Review: 2009 Nissan Murano LE
07-08-09, 03:43 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Review: 2009 Nissan Murano LE
By CL member request, a Review of the 2009 Nissan Murano LE
http://www.nissanusa.com/murano/
In a Nutshell: Still geeky-styled, IMO, but much better fit/finish and interior quality than in the past.
.jpg)
While some of the other CL-requested reviews are on hold right now due to lack of availability, I received a request for a review of the new Nissan Murano. So, I will do that now, as there is an adequate supply of Muranos right now, and availability is not a problem*.
The Nissan Murano was first introduced in 2003 as a car-based, unibody, FWD/AWD SUV, and was Nissan's answer to the hugely successful Toyota RAV4/Highlander, Honda CRV/Pilot, Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner, Mitsubishi Outlander/Endeavor, and Subaru's Outbacks. Nissan had previously introduced some smaller, compact, AWD wagons (the Axxess was one example) , but they did not prove successful in the American market. The larger mid-size Nissan Pathfinder SUV, with its part-time 4WD, was car-like and unibody enough (at the time) to serve as a successful on-road SUV for daily use, but was too large and heavy to really compete with the smaller car-based SUVs in gas mileage, handling, or manuverability, and the archaic part-time 4WD was a drawback that Nissan did not address for years, despite my constant suggestions. Since then, the Pathfinder has been re-designed as a rather nice but ubiquitous truck-based SUV (with multi-function 4WD/AWD), well-suited for both off-roading and pavement use (I recently did a Pathfinder review), and the very large Nissan Armada was introduced to compete with the Toyota Sequoia and large domestic SUV's (The Armada will soon be dropped). So, until the new, smaller, compact, car-based Nissan Rogue SUV was recently introduced, the Murano, alone, had to pretty much carry Nissan's banner against a rather large number of competing compact and mid-size car-based SUVs, while the Pathfinder and Armada competed with the bigger boys and off-roaders.
And compete it did. The Murano became one of Nissan's best-selling vehicles in history, despite the fact that it was introduced during a period when Nissan was almost bankrupt. Renault's buyout of the company, and the effort to make Nissan profitable again, led to the famous cost-cutting-orders from CEO Carlos Ghosn that resulted in rather shoddy quality and distressingly cheap Nissan interiors. The Altima and Murano, at the time, were probably the two best examples of shoddiness, and the Maxima soon became that way also. I remember some of the Nissan Mickey-Mouse-Ear-shaped dash-gauge clusters, at that time, that were so cheap and flimsy, with dime-store plastic, that you could rock the whole gauge assembly back and forth with a couple of fingers.
Yet, despite its interior cheapness, the Murano sold extremely well. Like competing small/mid-sized car-based SUVs from other companies, it offered just what many customers wanted at the time.....a reasonable price, all-weather security, room to carry things (though the egg-shaped styling cut down a little on space efficiency), reasonably good gas mileage by SUV standards, and car-like manuvering/steering. It has remained a good seller since its introduction, and, fortunately, the insultingly cheap interiors are gone. Nissan is now far more profitable than it was in 2003, and can afford to put better-quality materials into its vehicles. I found the present LE interior head-and-shoulders above the first Muranos I looked at 6-7 years ago. Reliability was spotty at first, with some hardware problems, but has since risen to better-than-average, and the vehicle is on Consumer Reports' Recommended list. I myself have never liked the body styling, finding it too geeky and egg-shaped for my tastes, but, of course, that is a subjective matter, and the Murano's continuing good sales show that not everyone shares that opinion. And, if I like a vehicle's mechanicals and underpinnings enough, I'll buy it even if I don't particularly like the looks (I would own and drive some Subarus, for example, such as the new Impreza/Outback Sport hatchback, even if I didn't care for the styling).
In the American market, for 2009, the Murano comes in four different versions; the base-model S, starting at $27,680, the mid-line SL, starting at $29,230, the SL/360 Value package, starting at $33,280, and the top-line LE, starting at $37,260. All models come with a 265 HP version of Nissan's ubiquitous 3.5L V6 (a slightly lower output than in some sister Nissan vehicles with the same engine) and a Xtronic CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission), Nissan having turned to CVTs for a number of its vehicles (Nissan, unlike some other companies, actually does a good job on its CVTs....more on that below). S and SL models come with a choice of FWD or AWD (most customers, of course, choose AWD), LE models only AWD. Since the review request was, if possible, for a top-line LE, that is what I chose * (and, of course, the LE version is rather pricey, as you can essentially get a Lexus RX350 for the same money).
Details coming up.
*In general, nationwide availability of the Murano is not a problem, but there may be some spot-shortages, as there was at the Nissan shop I was at today. They only had a few 2009 models in stock, but did have a blue LE AWD that had just come in and was being inspected and PDI'ed. When it was done, I went in and drove it myself right out of the PDI service bay for the test-drive.
Model Reviewed: 2009 Nissan Murano LE.
Base Price: $37,260
Options:
Splash Guards: $125
Dual Moonroof: $1170
3-Piece Floor Mats: $120
Illuminated Door Sills: $280
Roof Cross bars: $190
Destination/Freight: $780 (slightly more than the average shipping charge)
List Price as Reviewed: $39,925
Drivetrain: AWD, transversely-mounted 3.5L DOHC V6, 265 HP @ 6000 RPM, Torque, 248 Ft-lbs. @ 4400 RPM,
X-Tronic CVT (Continuusly-Variable-Transmission)
EPA Mileage Rating: 18 City, 23 Highway (same for FWD and AWD)
Exterior Color: Deep Sapphire Blue
Interior: Beige Leather
PLUSSES:
Same EPA mileage for AWD as RWD...no additional penalty.
Reliability record now better then average.
Built in the U.S. (according to the sticker) with American labor.
"Security Plus", factory-approved (not dealer or aftermarket) extended warranty available.
Smooth, quiet V6 engine.
Fairly good HP/torque, but not as strong as some other Nissan V6 engines.
Superb CVT transmission, despite the lack of distinct gear ranges.
Hush-quiet ride with low wind noise.
