Topic: First Drive: 2017 Nissan Qashqai

[AutoTrader.ca]

Here comes a new challenger
Read more...

[ChaosphereIX]

 

seems competent in the segment

it is a crossover

there is nothing more to say, they are all the same, pick your fav warranty and price bracket

meh

[Jaeger]

The Rogue does well for Nissan and this should, too.  Space advantage over the CX3 is significant, but the Mazda is the clear winner on looks (to these eyes, anyway).

Not sure why the HRV gets relentlessly slammed, but then I haven't driven one.  Having sat in one at the dealership, though, I'm at a loss to understand all the negativity.

[Noto]

Jaeger, drive an HRV and you'll understand.

I'm not quite sure why Nissan doesn't offer the 1.6T from the Juke in this at least as an option.  For $32k for the loaded model, that engine is laughable.

Also, "soon-to-launch Toyota C-HR" - it's already launched.

I don't think any of the subcompact CUVs have a power liftgate, and the options otherwise are good... Loaded comes in what, $4k cheaper than the Rogue?

My only real beef is the powertrain.

Stephanie, the seats and the ride in the Rogue are sublime - is this the case in the Qashqai as well?

[Rupert]

   A report of a vehicle with fold down rear seats that has photographs needs at least two of the photo's showing the rear seat backs folded down. This is an important feature for everyone....to know what this looks like. One photo from the back and one from the side...to show how horizontal the backs are and thus how useful.

   I find that it is hard to measure the size of these things and Nissan's seem to be many and close in this aspect. I have no problem with a 2L engine...plenty. Good to see that Nissan realizes that there is still a large sector of the public that only wants FWD...or needs for that matter. Nice looking but I think that the Rogue is a better size being enough larger to be of value.

[Blueprint]

This thing nails "wants" for Joe-Anne Public. Looks good, inside and out, although we've only seen top-trims so far. At these prices, I predict it will outsell anything in its class. The Toyota's styling may just scare off the brand's buyers over to Nissan.

[JRM]

I've seen the Toyota C-HR.  It's quite a stretch to put it in the subcompact CUV class.  It doesn't even offer AWD and looks more like a slightly elevated hatch back with tacky plastic cladding.   Having said that I like the looks of the Cashqai inside and out.  I'd have to take it for thorough test drive to determine the sufficiency of power, though.

[OliverD]

Looks like the drivetrain is the weakest part of this package. When 150-170 hp in a compact sedan or hatch is the norm, it's tough to accept less in a heavier AWD CUV.

Nissans don't do much for me but this actually looks like a pretty good package. They should offer the 1.6T or the 2.5 as an option though.

[Noto]

Looks like the drivetrain is the weakest part of this package. When 150-170 hp in a compact sedan or hatch is the norm, it's tough to accept less in a heavier AWD CUV.

Nissans don't do much for me but this actually looks like a pretty good package. They should offer the 1.6T or the 2.5 as an option though.

It seems like the manufacturers did a reverse auction type of thing.  Subaru held steadfastly with the 2.slow, the HRV is a wimp, and even the CX-3 does the same thing.  Only the RVR has the option for MOAR POWAH ... And how are its sales doing? 

Manufacturers seem to think fuel economy is more important. Perhaps true, but then why is the Qashqai so poor?

[Mike]

Manufacturers Consumers seem to do think fuel economy is more important.

Every market research study has fuel economy right near the top and power no where to be found. We who like power are the minuscule minority.

[Fobroader]

Looks like the drivetrain is the weakest part of this package. When 150-170 hp in a compact sedan or hatch is the norm, it's tough to accept less in a heavier AWD CUV.

Nissans don't do much for me but this actually looks like a pretty good package. They should offer the 1.6T or the 2.5 as an option though.

Yup....140hp in a heavy CUV does not make me remotely interested. Needs 50% more power to make it remotely interesting.

[EV-Light]

Manufacturers Consumers seem to do think fuel economy is more important.

Every market research study has fuel economy right near the top and power no where to be found. We who like power are the minuscule minority.

Lol so disagree...this was a merely cheap move for Nissan. This Nissan quiche thing will be super underpowered


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OliverD]

Manufacturers Consumers seem to do think fuel economy is more important.

Every market research study has fuel economy right near the top and power no where to be found. We who like power are the minuscule minority.

Lol so disagree...this was a merely cheap move for Nissan. This Nissan quiche thing will be super underpowered

You disagree with what exactly? 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

He's a Trump supporter. They're easily triggered by things like "research".

[Noto]

Manufacturers Consumers seem to do think fuel economy is more important.

Every market research study has fuel economy right near the top and power no where to be found. We who like power are the minuscule minority.

Yes, absolutes are completely telltale...

"Rate the following in terms of importance to you:  Power, Fuel Economy, Safety, Value, Price, Styling, ... "

Of course, that ignores folks who would trade, say, 1 MPG for 30hp, or in the case of the Qashqai, save 1MPG and gain ~30hp.  No sh!t the majority of the world would rather their Corolla to have 132hp and get a combined rating in the ~7L/100km range instead of a 507hp bi-turbo V8 that would consume more than double that and on "premium" fuel.

