Topic: 2014 Nissan Rogue To Start At $23,498 In Canada

[Noto]

Dont know how you can say poor materials when it's soft touch everywhere   Comparing to the competition that has all hard plastics, but at least the CRV has done it nice.

His 2011 Rogue is solid plastic nearly everywhere.  I'm sure the new one uses better materials.

[mixmanmash]

I agree with NoTo.  The fuel economy of the previous gen was nowhere near the ratings.  I have tried driving for fuel economy and it doesn't deliver.  Average is 11 city, 8.5 hwy. I blame the CVT and how it's programmed in this application.

[dkaz]

I'll just sit back and laugh at all these futile attempts to build a better automatic transmission. Stick shift rules!  Heck I'm a Mazda slappy but I won't touch the Skyactiv automatic, I'll wait til 2020 to see how well they hold up. Meanwhile my Sienna's trustworthy 4 speed auto will continue chugging along.

[Fobroader]

I'll just sit back and laugh at all these futile attempts to build a better automatic transmission. Stick shift rules!  Heck I'm a Mazda slappy but I won't touch the Skyactiv automatic, I'll wait til 2020 to see how well they hold up. Meanwhile my Sienna's trustworthy 4 speed auto will continue chugging along.

Im with ya, I have never had a problem with a standard tranny, ever. If I did, it was usually me, seems all these newfangled trannies are having issues, dont know why you would put yourself through that. Short of a physical inability to drive it, the manual will always be my favorite.

[Solstice2006]

I'll just sit back and laugh at all these futile attempts to build a better automatic transmission. Stick shift rules!  Heck I'm a Mazda slappy but I won't touch the Skyactiv automatic, I'll wait til 2020 to see how well they hold up. Meanwhile my Sienna's trustworthy 4 speed auto will continue chugging along.

From what I heard the skyactiv manuals keep popping out of 3rd...  I have to count myself lucky, have never had a transmission problem in any car that I've owned... And I do flushes around 75km

[Snowman]

I have to laugh at times on this board. Many here complain about the lack of a manual but how many actually have a daily driver with one  Talk is cheap.

[Black Hatch]

I'll just sit back and laugh at all these futile attempts to build a better automatic transmission. Stick shift rules!  Heck I'm a Mazda slappy but I won't touch the Skyactiv automatic, I'll wait til 2020 to see how well they hold up. Meanwhile my Sienna's trustworthy 4 speed auto will continue chugging along.

Nice. Not comfortable with Mazda autos but okay with a Toyota auto, we see where your true colors are. 

Kidding aside, skyactiv on as a whole is unproven in the long run... but in regards to transmission I am a lot more comfortable with my skyactiv auto say compared to a
1. Nissan CVT (see new Pathfinder issues, judders)
2. Ford  DCT (see Focus moan thread)
3. Honda new CVT (less history than skyactiv auto)
4. Subaru new CVT
5. Toyota new CVT (less history than skyactiv auto)
Oh did I mentioned I didn't like CVTs.

And didn't Honda have trouble with their autos on their odyssey and accords awhile back?

Also I had one bad experience with the clutch hose breaking in my RX-8.
no issues on the autos on my mazda6 and cx-5.

[dkaz]

Im with ya, I have never had a problem with a standard tranny, ever. If I did, it was usually me, seems all these newfangled trannies are having issues, dont know why you would put yourself through that. Short of a physical inability to drive it, the manual will always be my favorite.

Yep, a blown left knee would be my folly. But there is a paraplegic rally racer who drives a manual, all with hand controls. So anything is possible.

From what I heard the skyactiv manuals keep popping out of 3rd...

There are about a dozen manual Skyactiv owners in our club and no one's report slippage yet.

I have to laugh at times on this board. Many here complain about the lack of a manual but how many actually have a daily driver with one  Talk is cheap.