Fairly good ride comfort.
Low tire noise.
Good brake pedal feel and response.
Classy chrome grille (though the styling isn't my favorite).
Good-to-Excellent paint job.
Well-done exterior trim.
Smooth, easy-swivel/snap exterior side mirrors.
Nice large outside mirrors.
Splash guards and lower-body chrome/vinyl cladding help ward off paint damage.
Fairly simple, easy-to-use button/control layout.
Nice fore-aft CVT shifter has no anoying zig-zags.
Power tilt/telescope steering column.
Well-done steering wheel.
Clear, simple, easy-to-read gauges.
NAV/back-up TV screen not as complex as on some other vehicles.
Double-stitched leather seats.
Well-done, quality interior hardware/trim, far superior to earier models.
Excellent, powerful stereo sound quality.
Good front/rear seat legroom.
Good front headroom.
Fairly good rear footroom.
Easy-Pull-strap rea seat fold-down.
Remote trunk lever for rear-seat fold-down.
Well-finished cargo area.
MINUSES:
Top-level LE version rather pricey.
Output of 3.5L V6 not as high as in some other Nissan/Infiniti products.
The usual somewhat dull paint colors.
Awful underhood layout.
OK but not particularly thick sheet metal.
Fairly poor rear vision from the triangular C/D pillars.
Slow, sluggish steering response.
Somewhat numb power-steering feel.
Low but noticeable body roll.
CVT transmission, otherwise superb, lacks distinct ranges and paddle-shifts.
Lightweight-plastic side-mirror housings.
Rather flat, non-supportive seat cushions.
Otherwise nice seat leather has a rough, grainy feel and lacks smoothness.
Temporary spare tire.
Aero-shaped rear roofline limits some cargo space.
Marginal rear headroom, under the sunroof housing, for tall people.
No 3rd-row seat option available.
Lower-dash can bump the knees of some tall people.
EXTERIOR:
As you first walk up to it, there's no mistaking a Murano for anything else than that......a Murano. Though its basic shape and grille has some similiaraties to the much smaller Nissan Versa 5-door, hatchback, the Murano, in general, is a uniquely-styled automotive product that definitely gets itself noticed. Although styling, in general, is subjective, most people either tend to like or dislike the design.....there doesn't seem to be much middle ground. It hasn't changed much, in the way of exterior looks, since its 2003 introduction, though the trim quality and fit/finish today is far superior to the 2003 and 2004 models. I'm generally not a fan of its egg-shaped styling, but its general popularity with the public cannot be denied. The body sheet metal is not one of the stronger points...though not tinny, it feels fairly thin. The paint job, though not Lexus-slick, is done quite well, with a smooth, even gloss and a general lack of orange peel. I generally liked the Sapphire Blue and Merlot Red colors, but, apart from those two, it was the usual color-palate from the city morgue. The arc-shaped grille's chrome and logo looked classy, but I wasn't a fan of its shape. The vinyl/plastic/chrome lower-body-surround cladding and (optional) splash guards help protect the lower-body from paint damage. The twin side mirrors had a very smooth, easy, swivel/snap action, and a nice large viewing area, but the plastic housings felt a little thin and flimsy. Most of the exterior trim looked and felt well-done. I generally liked the look and shape of the LE's spoked-alloy wheels. The doors and hood, despite the somewhat thin sheet metal, had a fairly solid feel and sound when closing.
UNDERHOOD:
I forgot to note, like I usually do, if the hood has a prop-rod, gas struts, or an insulation pad (I'm sorry about that), and Nissan doesn't note that in their Murano specs, so I couldn't hunt it up either. But the engine runs so quietly (more on that below) that it almost certainly has an insulation pad......I'd bet on that. But the general underhood layout, like on some other V6 Nissan/Infiniti vehicles I've seen, is awful. The ubiquitous, transverse-mount, 3.5 liter DOHC V6, (old staple with Nissan), fits in extremely tightly, to the point where I may be a little concerned about enough air circulation around the engine for cooling....also the case with a few other Nissan V6 underhood compartments. I didn't note any signs of overheating on the one I drove (its cooling system, of course, was brand-new), but some car magazines have noted more-than-average engine heat in their tests of some other Nissan/Infiniti products, notably the G37. Of course, Nissan has a standard 5/60 drivetrain warranty to protect against any heat-related engine damage, and a factory-approved extended warranty is also available. The tight-fitting engine, of course, its plastic cover, and other underhood covers limits access to most components, so this is definitely not a do-it-yourself vehicle (few are nowadays). Filler caps, reservoirs, and a couple of dipsticks are just about all that is easily reached underhood.
INTERIOR:
The 2009 LE interior was MUCH more impressive than on early-model Muranos, which were, IMO, insultingly cheap. There was plenty of headroom up front, under the (optional) double-sunroof housing, somewhat less so in the rear, under the rear sunroof housing, because the rear seats are raised slightly, Land-Rover-Style, for a view out front, but the ceiling isn't raised to compensate. Legroom in both front and rear is fine, footroom in the back just adequate for big shoes (like my size 15s). The rear seats have fairly nice leather (a little grainy-looking and feeling), a pull-down center armrest with cupholders, and a nice easy-pull-strap at the bottom for dropping the seatbacks down and sliding the bottom cushion forward to expand the cargo area. A remote lever for this is also in the trunk.....more on that below.
The front seats are fairly comfortable, but their flattish cushions/bolsters lack some side support.......and, of course, sports/racing-car-cornering seat support is generally not needed in this type of vehicle. The forward-tilt of the headrests can, in some cases, impact slightly on neck comfort, but not enough for a complaint. The general level of the interior trim/hardware was excellent, and worthy of the car's 38-40K price. My test car had beige leather with wood-tone trim, and the wood trim was nicely-colored and classy-looking. All of the buttons/controls/***** had a solid, high-quality feel, and the buttons, in general were simple and easy to use. Even the NAV screen and the Infiniti-style ****/adjuster control was not as complex as on a number of other vehicles I've tried. The screen doubles as a TV camera, with distance-markings, when the car is in reverse for backing up. The colorful, clear, easy-to-read primary gauges were superb. The steering wheel was nicely-shaped, did not hide things, and had nice, smooth, classy beige-leather wrapping, and the stiches, unlike some others, were not uncomforable. The stereo sound quality, especially with bass, was way up there (just perfect for Twisted Sister's Dee Snider doing their classic "We're Not Gonna Take It". The dual-climate-control buttons and ***** were likewise clear and easy to use. The steering column had nice, convienent, power tilt/telescope functions. The CVT transmission shifter had a nice fore/aft motion that eliminated the annoying zig-zags, but lacked manual-shift paddles on the column.....more on the transmission below.