The Corolla XRS had the Camry engine back in the day.  It offered only 26hp more, but drank about 2L/100km more.  That tradeoff probably wasn't worth it and sales showed that (also, price was a big detail - it was more than $30k for a loaded Corolla XRS at the time MSRP!). 

In the case of Subaru's or Nissan's 2.0L vs 2.5L engines, the applications have clearly shown that the smaller engine nets no better fuel economy even in smaller vehicles.  Look at your own bread and butter:

[mlin32]

I'm sure the Kumquat will sell just fine, just like all the other bland Nissan products. Good consumption figures, accommodating interior and boot space, and the North-American crowd-pleasing rubber-band CVT transmission. Nissan usually throws in nice incentives too. As an appliance for shuttling around, it will be a good seller.

Next !

[Mike]

Manufacturers Consumers seem to do think fuel economy is more important.

Every market research study has fuel economy right near the top and power no where to be found. We who like power are the minuscule minority.

Yes, absolutes are completely telltale...

"Rate the following in terms of importance to you:  Power, Fuel Economy, Safety, Value, Price, Styling, ... "

Of course, that ignores folks who would trade, say, 1 MPG for 30hp, or in the case of the Qashqai, save 1MPG and gain ~30hp.  No sh!t the majority of the world would rather their Corolla to have 132hp and get a combined rating in the ~7L/100km range instead of a 507hp bi-turbo V8 that would consume more than double that and on "premium" fuel.

The Corolla XRS had the Camry engine back in the day.  It offered only 26hp more, but drank about 2L/100km more.  That tradeoff probably wasn't worth it and sales showed that (also, price was a big detail - it was more than $30k for a loaded Corolla XRS at the time MSRP!). 

In the case of Subaru's or Nissan's 2.0L vs 2.5L engines, the applications have clearly shown that the smaller engine nets no better fuel economy even in smaller vehicles.  Look at your own bread and butter:

I believe you're missing the point. I'm talking within segments, not some wild Corolla vs Maserati hyperbole. Every vehicle, every trim, every segment has detailed information from consumers who bought, considered or rejected said vehicle. The majority of folks will trade 1 MPG for 30 hp. Will some go the other way, yes. But the research shows the majority do not.

[ChaosphereIX]

Manufacturers Consumers seem to do think fuel economy is more important.

Every market research study has fuel economy right near the top and power no where to be found. We who like power are the minuscule minority.

Yes, absolutes are completely telltale...

"Rate the following in terms of importance to you:  Power, Fuel Economy, Safety, Value, Price, Styling, ... "

Of course, that ignores folks who would trade, say, 1 MPG for 30hp, or in the case of the Qashqai, save 1MPG and gain ~30hp.  No sh!t the majority of the world would rather their Corolla to have 132hp and get a combined rating in the ~7L/100km range instead of a 507hp bi-turbo V8 that would consume more than double that and on "premium" fuel.

The Corolla XRS had the Camry engine back in the day.  It offered only 26hp more, but drank about 2L/100km more.  That tradeoff probably wasn't worth it and sales showed that (also, price was a big detail - it was more than $30k for a loaded Corolla XRS at the time MSRP!). 

In the case of Subaru's or Nissan's 2.0L vs 2.5L engines, the applications have clearly shown that the smaller engine nets no better fuel economy even in smaller vehicles.  Look at your own bread and butter:

I believe you're missing the point. I'm talking within segments, not some wild Corolla vs Maserati hyperbole. Every vehicle, every trim, every segment has detailed information from consumers who bought, considered or rejected said vehicle. The majority of folks will trade 1 MPG for 30 hp. Will some go the other way, yes. But the research shows the majority do not.

people are wrong then

there comes a point where there just is not enough power to move these ever-increasingly fat cars around



yes, 120hp was enough to move around a car in the 90s, but they weighed a lot less back then. Modern cars need more power, especially with the ever increasing power in other segments, let alone the CUV one where turbos and 0-60 measurements are actually a thing for these baby strollers / shopping baskets

I would gladly trade in a few mpg for some extra power. Not going to notice anyway, and the numbers might even become a wash because you will not have to floor it all the time to just keep up with traffic.

[Mike]

I would gladly trade in a few mpg for some extra power. Not going to notice anyway, and the numbers might even become a wash because you will not have to floor it all the time to just keep up with traffic.

Me as well. Can't wait to get my WRX or STI. But we are a dying breed. 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I was fine with the power output of the CrossTrek. The aggressive throttle tip in made it feel sprightly around town, where it spent 99% of its time. On the highway it could have used a bit more power, but as long as a person was driving for the power they had, not the power they wanted, it got alone fine there also.

I was well pleased with the fuel economy though, which could dip down to the 6.0L/100km range.

In day to day driving, I accelerate at the same rate whether I was driving the 148hp Crossy, the 256hp Outback or the current 170hp Passat, just like the rest of the traffic around me.