The Nissan Juke: We Talk About It

  • Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 605 comments
  • 66,682 views
that's my point, fwd or rwd with snow tires is no better or worse than 98% of all sub $30-$35k awd SUVs. Once you go higher in price and you get more proper setups with locking diffs and traction sensing gizmos, I'm not gonna argue that awd is awesome. For what the majority of people need, fwd or rwd with snow tires will be more than enough. They just have been fed this awd/4wd stuff for so long that they believe 4wd with bald tires will get them up the side of a cliff.
Last year there was an accident on an on ramp and people could get through. This one lady in her RDX decided that she'll go around the accident by going into the grass area. Keep in mind this was february and we had about 6-8" of snow on the ground. Well, let's just say the tow truck made some extra cash pulling the poor lady out of the snow. She was completely convinced that her awd would let her go around and make it's way through all the snow and there was no way she would get stuck.
 
I like the slopey roof. 👍
dave_sz
yeah, and when people buy them and see that the car can't move in 3" of snow cause of the stock tires, then what? Sales plummet?
Click to expand...
Chains, baby! I can do a lot more than 3" in my front wheel drive(w/cable chains). I must be OK on the snow, because I usually don't run into trouble until my car is literally bottoming out on the snow. I still try, and I haven't broken anything yet. :lol:

And where I live, near Portland(OR), they'd have most of the snow plowed off the busier streets. Any types of traction devices, combined with the 4x4/AWD, you will be able to get around with just decent driving skills. Of course, we don't get near the amount of snows they get back East.
dave_sz
that's my point, fwd or rwd with snow tires is no better or worse than 98% of all sub $30-$35k awd SUVs. Once you go higher in price and you get more proper setups with locking diffs and traction sensing gizmos, I'm not gonna argue that awd is awesome. For what the majority of people need, fwd or rwd with snow tires will be more than enough. They just have been fed this awd/4wd stuff for so long that they believe 4wd with bald tires will get them up the side of a cliff.
Last year there was an accident on an on ramp and people could get through. This one lady in her RDX decided that she'll go around the accident by going into the grass area. Keep in mind this was february and we had about 6-8" of snow on the ground. Well, let's just say the tow truck made some extra cash pulling the poor lady out of the snow. She was completely convinced that her awd would let her go around and make it's way through all the snow and there was no way she would get stuck.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but with 4x4's, I believe it has lot to do with the drivers, not just tires. I've done plenty of snow condition driving with 4X4's with worn out tires, and on the very road other cars & SUVs are getting stuck on, I'm getting around like a BMX bike on a dry pavement. The same road I wouldn't dare attempt to drive, or climb with my car, even with the cable chains on.
 
Last edited:
^snow plows and salt trucks outside of the vicinity of chicago are not the most reliable. Sometimes it takes them minutes to get going, other times it's hours. It depends on the city/village. Last week I got stuck in a terrible snowfall. Within 2 hours we had 4-6" on the ground. I waited 4 hours before heading out and all the major roads, 2-3 lane roads, weren't touched by plows. I didn't see pavement for 17 miles til about 3 block from my house. Thankfully I live close to a school so the streets by my house are usually cleared up quickly, unless, it's the weekend. Then they wait til sunday night to get moving.
 
Yeah, we see the delays here, too. I just use it as an excuse to come in late to work. Or not at all. :lol:
 
homeforsummer
Like most niche vehicles, you find yourself asking "what's the point?", but when you compare them to the more mundane cars they're invariably based on then they make a lot of sense. A Juke is a Micra for young people. A Countryman is a MINI for people who need more space. Etc.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I could easily use the space with the Juke, and the added capabilities would be a welcome change over the VWs and Toyotas that I've owned. A shame the styling is so controversial, especially when comparing simply in price alone, it could very well end up being a better option when compared to the Countryman.
 