My only other complaints with the interior (and they were minor) were the somewhat limited rear-vision out the back from the large, reverse-triangular C/D-pillars and the lower-dash protrusions up front that could rub the knees or shins of some tall people, depensing on how they had the seat adjusted. But, all in all, a very well-done interior, though it must be remembered that the LE model runs close to $40,000, and lesser S and SL Muranos might not be quite so impressive inside.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
My test car had a power-opening/closing trunk lid that did much of the work for you, and it opened up to a generally well-finished cargo area. A standard pull cargo-shade covered up the area's contents (a number of vehicles are eliminating this as a standard feature to cut costs, and making it an accessory). Nice beige carpeting (to match the interior) covered the trunk floor and walls. a nice, convienient pull-lever in the right wall lowers the second-row seats to expand the cargo area. No 3rd-row seat option is available.....for that, you have to move up to the slightly larger Nissan Pathfinder. But, IMO, a 3rd-row seat, even for kids, would be impractical in this vehicle anyway, since the egg-shaped, drop-down rear roofline cuts into the available room. A pull-up cover on the left-floor exposes an under-floor cubby-compartment (a similiar one on the right holds the jack), and......you guessed it.....a temporary spare lies under the floor, under another, lower, awkward-to-pull-up cover. Why a real spare tire/wheel can't go into a $40,000 vehicle simply beats me. I know I sound like a broken phonograph record, but I see this on almost every vehicle now that I review, but it still doesn't make it right. But, considering the superb improvements made on the new Nissan interiors over earlier models, I guess we can still tolerate some Carlos Ghosn-type cost-cutting in other places to compensate.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the ubiquitous 3.5L V6 by a push-button, with a transponder-fob in the vicinity. The engine comes to life smoothly and quietly, further confirming the presence of an underhood sound-insulation pad (even though I forgot to check it). The engine remains smooth and quiet on the road, with little exhaust noise. Its power level, with 265 HP and 248 ft-lbs. of torque, is adequate for an AWD SUV of this size/weight range, but not quite up to that of some other versions of Nissan 3.5L/3.7L V6's, some of which can reach over 300 HP. Don't try to drag-race people on Friday nights...chances are you will lose. This powerplant, though, even if not the most powerful version, has a good reputation for engineering, reliability, and smooth operation.
The CVT transmission is a gem, despite its noted lack of programmable gear "ranges" or manual-shift controls. Nissan has developed a reputation for making good CVT's, and it shows. Operation was smooth, quiet, and seamless, with virtually none of the "motorboating", "rubber-banding", or RPM-flares thet you get with some CVT's. Long-term durability, of course (as it is with any CVT) is still,a question mark, but, according to Consumer Reports, the Nissan CVTs have generally held up OK in the few years they have been on the road. And, again, the standard 5/60 drivetrain warranty and optional extended warranties will keep you covered if you need it. To top it off....as I mentioned above, the CVT has a nice fore/aft shift-lever motion, without those annoying zig-zags.
The chassis/suspension/tires, without question, are biased much more toward comfort than sharp handling. The power-steering feel bordered on numb, and steering response was slow and rather sluggish. Body roll was not excessive, but was noticeable. To compensate, though, ride comfort was noticeably better-than-average for mid-sized SUVs, and the noise level due to good wind and tire-noise isolation, was very low......almost to the Lexus RX350 level. This vehicle cruises almost like an RX....but, of course, costs virtually as much. The brakes were also better-than-average in their pedal feel, with good response, virtually no sponginess, even modulation, and the pedal placement was good.....it did not cause any hang-ups for my big size-15 clown-shoes in the transition from gas pedal to brake.
THE VERDICT:
If you have an older Murano, and like its styling but are unsatisfied with its El Cheapo fit/finish and material quality, by all means, don't give up on Nissan......go take a look at the new 2009 Murano. The difference in fit/finish, material quality, and interior plushness is just enormous, especially in the top-line LE model. You can now not only relax in smooth, quiet comfort and enjoy the new-found interior plushness, but also enjoy its improving repair record (though long-term durability of the CVT may still be questionable). The AWD, of course, gives all-weather security, and there is reasonably good space effiency inside except for the drop-down rear roofline/cargo area.
But the exterior styling is still a turn-off to some people (me included); the CVT, good as it is, could benefit from more programmable "ranges" and shift controls, the steering is numb and sluggish, and the V6's power, though adequate, won't get you any trophies at the drag strip. And, as I've mentioned before, the top-line LE model is expensive by Nissan standards, topping out at almost $40,000....for that money, you could have a Lexus RX350 (as I would choose).
But, all in all, kudos to Nissan for atoning for their past sins in the fit/finish/material quality areas and now making some more impressive vehicles. The Murano LE, though not chump-change, is an impressive vehicle if you don't place sporty performance as a high priority, and, IMO, is a good alternative to the RX350 if you don't live near a Lexus dealer or otherwise would prefer a Nissan product. The Murano is built in American plants, with American labor, and, to boot, is generally less-expensive than the RX to service.
http://www.nissanusa.com/murano/
In a Nutshell: Still geeky-styled, IMO, but much better fit/finish and interior quality than in the past.
While some of the other CL-requested reviews are on hold right now due to lack of availability, I received a request for a review of the new Nissan Murano. So, I will do that now, as there is an adequate supply of Muranos right now, and availability is not a problem*.
