Topic: Test Drive: 2017 Nissan Rogue SL Platinum

[AutoTrader.ca]

The suburban solution
Read more...

[Robin2]

We have a 16 SV rogue and it surprised me so far.  it's no powerhouse as I'm used to 300+ hp wrx but this is way better than 2010 santa fe and wife is happy.

Im fine with the CVT and powerband is decent on it. 

For fuel economy, it's good considering 3500lbs and awd.  On pure hwy, we got 7.3L over 800kms driven up north late last summer - all highway and mainly 100-115km/h range. 

In everyday driving and winter, we're getting about 10l / 100kms but that's 70% city driving / commuting to work and car barely sees over 80km/h on 20-25kms drive to work every morning.

Nissan could put a bigger fuel tank as it's only a 55L tank and would help on the range too.  but this is minor issue.

The awd lock feature only works till 40km/h and disengages.  if you need it again, you have lock button again to activate it. 

awd works well, but it's no Subaru.  I prefer my Subaru.

[Firm]

I am testing a 17 SL Platinum right now (in red). The steering feels much better than the pre-face lifted version for some reason, it rides well and the platinum seats are really comfy. That makes it fairly pleasant to live with, but there's two things really bugging me. First is the 2.5L CVT combo....merging, passing, and even just getting up to speed between stop lights sounds and feels way more laboured than it should. The other thing is the infotainment and controls, definitely due for an update. Even the audio control knobs are silly, they're recessed just a bit, which prevents ones fingers from gripping the rubberized sides of the knob, the only place to grip is the slippy polished chrome edge of the knob, so I am constantly fumbling with them.

[dirtyjeffer]

For fuel economy, it's good considering 3500lbs and awd.  On pure hwy, we got 7.3L over 800kms driven up north late last summer - all highway and mainly 100-115km/h range. 

In everyday driving and winter, we're getting about 10l / 100kms but that's 70% city driving / commuting to work and car barely sees over 80km/h on 20-25kms drive to work every morning.

that's pretty decent...our 16 Sorento gets high 8s on the highway and most of the city stuff is low 12s...of course, ours has the turbo in it, and my wife isn't shy about using it. 

[Rupert]

   I think that I might be in this sector next and the Rogue is certainly on the list. Comfort is high on the list of requirements and have read before here that this feature is tops in the Rogue. They all go and steer just fine...they have to. When I say comfort though, I include highway noise which can be very tiring on longer trips...which we might be making a few more of. In this respect alone, the Escape seems a better buy then...don't use the radio much at all.

   There are lists on here of all kinds of attributes...but highway noise is not seemingly one of them...why not? It's not thought of much but is important in my opinion. How hard would it be to hang a device from the rearview mirror to record this feature and provide a standard record for all tests. This to go along with the testers own aural impressions. A number.

   I enjoyed your ride...not being a drifter.

[Niklasky]

I am currently in the market for a CUV, however I am not considering the Rogue. I find it underpowered and not up to the quality standards of it's competitors. I also don't like that the rear armrest is actually the middle seat, so when you pull it down, you are exposed to the contents of your trunk. A regular armrest with pass through for long items would have been better.

I don't see this Rogue coming close to the new CR-V in terms of functionality, quality and performance. And the upcoming CX-5 should give it a further blow.

[JacobBlack]

   There are lists on here of all kinds of attributes...but highway noise is not seemingly one of them...why not? It's not thought of much but is important in my opinion. How hard would it be to hang a device from the rearview mirror to record this feature and provide a standard record for all tests. This to go along with the testers own aural impressions. A number.

Highway noise is frequently mentioned in our articles, and road noise is mentioned here.
Re the decibel meter - I've tried four different apps on my mobile phone and they all record "92 db" in literally every single car - so I don't think they're all that useful. Perhaps a more expensive meter would be good, but then I have to get one to every single one of our contributors. We try to give an assessment of road noise whenever we can though.

[Rupert]

Found this...http://www.dangerousdecibels.org/virtualexhibit/6measuringsound.html

Not a pointless subject I think. One that might well be of note to many. About $170 for a small meter.

[JacobBlack]

Aw! Thanks! Did you buy it for me? Do you need a shipping address?   

[Rupert]

   Well... I would but 'she who must be obeyed' says no. I will try and save a few bucks out of housekeeping every week until I have enough to 'launder' one in.

[Great_Big_Abyss]

Aw! Thanks! Did you buy it for me? Do you need a shipping address?   

LMFAO. 

[Fobroader]

Found this...http://www.dangerousdecibels.org/virtualexhibit/6measuringsound.html

Not a pointless subject I think. One that might well be of note to many. About $170 for a small meter.

Any new vehicle, minus an Ariel Atom or Caterham Super 7, is going to be very quiet. If noise if a concern, that would involve a test drive by the person with the highly sensitive ears.

[dirtyjeffer]

i'm pretty sure most of the vehicles in this class are all pretty comparable in terms of noise...as well, sometimes certain things play more of a factor into noise than the vehicle itself...tires being one...as well, if you really are looking at a vehicle with very low cabin noise, you're likely going to be stepping up to the premium class of vehicles, as well as sedans, as SUVs are traditionally louder due to their open cargo areas and boxier shape...i don't think significant cabin noise reduction would really play much of a factory until you get into something above $80k.

[Rupert]

Most folk have sensitive ears until degraded over time by noise do you think? This is a more valuable number than a few more horsepower...for me anyway.

Gosh $50k for a bit of felt...git arrrt.

[dirtyjeffer]

Most folk have sensitive ears until degraded over time by noise do you think? This is a more valuable number than a few more horsepower...for me anyway.

most people will experience some hearing loss as they age, meaning some of those who can afford those really quiet cars likely wouldn't hear a bit more noise anyway...in any case, as i stated before, most of the cars are going to be pretty similar anyway, so i don't think you'd notice a significant difference between like vehicles...as well, there might be a decent car, but has noisy tires on it, so you may exclude that vehicle because of it...of course, when the tires need to be changed out, and perhaps some different tires are used, you find a substantial improvement...same vehicle, different tires...the opposite could happen too...you might buy a vehicle with heavy weighting on the road noise portion, then when you replace the tires, find it's noise to be considerably higher...upgrading tires is far less expensive than buying another car.

[Rupert]

I see what you guys write but you are wrong. Cars can be quieter...easily...it does not take much. This is why there are companies out there that provide silent kits..."that seem to work".https://www.b-quiet.com/collections/all

If this becomes a sales factor for car manufacturer's...it will be done by them...instead of having to go after-market. It's silly to refuse a better product.

[Fobroader]

Outside of a few straight pipe racecars and open topped, mud tired Jeeps, I've never been in loud, factory stock, newer car.

[Rupert]

Deaf then..

[Fobroader]

Deaf then..

Working with jet engines since I was about 20...yeah, I'll buy that.

[Rupert]

Sorry...it was meant to be humorous but clearly was not.