWD with a much cheaper car... but yeah... having two entirely different rear ends doesn't do much for economies of scale... I wonder why they didn't do it like the compact crossovers (CR-V, Escape, etcetera) do it... have the exact same rear end, except without the differential. Doesn't seem to add anything to the cost.
Click to expand...
I don't understand why all car companies often make an entirely different part for a car that lacks a certain option, even something extreme like changing the entire rear suspension. Seems like the costs of design, tooling, etc for an entire separate system would be way more expensive and wasteful than simply giving every single car the exact same part. Wouldn't it be cheaper to design a part once instead of twice?
 
Philly
Although the number of AWD BMWs is probably a bit higher here.
Click to expand...

Those Neocons in Holland, with all their money. Of course they'd have a boatload of AWD BMWs. Although, its much the same here in Grand Rapids.

On a day like today (the pissy, wet, constant snow), a car like the Juke would have been perfect.
 
buickgnx88
And why is that exactly?
Click to expand...

Because the only advantage of AWD is in traction in deep mud or snow. And you can still get stuck in an AWD vehicle... especially on your common AWD crossover, that doesn't have a low-range box, a locking center differential and locking hubs. (even with a locking center diff and LSDs, you can still get stuck pretty easily if you're on the wrong tires)

In terms of on-road safety... which is the one feature of AWD that many writers love to enthuse over, AWD is no substitute for a good suspension and good tires.

The only real advantage of AWD over other cars is that it's more stable under power in a corner than rear-wheel drive, and less understeery under power in a corner than front wheel drive (both situations dependent on the center differential setting and whether or not the car has LSDs).

This doesn't really matter that much to most consumers. What will matter to them is that an AWD version will be slower than the FWD/RWD version of their vehicle and will use more gas. Some might want the added "safety" of AWD, but that's really more a perception thing than anything else.
 
Keef
I don't understand why all car companies often make an entirely different part for a car that lacks a certain option, even something extreme like changing the entire rear suspension. Seems like the costs of design, tooling, etc for an entire separate system would be way more expensive and wasteful than simply giving every single car the exact same part. Wouldn't it be cheaper to design a part once instead of twice?
Click to expand...

That's what confuses me. I can understand them wanting multi-link for the AWD version as it's probably more suited to something with a diff and some driveshafts at the back, but then why not use the more sophisticated system on the lower models too, if you've put the time and money into developing it? It seems odd, unless it genuinely is cheaper for them to use torsion bars on the rest of the range.
 
YSSMAN
Those Neocons in Holland, with all their money. Of course they'd have a boatload of AWD BMWs. Although, its much the same here in Grand Rapids.

On a day like today (the pissy, wet, constant snow), a car like the Juke would have been perfect.
Click to expand...

We don't have that many Bimmers here. Mostly just lots of VWs. But I definitely did get a taste of why snow tires >>>>> AWD last night when we almost went spinning off the freeway.
 
buickgnx88
And yet I see more AWD CUVs than FWD, go figure hey? :lol:
Click to expand...

Same reasons you see "soccer moms" driving four ton SUVs to ferry their kids to school.

homeforsummer
That's what confuses me. I can understand them wanting multi-link for the AWD version as it's probably more suited to something with a diff and some driveshafts at the back, but then why not use the more sophisticated system on the lower models too, if you've put the time and money into developing it? It seems odd, unless it genuinely is cheaper for them to use torsion bars on the rest of the range.
Click to expand...

There's good evidence that it actually isn't, in some cases... depending on the volumes involved. But this is Nissan... they gave up on IRS on their cheap cars a loooooong time ago.
 
buickgnx88
And why is that exactly?
Click to expand...

Who really needs AWD/4WD?

Companies know you don't need awd in your civic, your corolla, or your cobalt.
Almost all low end SUVs have awd on the lowest trim.

niky
And you can still get stuck in an AWD vehicle... especially on your common AWD crossover, that doesn't have a low-range box, a locking center differential and locking hubs.
Click to expand...

you don't even have to get that deep into it. Your average joe/soccer mom is completely clueless about the fact that her awd doesn't do jack crap in the snow with the all season/summer tires that came with the car. They all think "awd=king of the road gtfo of my way bitches". 80% of all the accidents I see in the winter are awd SUVs.
 
homeforsummer
That's what confuses me. I can understand them wanting multi-link for the AWD version as it's probably more suited to something with a diff and some driveshafts at the back, but then why not use the more sophisticated system on the lower models too, if you've put the time and money into developing it? It seems odd, unless it genuinely is cheaper for them to use torsion bars on the rest of the range.
Click to expand...
The only way I can see it being cheaper to use two suspensions instead of one is if the car was purpose-built to use both in a bolt-on affair, and if the torsion-beam is also used on other cars in the range.
 
The problem is, you'll still have the mounting hardware for the AWD version to think about.

A car with a torsion beam has a different floorpan from one with IRS... even more different if the IRS version has AWD. This is the reason you can't just swap an EVO engine into a regular (old) Lancer and call it a day. Aside from the issue of wiring and the extra-wide EVO track, there's the fact that the floor pan and fuel tank are different. You swap in the fuel tank for the space to clear the differential, then you have to cut out the rear subframe and weld in the rear subframe from a Lancer. (It's not pretty, and... yes... probably not very safe). And the weird thing is... the Lancer already has IRS... the AWD IRS on the Evo is a different design.

Not knowing the design of the Juke, but knowing how small cars are built, I'd say the rear floorpan and fuel tank are designed to take advantage of the packaging efficiencies afforded by the rear torsion beam. An AWD version would likely have the differences mentioned above for the Lancer-Evo... and the price premium for the AWD version would go up accordingly.

Compact SUVs deal with this by having IRS as standard across the range with a hole where the rear differential is supposed to go on the lower-end models. This means you don't have to produce two different kinds of exhausts (saves money thanks to volume of production), two different kinds of suspensions (ditto), two different kinds of floorplans (ditto ditto) and you won't need two entirely different production lines for the vehicles... ((ditto ditto) ditto) as they can be assembled on one line with ease.
 
Aye. Ford Escape is probably the most obvious example of the latter, as when following one (as I often do,) you can see right under the vehicle to where there may or may not be a pumpkin.
 

Latest Posts

Back