The Nissan Murano was first introduced in 2003 as a car-based, unibody, FWD/AWD SUV, and was Nissan's answer to the hugely successful Toyota RAV4/Highlander, Honda CRV/Pilot, Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner, Mitsubishi Outlander/Endeavor, and Subaru's Outbacks. Nissan had previously introduced some smaller, compact, AWD wagons (the Axxess was one example) , but they did not prove successful in the American market. The larger mid-size Nissan Pathfinder SUV, with its part-time 4WD, was car-like and unibody enough (at the time) to serve as a successful on-road SUV for daily use, but was too large and heavy to really compete with the smaller car-based SUVs in gas mileage, handling, or manuverability, and the archaic part-time 4WD was a drawback that Nissan did not address for years, despite my constant suggestions. Since then, the Pathfinder has been re-designed as a rather nice but ubiquitous truck-based SUV (with multi-function 4WD/AWD), well-suited for both off-roading and pavement use (I recently did a Pathfinder review), and the very large Nissan Armada was introduced to compete with the Toyota Sequoia and large domestic SUV's (The Armada will soon be dropped). So, until the new, smaller, compact, car-based Nissan Rogue SUV was recently introduced, the Murano, alone, had to pretty much carry Nissan's banner against a rather large number of competing compact and mid-size car-based SUVs, while the Pathfinder and Armada competed with the bigger boys and off-roaders.
And compete it did. The Murano became one of Nissan's best-selling vehicles in history, despite the fact that it was introduced during a period when Nissan was almost bankrupt. Renault's buyout of the company, and the effort to make Nissan profitable again, led to the famous cost-cutting-orders from CEO Carlos Ghosn that resulted in rather shoddy quality and distressingly cheap Nissan interiors. The Altima and Murano, at the time, were probably the two best examples of shoddiness, and the Maxima soon became that way also. I remember some of the Nissan Mickey-Mouse-Ear-shaped dash-gauge clusters, at that time, that were so cheap and flimsy, with dime-store plastic, that you could rock the whole gauge assembly back and forth with a couple of fingers.
Yet, despite its interior cheapness, the Murano sold extremely well. Like competing small/mid-sized car-based SUVs from other companies, it offered just what many customers wanted at the time.....a reasonable price, all-weather security, room to carry things (though the egg-shaped styling cut down a little on space efficiency), reasonably good gas mileage by SUV standards, and car-like manuvering/steering. It has remained a good seller since its introduction, and, fortunately, the insultingly cheap interiors are gone. Nissan is now far more profitable than it was in 2003, and can afford to put better-quality materials into its vehicles. I found the present LE interior head-and-shoulders above the first Muranos I looked at 6-7 years ago. Reliability was spotty at first, with some hardware problems, but has since risen to better-than-average, and the vehicle is on Consumer Reports' Recommended list. I myself have never liked the body styling, finding it too geeky and egg-shaped for my tastes, but, of course, that is a subjective matter, and the Murano's continuing good sales show that not everyone shares that opinion. And, if I like a vehicle's mechanicals and underpinnings enough, I'll buy it even if I don't particularly like the looks (I would own and drive some Subarus, for example, such as the new Impreza/Outback Sport hatchback, even if I didn't care for the styling).
In the American market, for 2009, the Murano comes in four different versions; the base-model S, starting at $27,680, the mid-line SL, starting at $29,230, the SL/360 Value package, starting at $33,280, and the top-line LE, starting at $37,260. All models come with a 265 HP version of Nissan's ubiquitous 3.5L V6 (a slightly lower output than in some sister Nissan vehicles with the same engine) and a Xtronic CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission), Nissan having turned to CVTs for a number of its vehicles (Nissan, unlike some other companies, actually does a good job on its CVTs....more on that below). S and SL models come with a choice of FWD or AWD (most customers, of course, choose AWD), LE models only AWD. Since the review request was, if possible, for a top-line LE, that is what I chose * (and, of course, the LE version is rather pricey, as you can essentially get a Lexus RX350 for the same money).
Details coming up.
*In general, nationwide availability of the Murano is not a problem, but there may be some spot-shortages, as there was at the Nissan shop I was at today. They only had a few 2009 models in stock, but did have a blue LE AWD that had just come in and was being inspected and PDI'ed. When it was done, I went in and drove it myself right out of the PDI service bay for the test-drive.
Model Reviewed: 2009 Nissan Murano LE.
Base Price: $37,260
Options:
Splash Guards: $125
Dual Moonroof: $1170
3-Piece Floor Mats: $120
Illuminated Door Sills: $280
Roof Cross bars: $190
Destination/Freight: $780 (slightly more than the average shipping charge)
List Price as Reviewed: $39,925
Drivetrain: AWD, transversely-mounted 3.5L DOHC V6, 265 HP @ 6000 RPM, Torque, 248 Ft-lbs. @ 4400 RPM,
X-Tronic CVT (Continuusly-Variable-Transmission)
EPA Mileage Rating: 18 City, 23 Highway (same for FWD and AWD)
Exterior Color: Deep Sapphire Blue
Interior: Beige Leather
PLUSSES:
Same EPA mileage for AWD as RWD...no additional penalty.
Reliability record now better then average.
Built in the U.S. (according to the sticker) with American labor.
"Security Plus", factory-approved (not dealer or aftermarket) extended warranty available.
Smooth, quiet V6 engine.
Fairly good HP/torque, but not as strong as some other Nissan V6 engines.
Superb CVT transmission, despite the lack of distinct gear ranges.
Hush-quiet ride with low wind noise.
Fairly good ride comfort.
Low tire noise.
Good brake pedal feel and response.
Classy chrome grille (though the styling isn't my favorite).
Good-to-Excellent paint job.
Well-done exterior trim.
Smooth, easy-swivel/snap exterior side mirrors.
Nice large outside mirrors.
Splash guards and lower-body chrome/vinyl cladding help ward off paint damage.
Fairly simple, easy-to-use button/control layout.
Nice fore-aft CVT shifter has no anoying zig-zags.
Power tilt/telescope steering column.
Well-done steering wheel.
Clear, simple, easy-to-read gauges.