Oooo oooo me me me. I have a manual daily driver. Well it would be a daily driver if I didn't take transit to work. My wife used it to deliver papers, imagine having to stop and go 70 times in 10 km in a manual, about 130 houses altogether.

Nice. Not comfortable with Mazda autos but okay with a Toyota auto, we see where your true colors are. 

I'm not brand loyal. I've said many times before that I would only trust Toyota if I ever needed an automatic transmission. Oh, I guess it doesn't make me a Mazda slappy, other than the fact I've owned three Mazdas. That said, the Skyactiv auto drives great. But it worries me that out of the dozen automatic Skyactiv owners we have in our club, two have had problems with their transmissions, one required a tow after it stalled on a major arterial in the PM rush hour.

[SaskSpecV]

Many here complain about the lack of a manual but how many actually have a daily driver with one  Talk is cheap.

Hey, at least my money has been placed in the same location as my mouth
And it will be for the next "family vehicle" / daily driver as well.  Unfortunately, that limits it to a new Forester or Mazda5, or maybe next gen Golf Wagon (need a wagonish vehicle - so M/T family sedans are out - and the few other CUV/wagons with M/T are offered in stripper versions only)

[Black Hatch]

I'm not brand loyal. I've said many times before that I would only trust Toyota if I ever needed an automatic transmission. Oh, I guess it doesn't make me a Mazda slappy, other than the fact I've owned three Mazdas. That said, the Skyactiv auto drives great. But it worries me that out of the dozen automatic Skyactiv owners we have in our club, two have had problems with their transmissions, one required a tow after it stalled on a major arterial in the PM rush hour.

I'm curious about these auto skyactiv problems.
Are they posted on mazda247? Were these all from the mazda3? Year?
Are they due to shifting using the "manual" mode.
Auto tends to shift to get best FE.

PM me if you don't what to post here.

[Solstice2006]

Not sure how this thread turned into auto vs manual and reliability, anyway...

I'm not brand loyal. I've said many times before that I would only trust Toyota if I ever needed an automatic transmission. Oh, I guess it doesn't make me a Mazda slappy, other than the fact I've owned three Mazdas. That said, the Skyactiv auto drives great. But it worries me that out of the dozen automatic Skyactiv owners we have in our club, two have had problems with their transmissions, one required a tow after it stalled on a major arterial in the PM rush hour.

I understand how the skyactiv autos could concern based on some data in the forum.  But I find it a little amusing that you would only trust a Toyota transmission.... 

I guess the hundreds of thousands of kms that the police and taxi Impalas rack up in the city are not enough proof that Toyota isn't the only one that can make a reliable auto transmission...

[dkaz]

Lol oh dear what have I got myself into.

The GM auto transmission is also based on old reliable design right? I know nothing about them, I just know about the potential head gasket issues with some engines.

Toyota's had some bad head gaskets before, the 7Ms used in the Mark III Supra and Cressida, I also commonly see early 90s 4Runner ads with blown head gaskets. The manual transmission used in the 03-08 Corolla and Matrix also had problems.

I'm a manual driver. I don't trust automatics period. I'm ok with the Toyota's auto transmission but I'm still watching it with at least one eye all the time like that evil girlfriend always checking the call history and text messages to make sure it won't betray me.

[pcsp]

Fuel economy ratings for the new Rogue have improved: 6.0/7.9/7.1 (hwy/city/combined L/100km) for front-wheel drive CVT models and 8.2/6.2/7.3 for all-wheel drive models.

Besides the obvious error in the latter number (reversed hwy/city),

HOW ARE WE STILL ALLOWING THESE BULLSH!T CLAIMS?!  In what world could an AWD Rogue get 6.2L/100km on a highway, even at 100km/h?!  My brother's gets ~8L/100km, and since this new one is just retuned, but same mechanical equipment, I have a very difficult time believing those numbers.  He consistently averages over 11L/100km in the City.

My brother hates his Rogue for the fuel economy, poor quality materials, and harsh ride.  If this new one is, in person, as promised, then Nissan has fixed all of his concerns.  Only time (and a test-drive) will tell.