My girlfriend ordered one of these last weekend (the top spec turbo 4wd model) for delivery in October. I'm not a big SUV fan but I really quite like the look of these. As some others have said its nice to see Nissan trying something different. The top model with the torque vectoring 4wd system certainly seems like a lot of car for the money when compared to others in a similar price bracket. I'm looking forward to driving it and would report back on here if anyone's interested.
 
Yeah, I'd like to hear about it. I'm going to try and get a drive in a couple myself. Magazine reviews so far seem quite positive - it apparently handles well, for example, and the torque vectoring AWD seems to work well too.

It's just a little odd the way certain models have been specced. You can't get the turbo with a manual transmission, you can't get the diesel with an auto and you can't get anything apart from the turbo with AWD. My "ideal" Juke would be a diesel AWD auto, as it seems like it'd be a good mix of fun, economy and ease of use, with a bit of all-weather ability and maybe some green-laning thrown in for good measure.

As it is, I'd probably go for the turbo because it still has the auto and AWD. From a performance perspective I still think it should be offered with a manual 'box though.

What it is is good value though. £13k for the base model isn't bad at all, especially since the big rival MINI Countryman is starting at no less than £16k. I'd definitely have the best Juke I could afford rather than having to settle for a base-model Countryman.
 
Even if it drives well, it just looks too funky for me to drive one down the road... Not my cup of tea but hearing the price, it will sells well.
 
If I was in the market to buy a small car this is what I would probably buy, it is so damn individual and quirky. I liked it the minute I saw it on TV and was like how cool is it that you get baby Murano looks for that price. Another similar idea was the Dodge Nitro which I also was very tempted in because it really looked like a small Hummer.

Its good to see Nissan doing something different in this segment compared to the horrid 370Z and that new odd headlight design language. Its a real love it or hate it car but if your willing to be bold its a good choice.

Robin.
 
I sat in one at the autoshow and unfortunately the front leg room wasn't that great. I wasn't cramped or anything but I needed maybe one more inch and it would've been great.
It was close to the Murano convertible. I think they put it so close so that the ugliness and pointlessness from the Murano would make the Juke more appealing.
 
Keef
How do you max out front seat leg room? Who the hell are you, Andre the Giant?!
Click to expand...

Again, this is why I like being relatively short. I can still find a good seating position in big cars, but small cars aren't uncomfortable for me either.

The Juke is quite "cosy" inside so I can see how some people may struggle for room.
 
It isn't exactly big, but it is big enough. I think part of it has to do with there being less headroom than you'd expect. Compared to the Versa, the Juke feels very small on the inside. Still, you could easily seat four reasonably sized people comfortably for a trip, and carry most of their stuff. I'd have the Juke over the Countryman, but that's mostly because I'm insane.
 
It's not really being insane to choose the Juke over the Countryman. In fact, getting the less ugly, cheaper, more fun car is quite a rational choice. From most of the reviews I've read the Countryman is overwhelmingly average.
 
Sad state of affairs we live in when something that looks like the Nissan Juke can be considered the less ugly choice on the market (not that I disagree with that assertion). I will say that the Countryman is more of an understated, Tribeca ugly; whereas the Juke is a wild, B9 Tribeca ugly.
 
the lights on the hood area is what messes it up for me.
i placed my finger over them in a magazine ad, and the car actually looked good.
 
Toronado
I will say that the Countryman is more of an understated, Tribeca ugly; whereas the Juke is a wild, B9 Tribeca ugly.
Click to expand...

That... That is a very apt comparison. I feel like only car nerds would get it, which makes me appreciate it that much more.


I tend to feel like the color plays a big role on the Juke for it's looks. In red or white, I think it looks great. But blue or black? Absolutely terrible.
 
homeforsummer
It's not really being insane to choose the Juke over the Countryman. In fact, getting the less ugly, cheaper, more fun car is quite a rational choice. From most of the reviews I've read the Countryman is overwhelmingly average.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

As for interior space, I'm 6 feet tall; anybody taller is just trying too hard. Ya'll are the reason I feel like I'm sitting indian-style inside Mammoth Cave while driving my mom's Corolla.
 
I love the price, but the roof doesn't look very rack system friendly. It lacks cargo space, so I don't know what Nissan was thinking planting antenna mast on middle of the roof.
 
Toronado
Sad state of affairs we live in when something that looks like the Nissan Juke can be considered the less ugly choice on the market (not that I disagree with that assertion). I will say that the Countryman is more of an understated, Tribeca ugly; whereas the Juke is a wild, B9 Tribeca ugly.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I don't think the Juke is ugly in the first place. It's an acquired taste for sure but it's bold and there are some fantastic design details.

I also know very, very few people who'd take the MINI over the Juke, so it appears to be appealing to younger people more than the Countryman. I have a sneaking suspicion that in the UK at least, the Countryman will be a bit of a school-run-mum car and the Juke more for young professionals. In fact, the Juke's target market is more likely that of the standard MINI - against which it still looks good value and gives you a lot more space.
 
The Juke is definitely the better looking and just plain better car of the two. Anybody who buys the Countryman is simply doing it because it's a Mini. If they're willing to settle for second best then they can have at it.
 
I blogged about its looks and saw one last night. And yes- the JUKE is unspeakably ugly. It's the Aztek of the previous decade (2001-2010). Its only saving grace is its aggressive and muscular sides.
 
I agree it does rhyme with puke..and it does look like puke (especially in the front end :ill::crazy:) ... but for the money, its not too bad of a vehicle. :dopey: I priced one out at the Nissan shop and could had one for under $23,000 with all fees and the options I want. :dopey: :D --- Randy
 
Starting to remind me of the Scion xB. Love it/hate it type of design.

I personally love the looks, so does the rest of my three-man crew at work. Aztec comparison is uncalled for. Nobody liked that one. I want to say Rendezvous(Buick) was uglier, but that car actually had one fan: Tiger Woods.
 
In New York they run a commercial where some yuppie is driving a Juke. He actually reaches over and presses a boost button on the touch display making it seem to go faster through traffic. I threw up in my mouth. Such a sad way to appeal to the car-ignorant. Not a driver's car I take it. Google juke & donut on YouTube for the sadness.

Reminds me of how I need to switch off the traction control in my own car every time I drive it so I can spin the wheels when I want. My car has 140 hp and a stick shift. WTF is the point of traction control here? It defaults to "on" for some reason.

On a car with less than 200 hp (the Juke) even if there were a driver- controlled way to control power with a button (doubt it really works anyway) why would you ever switch it off?

Don't like the styling either.
 
checkyoursix
On a car with less than 200 hp (the Juke) even if there were a driver- controlled way to control power with a button (doubt it really works anyway) why would you ever switch it off?

Don't like the styling either.
Click to expand...

BMW M5 and the M-button. Why would you ever want to have less than the full power of that 5l V10? 💡
 
checkyoursix
On a car with less than 200 hp (the Juke) even if there were a driver- controlled way to control power with a button (doubt it really works anyway) why would you ever switch it off?
Click to expand...

The i-CON system in the Juke has three separate modes; Sport, Normal and Eco. Each selection effects the throttle input, steering sensitivity, and the nature of the CVT system for putting down the power. Over at Edmunds, where they currently are running a Juke for their long-term test, they seem to indicate that there isn't much of a noticeable difference between Normal and Sport, but that Eco takes a significant edge off the performance of the car.

As someone who is looking into buying a Juke, it is a nifty trick for a nifty vehicle. Switching into Sport mode, which activates the boost gauges and the G-meeter, it would be fun to use when showing off to my friends. Otherwise, I wouldn't see much of a need to ever leave Normal mode. Even then, Eco mode would be great for inner-city driving, like what I did yesterday in Chicago.
 

Latest Posts

Back