NAV/back-up TV screen not as complex as on some other vehicles.
Double-stitched leather seats.
Well-done, quality interior hardware/trim, far superior to earier models.
Excellent, powerful stereo sound quality.
Good front/rear seat legroom.
Good front headroom.
Fairly good rear footroom.
Easy-Pull-strap rea seat fold-down.
Remote trunk lever for rear-seat fold-down.
Well-finished cargo area.
MINUSES:
Top-level LE version rather pricey.
Output of 3.5L V6 not as high as in some other Nissan/Infiniti products.
The usual somewhat dull paint colors.
Awful underhood layout.
OK but not particularly thick sheet metal.
Fairly poor rear vision from the triangular C/D pillars.
Slow, sluggish steering response.
Somewhat numb power-steering feel.
Low but noticeable body roll.
CVT transmission, otherwise superb, lacks distinct ranges and paddle-shifts.
Lightweight-plastic side-mirror housings.
Rather flat, non-supportive seat cushions.
Otherwise nice seat leather has a rough, grainy feel and lacks smoothness.
Temporary spare tire.
Aero-shaped rear roofline limits some cargo space.
Marginal rear headroom, under the sunroof housing, for tall people.
No 3rd-row seat option available.
Lower-dash can bump the knees of some tall people.
EXTERIOR:
As you first walk up to it, there's no mistaking a Murano for anything else than that......a Murano. Though its basic shape and grille has some similiaraties to the much smaller Nissan Versa 5-door, hatchback, the Murano, in general, is a uniquely-styled automotive product that definitely gets itself noticed. Although styling, in general, is subjective, most people either tend to like or dislike the design.....there doesn't seem to be much middle ground. It hasn't changed much, in the way of exterior looks, since its 2003 introduction, though the trim quality and fit/finish today is far superior to the 2003 and 2004 models. I'm generally not a fan of its egg-shaped styling, but its general popularity with the public cannot be denied. The body sheet metal is not one of the stronger points...though not tinny, it feels fairly thin. The paint job, though not Lexus-slick, is done quite well, with a smooth, even gloss and a general lack of orange peel. I generally liked the Sapphire Blue and Merlot Red colors, but, apart from those two, it was the usual color-palate from the city morgue. The arc-shaped grille's chrome and logo looked classy, but I wasn't a fan of its shape. The vinyl/plastic/chrome lower-body-surround cladding and (optional) splash guards help protect the lower-body from paint damage. The twin side mirrors had a very smooth, easy, swivel/snap action, and a nice large viewing area, but the plastic housings felt a little thin and flimsy. Most of the exterior trim looked and felt well-done. I generally liked the look and shape of the LE's spoked-alloy wheels. The doors and hood, despite the somewhat thin sheet metal, had a fairly solid feel and sound when closing.
UNDERHOOD:
I forgot to note, like I usually do, if the hood has a prop-rod, gas struts, or an insulation pad (I'm sorry about that), and Nissan doesn't note that in their Murano specs, so I couldn't hunt it up either. But the engine runs so quietly (more on that below) that it almost certainly has an insulation pad......I'd bet on that. But the general underhood layout, like on some other V6 Nissan/Infiniti vehicles I've seen, is awful. The ubiquitous, transverse-mount, 3.5 liter DOHC V6, (old staple with Nissan), fits in extremely tightly, to the point where I may be a little concerned about enough air circulation around the engine for cooling....also the case with a few other Nissan V6 underhood compartments. I didn't note any signs of overheating on the one I drove (its cooling system, of course, was brand-new), but some car magazines have noted more-than-average engine heat in their tests of some other Nissan/Infiniti products, notably the G37. Of course, Nissan has a standard 5/60 drivetrain warranty to protect against any heat-related engine damage, and a factory-approved extended warranty is also available. The tight-fitting engine, of course, its plastic cover, and other underhood covers limits access to most components, so this is definitely not a do-it-yourself vehicle (few are nowadays). Filler caps, reservoirs, and a couple of dipsticks are just about all that is easily reached underhood.
INTERIOR:
The 2009 LE interior was MUCH more impressive than on early-model Muranos, which were, IMO, insultingly cheap. There was plenty of headroom up front, under the (optional) double-sunroof housing, somewhat less so in the rear, under the rear sunroof housing, because the rear seats are raised slightly, Land-Rover-Style, for a view out front, but the ceiling isn't raised to compensate. Legroom in both front and rear is fine, footroom in the back just adequate for big shoes (like my size 15s). The rear seats have fairly nice leather (a little grainy-looking and feeling), a pull-down center armrest with cupholders, and a nice easy-pull-strap at the bottom for dropping the seatbacks down and sliding the bottom cushion forward to expand the cargo area. A remote lever for this is also in the trunk.....more on that below.
The front seats are fairly comfortable, but their flattish cushions/bolsters lack some side support.......and, of course, sports/racing-car-cornering seat support is generally not needed in this type of vehicle. The forward-tilt of the headrests can, in some cases, impact slightly on neck comfort, but not enough for a complaint. The general level of the interior trim/hardware was excellent, and worthy of the car's 38-40K price. My test car had beige leather with wood-tone trim, and the wood trim was nicely-colored and classy-looking. All of the buttons/controls/***** had a solid, high-quality feel, and the buttons, in general were simple and easy to use. Even the NAV screen and the Infiniti-style ****/adjuster control was not as complex as on a number of other vehicles I've tried. The screen doubles as a TV camera, with distance-markings, when the car is in reverse for backing up. The colorful, clear, easy-to-read primary gauges were superb. The steering wheel was nicely-shaped, did not hide things, and had nice, smooth, classy beige-leather wrapping, and the stiches, unlike some others, were not uncomforable. The stereo sound quality, especially with bass, was way up there (just perfect for Twisted Sister's Dee Snider doing their classic "We're Not Gonna Take It". The dual-climate-control buttons and ***** were likewise clear and easy to use. The steering column had nice, convienent, power tilt/telescope functions. The CVT transmission shifter had a nice fore/aft motion that eliminated the annoying zig-zags, but lacked manual-shift paddles on the column.....more on the transmission below.