Why are we still on about Natural Resources Canada fuel economy ratings? We should know they only should be used for comparison purposes. Subtract 20% and, presto, you have your actual real world fuel economy. Comparisons are very useful. For example, if one was cross shopping the Rogue with a similar sized Chev Equinox V6 (13.2/8.4), the ratings would tell the shopper that the Chev will use about 50% more fuel than the Nissan. Incidentally, great job, Nissan, on stellar fuel economy for the new Rogue.

[Noto]

I disagree entirely.

Ford, for one, has admitted that they tailor-make their cars to beat the test, but it's not linear as to how each vehicle will do in real world.  As per your example, the Equinox may, or may not use 50% more fuel, and not every car will use 20% more than the NRC ratings.

So yes, Nissan reprogrammed the Rogue to beat the test, but real world figures will likely continue to be far higher than one could reasonably expect.  I doubt their reprogramming of the CVT will bring real world consumption significantly down.

[pcsp]

Granted, there are SO many modifications that could be made to the NRC system of ratings to make it more usable and realistic. As a comparative tool. though, it sure beats anything else - including word of mouth. Individual variations in people's driving habits are VERY significant and having a standardized tool is vital. Manufacturers will always try to beat the system in various ways - the obvious examples and offenders will eventually get nailed. Using NRC as a guide can be essential to informed consumer purchase decisions.

I ignored this in 2003, as I purchased a Toyota Tundra V8 with ratings of 17/22 (Canadian city/highway). I thought "it's a Toyota and if I drive it easy I can beat the ratings with ease". NOT! I was lucky to achieve 16 mpg combined! A good current example would be the Honda Ridgeline and Chev Silverado. The V8 full sized 4X4 Chev will achieve about 5% better fuel economy than the Honda. Consumers need this useful info and right now NRC provides it.

[Solstice2006]

Personally, to get a good indication of the fuel economy of a car before I buy it, I check the EPA, and fuelly, and take the average of the two.  So far, I have this to be as close to real world conditions as possible.  When driving normally, with normal weather (10 to 20C), non winter gas, all season tires.

[Frontier1]

I disagree entirely.

Ford, for one, has admitted that they tailor-make their cars to beat the test, but it's not linear as to how each vehicle will do in real world.  As per your example, the Equinox may, or may not use 50% more fuel, and not every car will use 20% more than the NRC ratings.

So yes, Nissan reprogrammed the Rogue to beat the test, but real world figures will likely continue to be far higher than one could reasonably expect.  I doubt their reprogramming of the CVT will bring real world consumption significantly down.

Fuelly numbers are in line with the competition or better, end of conversation.

[ArticSteve]

When manufactures reprogram their CVTs to eek out even more mpg the drive of the vehicle suffers accordingly.  The current Altima is a case in point.  You can only go to the CVT reprograming well so many times. 

[dkaz]

So let's do a Fuelly compact SUV competition:

Kia Sportage - 8.5
Mazda CX-5 - 8.5
Mitsubishi RVR - 8.8
Subaru Forester - 8.8
Honda CR-V - 9.0
Nissan Rogue - 9.0
Toyota Rav4 - 9.0
VW Tiguan - 9.4
Hyundai Tucson - 10.1
Ford Escape - 10.2

So Rogue is middle of the pack.

[sailor723]

So let's do a Fuelly compact SUV competition:

Kia Sportage - 8.5
Mazda CX-5 - 8.5
Mitsubishi RVR - 8.8
Subaru Forester - 8.8
Honda CR-V - 9.0
Nissan Rogue - 9.0
Toyota Rav4 - 9.0
VW Tiguan - 9.4
Hyundai Tucson - 10.1
Ford Escape - 10.2

So Rogue is middle of the pack.

I know it doesn't apply to some on that list but does Fuelly distingush between AWD and FWD models?