My only other complaints with the interior (and they were minor) were the somewhat limited rear-vision out the back from the large, reverse-triangular C/D-pillars and the lower-dash protrusions up front that could rub the knees or shins of some tall people, depensing on how they had the seat adjusted. But, all in all, a very well-done interior, though it must be remembered that the LE model runs close to $40,000, and lesser S and SL Muranos might not be quite so impressive inside.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
My test car had a power-opening/closing trunk lid that did much of the work for you, and it opened up to a generally well-finished cargo area. A standard pull cargo-shade covered up the area's contents (a number of vehicles are eliminating this as a standard feature to cut costs, and making it an accessory). Nice beige carpeting (to match the interior) covered the trunk floor and walls. a nice, convienient pull-lever in the right wall lowers the second-row seats to expand the cargo area. No 3rd-row seat option is available.....for that, you have to move up to the slightly larger Nissan Pathfinder. But, IMO, a 3rd-row seat, even for kids, would be impractical in this vehicle anyway, since the egg-shaped, drop-down rear roofline cuts into the available room. A pull-up cover on the left-floor exposes an under-floor cubby-compartment (a similiar one on the right holds the jack), and......you guessed it.....a temporary spare lies under the floor, under another, lower, awkward-to-pull-up cover. Why a real spare tire/wheel can't go into a $40,000 vehicle simply beats me. I know I sound like a broken phonograph record, but I see this on almost every vehicle now that I review, but it still doesn't make it right. But, considering the superb improvements made on the new Nissan interiors over earlier models, I guess we can still tolerate some Carlos Ghosn-type cost-cutting in other places to compensate.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the ubiquitous 3.5L V6 by a push-button, with a transponder-fob in the vicinity. The engine comes to life smoothly and quietly, further confirming the presence of an underhood sound-insulation pad (even though I forgot to check it). The engine remains smooth and quiet on the road, with little exhaust noise. Its power level, with 265 HP and 248 ft-lbs. of torque, is adequate for an AWD SUV of this size/weight range, but not quite up to that of some other versions of Nissan 3.5L/3.7L V6's, some of which can reach over 300 HP. Don't try to drag-race people on Friday nights...chances are you will lose. This powerplant, though, even if not the most powerful version, has a good reputation for engineering, reliability, and smooth operation.
The CVT transmission is a gem, despite its noted lack of programmable gear "ranges" or manual-shift controls. Nissan has developed a reputation for making good CVT's, and it shows. Operation was smooth, quiet, and seamless, with virtually none of the "motorboating", "rubber-banding", or RPM-flares thet you get with some CVT's. Long-term durability, of course (as it is with any CVT) is still,a question mark, but, according to Consumer Reports, the Nissan CVTs have generally held up OK in the few years they have been on the road. And, again, the standard 5/60 drivetrain warranty and optional extended warranties will keep you covered if you need it. To top it off....as I mentioned above, the CVT has a nice fore/aft shift-lever motion, without those annoying zig-zags.
The chassis/suspension/tires, without question, are biased much more toward comfort than sharp handling. The power-steering feel bordered on numb, and steering response was slow and rather sluggish. Body roll was not excessive, but was noticeable. To compensate, though, ride comfort was noticeably better-than-average for mid-sized SUVs, and the noise level due to good wind and tire-noise isolation, was very low......almost to the Lexus RX350 level. This vehicle cruises almost like an RX....but, of course, costs virtually as much. The brakes were also better-than-average in their pedal feel, with good response, virtually no sponginess, even modulation, and the pedal placement was good.....it did not cause any hang-ups for my big size-15 clown-shoes in the transition from gas pedal to brake.
THE VERDICT:
If you have an older Murano, and like its styling but are unsatisfied with its El Cheapo fit/finish and material quality, by all means, don't give up on Nissan......go take a look at the new 2009 Murano. The difference in fit/finish, material quality, and interior plushness is just enormous, especially in the top-line LE model. You can now not only relax in smooth, quiet comfort and enjoy the new-found interior plushness, but also enjoy its improving repair record (though long-term durability of the CVT may still be questionable). The AWD, of course, gives all-weather security, and there is reasonably good space effiency inside except for the drop-down rear roofline/cargo area.
But the exterior styling is still a turn-off to some people (me included); the CVT, good as it is, could benefit from more programmable "ranges" and shift controls, the steering is numb and sluggish, and the V6's power, though adequate, won't get you any trophies at the drag strip. And, as I've mentioned before, the top-line LE model is expensive by Nissan standards, topping out at almost $40,000....for that money, you could have a Lexus RX350 (as I would choose).
But, all in all, kudos to Nissan for atoning for their past sins in the fit/finish/material quality areas and now making some more impressive vehicles. The Murano LE, though not chump-change, is an impressive vehicle if you don't place sporty performance as a high priority, and, IMO, is a good alternative to the RX350 if you don't live near a Lexus dealer or otherwise would prefer a Nissan product. The Murano is built in American plants, with American labor, and, to boot, is generally less-expensive than the RX to service.
Last edited by mmarshall; 07-08-09 at 06:53 PM.
07-08-09, 06:59 PM
#3
Great review!! And my sincere thanks for the great job that you do. Since the new RX just flat didn't impress us, and I feel that Lexus is letting quality slip a bit, we had, as our short list, the Q5, the Venza, and the Murano. Of the three, we were most impressed with the Murano - Nissan has certainly come a long ways!
We the bought a 09 Murano LE, Brilliant Silver with all the bells and whistles, excepting the rear entertainment center - hey, there are only two of us, kids are grown and gone, what do we need back seat DVD entertainment for! I quite agree as to the assessment of the interior, it is quite is superb, and possibly rivaling Lexus with its nice materials, good leather (I feel close to the new RX but not as soft as the outgoing one), soft touch plastics, and comfy seating both front and back. I also feel, subjectively, that it is much quieter than our RX was. Our neighbors who have a 05 RX were quite astonished, and are even now contemplating the Murano as a replacement - they are less than thrilled with the new RX too.
A few areas that I would tend to disagree on, but they are niggling, and we all have our opinions, that’s what makes our hobby of cars so interesting. I feel that the handling is head and shoulders above that of our 05 RX 330, and certainly much more sporting then that that of the 2010 RX's that I've had a chance to drive. The steering has a little numbness to it on center, but, when was the last time you drove an RX, talk about numb! And I feel that the steering is much better weighted than that of the outgoing RX, which was very light.
As far as power, at least ours, with less than 1k miles, leaves nothing to be desired, as it sure seems to be able to scoot through traffic, passing is easy, and no complaints in regards to mileage. We did a 600+ mile trip, over serious mountain passes (4700+ and 5400+ feet) seeing 23.8 MPG going and 24.9 on our return, and again, this is with less than 1k miles on it.
The electronics suite is awesome, with a nice nav system, hard drive for added music, iPod hook up with steering wheel controls for the full iPod menu (just a lousy place to put the iPod!), and the back up camera is far and away better than what I had on the RX.
All in all, I think that the Murano is a good choice if you are looking for a little more sport, with about the same amenities, and maybe a few more goodies in the LE than what you can get in the new RX, that is, if you don't mind the shape and the alien countenance! We happen to like its looks, as it sure stands out and there is no mistaking it for any other car base SUV. Don't get me wrong, we loved our Thundercloud, and still have a GS 300 AWD which we intend to keep. We just felt it was time for a change, and Lexus didn't measure up to what we were looking for. Besides, Nissan was ready and willing to deal, so, even though the Murano MSRP pushes that of the RX, you can get very good deals right now.
We the bought a 09 Murano LE, Brilliant Silver with all the bells and whistles, excepting the rear entertainment center - hey, there are only two of us, kids are grown and gone, what do we need back seat DVD entertainment for! I quite agree as to the assessment of the interior, it is quite is superb, and possibly rivaling Lexus with its nice materials, good leather (I feel close to the new RX but not as soft as the outgoing one), soft touch plastics, and comfy seating both front and back. I also feel, subjectively, that it is much quieter than our RX was. Our neighbors who have a 05 RX were quite astonished, and are even now contemplating the Murano as a replacement - they are less than thrilled with the new RX too.
A few areas that I would tend to disagree on, but they are niggling, and we all have our opinions, that’s what makes our hobby of cars so interesting. I feel that the handling is head and shoulders above that of our 05 RX 330, and certainly much more sporting then that that of the 2010 RX's that I've had a chance to drive. The steering has a little numbness to it on center, but, when was the last time you drove an RX, talk about numb! And I feel that the steering is much better weighted than that of the outgoing RX, which was very light.
As far as power, at least ours, with less than 1k miles, leaves nothing to be desired, as it sure seems to be able to scoot through traffic, passing is easy, and no complaints in regards to mileage. We did a 600+ mile trip, over serious mountain passes (4700+ and 5400+ feet) seeing 23.8 MPG going and 24.9 on our return, and again, this is with less than 1k miles on it.
The electronics suite is awesome, with a nice nav system, hard drive for added music, iPod hook up with steering wheel controls for the full iPod menu (just a lousy place to put the iPod!), and the back up camera is far and away better than what I had on the RX.
All in all, I think that the Murano is a good choice if you are looking for a little more sport, with about the same amenities, and maybe a few more goodies in the LE than what you can get in the new RX, that is, if you don't mind the shape and the alien countenance! We happen to like its looks, as it sure stands out and there is no mistaking it for any other car base SUV. Don't get me wrong, we loved our Thundercloud, and still have a GS 300 AWD which we intend to keep. We just felt it was time for a change, and Lexus didn't measure up to what we were looking for. Besides, Nissan was ready and willing to deal, so, even though the Murano MSRP pushes that of the RX, you can get very good deals right now.
07-08-09, 07:21 PM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mike great review and this one I really agree with you on all points. Once you get past that abomination of an exterior (which isn't even unusual anymore, who the hell makes good looking vehicles anymore?????) the Murano is quite damn good and as stated, the interior is LEAPS and BOUNDS better than the first generation. I was shocked at how well it improved in one generation and as far as I am concerned as good as an Infiniti G37. Both share the same steering wheel I think and the dash layout is nearly identical. I also felt fit and finish was improved.
I did have huge problems with the MSRP (though no one pays this). This is RX territory, NEW RX territory as well as some other luxury SUVs. I find most all SUV pricing to be overpriced, especially from most non luxury brands.
Overall Nissan did a tremendous job with this vehicle though. Orzel seems to like his new one and thats what matters
My question for you is did you find the CVT and Engine to be buzzy?
I did have huge problems with the MSRP (though no one pays this). This is RX territory, NEW RX territory as well as some other luxury SUVs. I find most all SUV pricing to be overpriced, especially from most non luxury brands.
Overall Nissan did a tremendous job with this vehicle though. Orzel seems to like his new one and thats what matters
My question for you is did you find the CVT and Engine to be buzzy?
07-08-09, 10:05 PM
#5
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
Sure. Anytime. One thing that helps a lot is the high number of opportunities in this area that I have to do so.
The new RX certainly impressed me, though. It doesn't seem to have shown the material quality slip that the ES, IS, and LX did.
Congragulations on your purchase. I hope it turns out to be a nice vehicle for you.
It's quiet, yes, but, in my experience, not as quiet as an RX. Lexus is the acknowledged master of tomb-quiet rides, especally with the LS.
I reviewed a new RX350 last winter and an RX450H update a couple of weeks ago (both were posted). Neither the RX or the Murano, IMO, are sporting-type vehicles or have very quick, precise steering response....that is just not their forte. Both emphasize comfort over athletic response....and, yes, have some numbness in the steering.
Yes, power, with the V6's 265 HP and 248 ft-lbs. of torque, is adequate for normal driving, but not quite up to what some other versions of both the Nissan/Infiniti 3.5L and 3.7L V6s produce. The fairly good mileage you experience is boosted, to some extent, by the CVT's efficiency.
Agreed.
And my sincere thanks for the great job that you do.
One thing that helps a lot is the high number of opportunities in this area that I have to do so.
Since the new RX just flat didn't impress us, and I feel that Lexus is letting quality slip a bit, we had, as our short list, the Q5, the Venza, and the Murano. Of the three, we were most impressed with the Murano - Nissan has certainly come a long ways!
We the bought a 09 Murano LE, Brilliant Silver with all the bells and whistles, excepting the rear entertainment center
- I also feel, subjectively, that it is much quieter than our RX was.
It's quiet, yes, but, in my experience, not as quiet as an RX. Lexus is the acknowledged master of tomb-quiet rides, especally with the LS.
A few areas that I would tend to disagree on, but they are niggling, and we all have our opinions, that’s what makes our hobby of cars so interesting. I feel that the handling is head and shoulders above that of our 05 RX 330, and certainly much more sporting then that that of the 2010 RX's that I've had a chance to drive. The steering has a little numbness to it on center, but, when was the last time you drove an RX, talk about numb! And I feel that the steering is much better weighted than that of the outgoing RX, which was very light.
As far as power, at least ours, with less than 1k miles, leaves nothing to be desired, as it sure seems to be able to scoot through traffic, passing is easy, and no complaints in regards to mileage. We did a 600+ mile trip, over serious mountain passes (4700+ and 5400+ feet) seeing 23.8 MPG going and 24.9 on our return, and again, this is with less than 1k miles on it.
The electronics suite is awesome, with a nice nav system, hard drive for added music, iPod hook up with steering wheel controls for the full iPod menu (just a lousy place to put the iPod!), and the back up camera is far and away better than what I had on the RX.
Last edited by mmarshall; 07-08-09 at 10:25 PM.
07-08-09, 10:22 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
Some of the best-looking ones right now, IMO, are the pony cars.....Mustang, Challenger, and Camaro. Among non-pony cars, IMO, the Ford Fusion, Chrysler 300 (minus the Bentley grille), and Jaguar XF are decent-looking vehicles.
The pictures and images don't really do it as much good as seeing it in person. But a few flies in the ointment still remain, like thinnish sheet metal and and numb/sluggish steering.
If the LE is too much sticker-shock, there are the less-expensive S and SL versions, which start under 30K, but, naturally, they don't quite equal the LE model in equipment or interior plushness.
Orzel is not alone. The Murano, even in the El Cheapo, Carlos Ghosn cost-cutting days, has always sold well.
The CVT was seamless. Nissan has a reputation of making (perhaps) the best CVT units available, although the Murano version lacks the multi-"gear" ranges and paddle-shifters of some other Nissan units. The 3.5L V6 was smooth and quiet under all conditions I drove it. But, since it was a brand-new engine (as most are that I review), I showed the usual respect for it by not taking it over 4000-4500 RPM, so I can't comment on its level of refinement at or near redline.
I got a chance to test-drive a new 2.5L CVT Subaru Legacy a few weeks ago at the local June 20 preview, and Subie's all-new CVT may be the equal of Nissan's. It also has paddle-shifters and 6 distinct gear "ranges". It makes the 2.5L non-turbo H4 essentially perform like the H6.
who the hell makes good looking vehicles anymore?????)
the Murano is quite damn good and as stated, the interior is LEAPS and BOUNDS better than the first generation. I was shocked at how well it improved in one generation and as far as I am concerned as good as an Infiniti G37. Both share the same steering wheel I think and the dash layout is nearly identical. I also felt fit and finish was improved.
I did have huge problems with the MSRP (though no one pays this). This is RX territory, NEW RX territory as well as some other luxury SUVs. I find most all SUV pricing to be overpriced, especially from most non luxury brands.
Overall Nissan did a tremendous job with this vehicle though. Orzel seems to like his new one and thats what matters
My question for you is did you find the CVT and Engine to be buzzy?
I got a chance to test-drive a new 2.5L CVT Subaru Legacy a few weeks ago at the local June 20 preview, and Subie's all-new CVT may be the equal of Nissan's. It also has paddle-shifters and 6 distinct gear "ranges". It makes the 2.5L non-turbo H4 essentially perform like the H6.
Last edited by mmarshall; 07-09-09 at 06:16 AM.
07-09-09, 10:24 AM
#10
Take two double shoots of good single malt scotch, that tends to help a lot! 
I find it kind of an in-your-face exterior. Sort of like giving society the finger. But then I've always had a problem with authority. Both my wife and I like it, it stands out and makes a statement to the world - like FU!
I find it kind of an in-your-face exterior. Sort of like giving society the finger. But then I've always had a problem with authority. Both my wife and I like it, it stands out and makes a statement to the world - like FU!
Last edited by Orzel; 07-09-09 at 12:15 PM.
07-09-09, 11:19 AM
#12
Lexus Champion
40 grand just sounds like too much for that vehicle... loaded or not. Maybe if I drove one my mind would be changed, but if it's anything even remotely close to the last Murano, I wouldn't buy a loaded one for even 30, much less 40.
Are you planning to check out the 2010 LaCrosse when it comes out in about a month?
Are you planning to check out the 2010 LaCrosse when it comes out in about a month?
Last edited by Threxx; 07-09-09 at 01:56 PM.
07-09-09, 11:46 AM
#13
I loved the styling of the first gen Murano, I think they totally screwed up the lines with the second gen with the bloated front fenders and odd looking grille.
During the test drive, I felt the Murano had better steering feedback and tighter handling than the RX, however its price was too high when fully loaded.
During the test drive, I felt the Murano had better steering feedback and tighter handling than the RX, however its price was too high when fully loaded.
07-09-09, 12:17 PM
#14
40 grand just sounds like too much for that vehicle... loaded or not. Maybe if I drove one my mind would be changed, but if it's anything even remotely close to the last Murano, I wouldn't buy a loaded one for even 30, much less 40.
Are planning to check out the 2010 LaCrosse when it comes out in about a month?
Are planning to check out the 2010 LaCrosse when it comes out in about a month?
07-09-09, 01:50 PM
#15
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter