Review: 2010 Nissan Rogue
06-25-10, 07:18 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Review: 2010 Nissan Rogue
By non-CL member request, a Review of the 2010 Nissan Rogue.
http://www.nissanusa.com/rogue/
In a Nutshell: Well-built, with simple/easy-to-use controls, and generally pleasant to drive....but the CVT transmission is a question mark.
I decided to do a full-review of the 2010 Nissan Rogue for three reasons. First, I had never driven one before, that I could remember. Second, my CL-requested reviews (2010 Ford Fiesta, Hyundai Equus) are still on hold awaiting vehicle availability in the American market (should be about 3-4 weeks now), so I don't have any current backlog. Third, an ex-coworker of mine, whose previous car was totalled (she's OK) and needs a new vehicle, expressed interest in the Rogue. She's had good luck with Nissans, and is looking at small SUVs. So, this was the perfect time to try out a new Rogue, and, despite fairly good sales in the D.C. area, they are readily in stock at area Nissan dealerships.
The Nissan Rogue, of course, is a small-to-medium-sized, car-based, unibody SUV derived basically from the compact Nissan Sentra sedan platform. It is Nissan's answer to the sea of other small, car-based SVUs currently on the market (Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner, Saturn VUE, Hyundai Tuscon, Kia Sportage, Mitsubishi Outlander, Dodge Journey, Subaru Forester, Chevy Equinox, etc.......and others). All of these vehicles have proven very popular for their almost unique combination of low price, space efficiency, cargo-carrying ability, all-wheel-drive surefootedness in bad weather, decent fuel mileage by AWD standards, and better road manners and ride/handling combination than larger, truck-based SUVs. Of course, most of them (with the possible exception of the Suzuki Vitara), lack the hard-core off-road and towing ability of the more rugged truck-based models. But, in today's SUV market (as opposed to that of decades ago), the typical SUV serves more as a commuter, all-weather, mall-shopping, or kiddy-carrying vehicle than it does as a hard core Jeep. Few owners actually take their SUV's off the road any more (current estimates are 4-5%), and some insurance policies have off-road restrictions, even for hard-core SUVS such as Jeeps or Hummers.
In the Nissan SUV line, the Rogue (and similiar-sized, but truck-based Xterra) slots in between the smaller, shoe-box-styled Cube and the larger Murano, Pathfinder, and Armada models. It bears some similiarity, especially in physical size, to the more expensive (and more plush) Infiniti EX35 SUV, but the Nissan and Infiniti people both say that the two are not done on the same platform/chassis. For 2010, the Rogue comes in two basic versions/trim lines, the entry-level S and the upmarket SL. A "360 Degree" trim version is actually a separate option package (as are several different Premium and Leather packages), and the web site shows a special S "Krom" version that is not listed in the regular sales brochure (I included one or two Krom images above). All U.S.-market Rogues get the same 2.5L in-line 4-cylinder engine also used in some other smaller Nissan products (no V6 is offered) and Nissan's ubiquitous CVT (Continuously-Variable-Transmission (no manual transmission is offered, either). All S and SL models get a choice of FWD (Front-Wheel-Drive) or AWD (All-Wheel-Drive)....the FWD models, of course, being slightly cheaper, less-complex, and more economical. But, considering the only 1 MPG EPA fuel-mileage difference betwen the two versions, in my opinion, the AWD, in this area, is the obvious choice (as last winter's blizzards more than proved). The Rogue, according to Consumer Reports, the most trusted national auto-reliability source I can think of, has consistantly been Better-Than-Average in reliability, and the ones I looked at today showed good assembly quality and the use of some nice materials (more on that later). The CVT, though, may be questionable.....I'll also get to that later.
For the review, thinking specifically of my ex co-worker and the version that IMO would make the most sense for her, I picked out a base S model with AWD, but without a lot of other options. The S model has an attractive price, and, while it doesn't come with a huge amount of standard equipment by today's standards, it does have most of the things that people come to expect today on even base vehicles (air-conditioning, power windows/doors/mirrors, stereo, intermittent wipers, etc....and modern safety equipment). The base S model lacks a few touches, such as a pull-shade cover to hide things in the cargo area, but that can easily be added as a dealer-accessory for a reasonable price.
As with every other vehicle I review, I found both good and annoying features. Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Nissan Rogue S AWD
Base Price: $21,710
Options:
Floor/Cargo mats: $185
Destination/Freight: $800 (slightly higher than average for this class)
List Price as reviewed: $22,695
Drivetrain: AWD, transversely-mounted, DOHC 2.5L in-line 4-cylinder, 170 HP @ 6000 RPM, Torque 175 ft-lbs. @ 4400 RPM,
CVT (Continuously-Variable-Transmission), Limited-slip differential.
EPA Mileage Rating: 21 City, 26 Highway
Exterior Color: Wicked Black (yes, that's what Nissan calls it)
Interior: Black Cloth
PLUSSES:
S model a bargain price.
Generally good acceleration for a non-turbo four-cylinder with AWD.
Genarally good CVT drivability (but some "rubber-banding" characteristics).
Fairly quick steering response.
Reasonably smooth ride by SUV standards.
Good wind noise isolation.
Good underhood layout.
Good paint job.
Fairly solid exterior sheet metal.
Nicely-done exterior chrome door handles.
Solid-closing doors.
Good exterior hardware and mirror-housings.
Padded, soft-surface dashboard.
Nice cloth seat fabric.
Nicely-done (IMO) steering wheel.
Good stereo sound quality for this class of vehicle.
Superby simple, easy-to-use dash controls/buttons.
Exellent, simple, clear, easy-to-read twin-primary gauges.
Solid, high-quality, well-fitted interior trim materials.
Well-trimmed/finished cargo area.
MINUSES:
No V6 or manual-transmission options.
CVT transmission long-term durability unproven.
Limited driver-control for the CVT-shifting.
Some body roll, with sharp steering input, from the suspension and high center of gravity.
OK but somewhat spongy brake-pedal action.
Small but audible road/tire noise.
Cheap underhood prop-rod instead of struts. (this is mitigated somewhat by the car's low price)
No body-side mouldings for parking-lot ding protection.
Exterior paint colors OK, but could be a little more cheerful.
Firm but unsupportive seat cushions.
Awkward foot-operated parking brake for tall people.
El-Cheapo, hard-material sun visors.
Temporary spare tire instead of real one (but, again, the car's low price is a factor)
Awkward spare-tire cover access.
Cargo-area cover an accessory on S model.
Poor rear vision from rear-roofline and bulky D-pillars.
No remote rear-seat releases in the cargo area (but the seats do fold down).
No factory wood-tone interior trim available (I tend to like wood).
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the Rogue, It generally bears a resemblance to some other Nissan SUVs, so it is not a particular standout, style-wise. The general body shape is similiar to that of the larger Nissan Murano, though the more-subdued grille/headlights remind one more of the Altima and Maxima. The taillights are also a little more subdued than on the flamboyant Murano. The sheet metal appears to be solid and of high quality, and the doors, hood, and hatchback-lid close reasonably solid. There are no body-side mouldings on the doors to protect from careless people in parking lots giving you dings.....an increasingly common cost-cutting item for automakers. The exterior paint job is on the good side (as it is with most of today's vehicles), but lacks the brilliance/smoothness of top-level paint jobs like Audi and Toyota/Lexus. A small amount of orange-peel (but not bad) was noted on the black paint my test-car had. Other Rogue paint colors has lesser-amounts of orange-peel....black, for some reason, with many vehicles, often seems to have the most. The 7 exterior paint colors offered (white, Silver, Black, Red, and Blue, and two shades of Gray,) were mostly on the dull side, with only the Venom Red and Indigo Blue tending to keep your eyes open or from thinking of Murphy's Funeral Home. The S model comes with tall, 70-series, 16" Continental all-season tires, stamped-steel wheels, and silver-plastic wheel covers (SL models get 17" 60-series Continental all-seasons). Several different wheel/tire upgrades come with the Premium and 360-Degree trim packages. The Rogue seems to have enough ground clearance, like most small SUV's, to handle most snowstorms or deep mud without any problem. The twin exterior side mirrors are of adequate size, and their reasonably-solid plastic housings swivel/slide and lock smoothly and firmly. The exterior chrome and trim seemed solid and well-fitted, and I liked the chrome exterior door handles.
UNDERHOOD:
Open up the solid hood, and you must fumble around with a hood prop-rod instead of nice, more-convienient nice gas struts. Yes, this is an inexpensive vehicle, but some other inexpensive vehicles in this price class (like Subaru Foresters and Imprezas) now manage to use struts instead of prop-rods. Once propped, the hood has a nice insulation pad underneath (this helps with engine-noise control, as Nissan 4-cylinders are often not the quietest of powerplants. The basic underhood layout, though (especially for those who do their own work), is one of the vehicle's best points. The 2.5L in-line four-cylinder engine fits in very well, without a big, awkward plastic engine-cover to hide things like on many vehicles today. There is room to reach a number of top/middle engine components around the sides and in front. The battery (to the right of the engine), is clear, exposed, and easily-accessible. The dipsticks, fluid-reservoirs, and filler-caps, likewise, are fairly easy to reach. Upmarket/luxury-car manufacturers need to take a GOOD look at the way that vehicles like this are done underhood...I've seen countless upmarket vehicles where almost nothing is accessable under the hood, and one vehicle (the Porsche Boxster) with no engine hood at all.
INTERIOR:
Though the all-black cloth interior in my test car was, overall, a little too monotone-black and plain-looking for my tastes (Gray is also available), there were a number of things I liked about it. It was evident that Nissan, for the most part, did not cut many costs inside with material quality, and used somewhat plain-looking but well-made parts. The only really cheap hardware I came across were the solid, hard-plastic sun-visors, and even they seemed to be of durable plastic, not something that would fall apart in your hands. Nissan really got stung with criticism, back in the first days of CEO Carlos Ghosn's famous interior cost-cutting, of its insultingly cheap interior materials. Those days, of course, are gone. Starting about 2005 or so, Nissan started upgrading their interiors once again, and it shows. The Rogue's interior certainly is not lavish or luxury-grade, but virtually everything, even if plain-looking, feels solid and well-made. The dash has a strong, well-fitted, padded-surface all over it. The air vents, which are of the rotary type, operate with Swiss-Watch precision. The steering wheel is handsome, well-trimmed, and comfortable to hold. The stereo sound quality is pretty good for a vehicle of this class, and the stereo controls are very simple and easy-to-use (ditto for the climate-control *****). I'm a firm believer in simple, easily-used controls like this, as they lessen the chances of the driver having to take his or her eyes off the road any longer than necessary. This is a model dash/control setup for many manufacturers......Audi, BMW, Mercedes, are you listening? The matching speedometer and tachometer were also models of simplicity, clearness, and ease-of-reading (some of the best I've seen), but I didn't like the yellow digital bar-graph fuel-gauge, engine-temperature, and gear/trip-numbers between them quite as much.
All of the other interior hardware.....door/window switches, locks, *****, etc.... felt solid and of high quality. the interior door panels had hard-plastic upper-ridges but, even in the S model, had nice, big, soft, fabric-trimmed inserts and armrests as well. The nicely-done, solid-feeling vertical door-pulls, covered in well-painted silver/brushed-metal, added a nice touch.....as did the other silver/brushed-chrome accents on the wheel, console, and dash. However, I missed having some wood-tone trim inside....none is available from the factory. The fabric, which pretty much matched the fabric on the seats, was durable-feeling, yet plush. I didn't particularly care for the seating comfort of the front seats, though, as the cushions, though trimmed with nice fabric, were a little firm for my tastes, and the flat side-bolsters didn't give much lateral support. However, vehicles like the Rogue are not sports cars, aren't usually driven that way, and generally don't need sports-car body-support for hard cornering. The manual front-seat adjuster-levers generally worked OK, but sometimes had a slightly awkward feel. Headroom, front and rear, is OK for taller people, even with the sunroof housing and the slightly-dropped rear roofline. Legroom and footroom are also OK, front and rear, even with the front seat adjusted back a little.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
Open up the solid hatch-lid assembly, and a fairly nicely-appointed cargo area greets you. The rear roofline and raked-forward rear window does compromisethe cargo-room a little, but not badly, and certainly much less than in the similiarly-sized Infiniti EX35. The cargo-area is generally well-trimmed and well-finished for a vehicle of this class, though it does lack remote-releases at the rear end for the rear seat folding. On my test-vehicle with black interior, the trunk floor (and lower-walls, if my memory is right) were covered with a reasonably nice, plush, black carpet. The S model, as stated earlier, lacks the spring-loaded, cargo-cover pull-shade, but that can be added as a dealer-accessory (the salespeople, at that dealership, quoted around $150). My particular test-car had the optional ($185) floor/cargo-area mats that protect the trunk's carpet, but, unlike Subarus, the cargo-area piece is MORE carpet, not vinyl/rubber, for all-weather use. Underneath the trunk floor is the temporary spare tire (one of my pet peeves, as I believe cars should come with real spares), and, on top of the spare, a rather awkward-to-use cover with several trim-pieces that have to be inserted/removed just right for the cover to fit and/or be removed properly.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the ubiquitous Nissan 2.5L four with an old-fashioned key and side-column ignition switch (many vehicles, today, have converted to START/STOP buttons and proximity keys, but, in this class, it's not a big deal). The engine comes to life with fairly good refinement and a fairly smooth, quiet idle (the aforementioned underhood insulation pad does its job, but you still know it's not a Lexus V8). Once underway, the 4-cylinder combines with the CVT, despite the added weight/drag of the AWD, to give adequate all-around pick-up for everyday driving, at least with a lightly-loaded vehicle. Starting up from rest, things bog down a little for a couple of seconds, and, initially, acceleration is rather slow, but then starts to pick up noticeably. The CVT has a smooth, slick-operating shift lever but only two shift ranges.....D for normal driving and L for "Low" when downhill engine-braking or more power is needed for steep hills. On the S model, there are no column-shift paddles, and no separate gate for manual-shift "ranges" like with some other CVTs. Engine noise is rather low, even on hard acceleration, with less-than-intrusive exhaust noise. The CVT is, of course, smooth and quiet, though there is a small amount of the traditional CVT "rubber-banding" and "motorboating" effect, where RPMs climb at first, before acceleration follows.
The chassis is fairly well-done for a small SUV, keeping in mind that this was not designed to be a sports car. Steering response (by small SUV standards), despite the tall 70-series Continental tires on the test car that were designed for comfort more than handling, was not bad, though with abrupt steering input, there is noticeable body roll from the fairly high center of gravity. The seating position is high enough, even for a small SUV, that you are up above the roofs of most cars and looking down on a lot of the traffic in front of you. You can't see much out the rear, though, because of
the smallish window, slightly droop-rear roofline, and big, bulky D-Pillars. The S-model, of course, doesn't have a built-in camera for rear viewing on the NAV screen. Wind-noise control is generally muted and well-done, though there is a small but noticeable amount of road/tire noise from the all-season Contintntals. Braking action, though generally effective, showed some initial softness/sponginess in the brake pedal. It is hard to find almost any American, Korean, or Japanese-designed SUVs with really firm brake pedals, which seem to be mostly the realm of German-designed SUVs. The brake pedal, though, is fairly well-placed in relation to the gas pedal, so I didn't have any problems with my big size-15 circus-clown shoes hanging up or catching on the bottom or edge of the brake pedal while moving from gas-pedal to brake.....as I have written before, that, for me, is a problem in some vehicles.
THE VERDICT:
The overall conclusion, here, I'd say, is a good small SUV for the money. Most Rogue models, but especially the base S model, are attractively-priced, and, IMO, offer good value for the money. Nissan, though still cost-cutting on some convenience items like the hood prop-rod and temporary spare, has come a long way, especially in the quality of interior materials, from the old days of Ghosn's excessive cheapness. I find the interior a little plain-looking for my tastes, but there's no doubting its improved quality. The overall reliabilty record has generally been good, with few customer complaints.Road manners, by small-SUV standards, are generally good, and the underhood layout, for those who do their own work, is excellent. The powertrain, though certainly not dragster-quick, is adequate for most normal driving.
But there are a couple of flies in the ointment, too. The rear window and D-Pillars need redesign for better vision. The front seats need softer cushions and more-supportive side-bolsters. The brakes, though perfectly safe, could use a little more pedal-firmness. The CVT, though, is my main concern. It has not really been on the market that long (just the last few years), and some CVTs, though OK in the short run, have proved unreliable as miles built up, especially with higher-powered engines that put a lot of stress on them. The Nissan CVTs are, of course, covered by the standard 5 year/60,000 powertrain warranty (3/36 bumper-to-bumper), and Nissan has extended the factory warranties on the CVTs in some of their other models because they have been troublesome. Consumer Reports has given the Rogue a good reliability rating, but much of that data has been with the conventional transmissions of the past.
Still, if you basically like the vehicle, I wouldn't let the admittedly small possibility of a CVT breakdown stop me....especially if you plan to keep the vehicle only 5 years/60,000 miles or less. And IF the Rogue CVT units do prove troubleome over time, Nissan, recently, has been a very responsible company, and will probably extend the warranties on them, too.
As always, of course............Happy Car Shopping.
MM
http://www.nissanusa.com/rogue/
In a Nutshell: Well-built, with simple/easy-to-use controls, and generally pleasant to drive....but the CVT transmission is a question mark.
I decided to do a full-review of the 2010 Nissan Rogue for three reasons. First, I had never driven one before, that I could remember. Second, my CL-requested reviews (2010 Ford Fiesta, Hyundai Equus) are still on hold awaiting vehicle availability in the American market (should be about 3-4 weeks now), so I don't have any current backlog. Third, an ex-coworker of mine, whose previous car was totalled (she's OK) and needs a new vehicle, expressed interest in the Rogue. She's had good luck with Nissans, and is looking at small SUVs. So, this was the perfect time to try out a new Rogue, and, despite fairly good sales in the D.C. area, they are readily in stock at area Nissan dealerships.
The Nissan Rogue, of course, is a small-to-medium-sized, car-based, unibody SUV derived basically from the compact Nissan Sentra sedan platform. It is Nissan's answer to the sea of other small, car-based SVUs currently on the market (Toyota RAV4, Honda CR-V, Ford Escape/Mercury Mariner, Saturn VUE, Hyundai Tuscon, Kia Sportage, Mitsubishi Outlander, Dodge Journey, Subaru Forester, Chevy Equinox, etc.......and others). All of these vehicles have proven very popular for their almost unique combination of low price, space efficiency, cargo-carrying ability, all-wheel-drive surefootedness in bad weather, decent fuel mileage by AWD standards, and better road manners and ride/handling combination than larger, truck-based SUVs. Of course, most of them (with the possible exception of the Suzuki Vitara), lack the hard-core off-road and towing ability of the more rugged truck-based models. But, in today's SUV market (as opposed to that of decades ago), the typical SUV serves more as a commuter, all-weather, mall-shopping, or kiddy-carrying vehicle than it does as a hard core Jeep. Few owners actually take their SUV's off the road any more (current estimates are 4-5%), and some insurance policies have off-road restrictions, even for hard-core SUVS such as Jeeps or Hummers.
In the Nissan SUV line, the Rogue (and similiar-sized, but truck-based Xterra) slots in between the smaller, shoe-box-styled Cube and the larger Murano, Pathfinder, and Armada models. It bears some similiarity, especially in physical size, to the more expensive (and more plush) Infiniti EX35 SUV, but the Nissan and Infiniti people both say that the two are not done on the same platform/chassis. For 2010, the Rogue comes in two basic versions/trim lines, the entry-level S and the upmarket SL. A "360 Degree" trim version is actually a separate option package (as are several different Premium and Leather packages), and the web site shows a special S "Krom" version that is not listed in the regular sales brochure (I included one or two Krom images above). All U.S.-market Rogues get the same 2.5L in-line 4-cylinder engine also used in some other smaller Nissan products (no V6 is offered) and Nissan's ubiquitous CVT (Continuously-Variable-Transmission (no manual transmission is offered, either). All S and SL models get a choice of FWD (Front-Wheel-Drive) or AWD (All-Wheel-Drive)....the FWD models, of course, being slightly cheaper, less-complex, and more economical. But, considering the only 1 MPG EPA fuel-mileage difference betwen the two versions, in my opinion, the AWD, in this area, is the obvious choice (as last winter's blizzards more than proved). The Rogue, according to Consumer Reports, the most trusted national auto-reliability source I can think of, has consistantly been Better-Than-Average in reliability, and the ones I looked at today showed good assembly quality and the use of some nice materials (more on that later). The CVT, though, may be questionable.....I'll also get to that later.
For the review, thinking specifically of my ex co-worker and the version that IMO would make the most sense for her, I picked out a base S model with AWD, but without a lot of other options. The S model has an attractive price, and, while it doesn't come with a huge amount of standard equipment by today's standards, it does have most of the things that people come to expect today on even base vehicles (air-conditioning, power windows/doors/mirrors, stereo, intermittent wipers, etc....and modern safety equipment). The base S model lacks a few touches, such as a pull-shade cover to hide things in the cargo area, but that can easily be added as a dealer-accessory for a reasonable price.
As with every other vehicle I review, I found both good and annoying features. Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Nissan Rogue S AWD
Base Price: $21,710
Options:
Floor/Cargo mats: $185
Destination/Freight: $800 (slightly higher than average for this class)
List Price as reviewed: $22,695
Drivetrain: AWD, transversely-mounted, DOHC 2.5L in-line 4-cylinder, 170 HP @ 6000 RPM, Torque 175 ft-lbs. @ 4400 RPM,
CVT (Continuously-Variable-Transmission), Limited-slip differential.
EPA Mileage Rating: 21 City, 26 Highway
Exterior Color: Wicked Black (yes, that's what Nissan calls it)
Interior: Black Cloth
PLUSSES:
S model a bargain price.
Generally good acceleration for a non-turbo four-cylinder with AWD.
Genarally good CVT drivability (but some "rubber-banding" characteristics).
Fairly quick steering response.
Reasonably smooth ride by SUV standards.
Good wind noise isolation.
Good underhood layout.
Good paint job.
Fairly solid exterior sheet metal.
Nicely-done exterior chrome door handles.
Solid-closing doors.
Good exterior hardware and mirror-housings.
Padded, soft-surface dashboard.
Nice cloth seat fabric.
Nicely-done (IMO) steering wheel.
Good stereo sound quality for this class of vehicle.
Superby simple, easy-to-use dash controls/buttons.
Exellent, simple, clear, easy-to-read twin-primary gauges.
Solid, high-quality, well-fitted interior trim materials.
Well-trimmed/finished cargo area.
MINUSES:
No V6 or manual-transmission options.
CVT transmission long-term durability unproven.
Limited driver-control for the CVT-shifting.
Some body roll, with sharp steering input, from the suspension and high center of gravity.
OK but somewhat spongy brake-pedal action.
Small but audible road/tire noise.
Cheap underhood prop-rod instead of struts. (this is mitigated somewhat by the car's low price)
No body-side mouldings for parking-lot ding protection.
Exterior paint colors OK, but could be a little more cheerful.
Firm but unsupportive seat cushions.
Awkward foot-operated parking brake for tall people.
El-Cheapo, hard-material sun visors.
Temporary spare tire instead of real one (but, again, the car's low price is a factor)
Awkward spare-tire cover access.
Cargo-area cover an accessory on S model.
Poor rear vision from rear-roofline and bulky D-pillars.
No remote rear-seat releases in the cargo area (but the seats do fold down).
No factory wood-tone interior trim available (I tend to like wood).
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the Rogue, It generally bears a resemblance to some other Nissan SUVs, so it is not a particular standout, style-wise. The general body shape is similiar to that of the larger Nissan Murano, though the more-subdued grille/headlights remind one more of the Altima and Maxima. The taillights are also a little more subdued than on the flamboyant Murano. The sheet metal appears to be solid and of high quality, and the doors, hood, and hatchback-lid close reasonably solid. There are no body-side mouldings on the doors to protect from careless people in parking lots giving you dings.....an increasingly common cost-cutting item for automakers. The exterior paint job is on the good side (as it is with most of today's vehicles), but lacks the brilliance/smoothness of top-level paint jobs like Audi and Toyota/Lexus. A small amount of orange-peel (but not bad) was noted on the black paint my test-car had. Other Rogue paint colors has lesser-amounts of orange-peel....black, for some reason, with many vehicles, often seems to have the most. The 7 exterior paint colors offered (white, Silver, Black, Red, and Blue, and two shades of Gray,) were mostly on the dull side, with only the Venom Red and Indigo Blue tending to keep your eyes open or from thinking of Murphy's Funeral Home. The S model comes with tall, 70-series, 16" Continental all-season tires, stamped-steel wheels, and silver-plastic wheel covers (SL models get 17" 60-series Continental all-seasons). Several different wheel/tire upgrades come with the Premium and 360-Degree trim packages. The Rogue seems to have enough ground clearance, like most small SUV's, to handle most snowstorms or deep mud without any problem. The twin exterior side mirrors are of adequate size, and their reasonably-solid plastic housings swivel/slide and lock smoothly and firmly. The exterior chrome and trim seemed solid and well-fitted, and I liked the chrome exterior door handles.
UNDERHOOD:
Open up the solid hood, and you must fumble around with a hood prop-rod instead of nice, more-convienient nice gas struts. Yes, this is an inexpensive vehicle, but some other inexpensive vehicles in this price class (like Subaru Foresters and Imprezas) now manage to use struts instead of prop-rods. Once propped, the hood has a nice insulation pad underneath (this helps with engine-noise control, as Nissan 4-cylinders are often not the quietest of powerplants. The basic underhood layout, though (especially for those who do their own work), is one of the vehicle's best points. The 2.5L in-line four-cylinder engine fits in very well, without a big, awkward plastic engine-cover to hide things like on many vehicles today. There is room to reach a number of top/middle engine components around the sides and in front. The battery (to the right of the engine), is clear, exposed, and easily-accessible. The dipsticks, fluid-reservoirs, and filler-caps, likewise, are fairly easy to reach. Upmarket/luxury-car manufacturers need to take a GOOD look at the way that vehicles like this are done underhood...I've seen countless upmarket vehicles where almost nothing is accessable under the hood, and one vehicle (the Porsche Boxster) with no engine hood at all.
INTERIOR:
Though the all-black cloth interior in my test car was, overall, a little too monotone-black and plain-looking for my tastes (Gray is also available), there were a number of things I liked about it. It was evident that Nissan, for the most part, did not cut many costs inside with material quality, and used somewhat plain-looking but well-made parts. The only really cheap hardware I came across were the solid, hard-plastic sun-visors, and even they seemed to be of durable plastic, not something that would fall apart in your hands. Nissan really got stung with criticism, back in the first days of CEO Carlos Ghosn's famous interior cost-cutting, of its insultingly cheap interior materials. Those days, of course, are gone. Starting about 2005 or so, Nissan started upgrading their interiors once again, and it shows. The Rogue's interior certainly is not lavish or luxury-grade, but virtually everything, even if plain-looking, feels solid and well-made. The dash has a strong, well-fitted, padded-surface all over it. The air vents, which are of the rotary type, operate with Swiss-Watch precision. The steering wheel is handsome, well-trimmed, and comfortable to hold. The stereo sound quality is pretty good for a vehicle of this class, and the stereo controls are very simple and easy-to-use (ditto for the climate-control *****). I'm a firm believer in simple, easily-used controls like this, as they lessen the chances of the driver having to take his or her eyes off the road any longer than necessary. This is a model dash/control setup for many manufacturers......Audi, BMW, Mercedes, are you listening? The matching speedometer and tachometer were also models of simplicity, clearness, and ease-of-reading (some of the best I've seen), but I didn't like the yellow digital bar-graph fuel-gauge, engine-temperature, and gear/trip-numbers between them quite as much.
All of the other interior hardware.....door/window switches, locks, *****, etc.... felt solid and of high quality. the interior door panels had hard-plastic upper-ridges but, even in the S model, had nice, big, soft, fabric-trimmed inserts and armrests as well. The nicely-done, solid-feeling vertical door-pulls, covered in well-painted silver/brushed-metal, added a nice touch.....as did the other silver/brushed-chrome accents on the wheel, console, and dash. However, I missed having some wood-tone trim inside....none is available from the factory. The fabric, which pretty much matched the fabric on the seats, was durable-feeling, yet plush. I didn't particularly care for the seating comfort of the front seats, though, as the cushions, though trimmed with nice fabric, were a little firm for my tastes, and the flat side-bolsters didn't give much lateral support. However, vehicles like the Rogue are not sports cars, aren't usually driven that way, and generally don't need sports-car body-support for hard cornering. The manual front-seat adjuster-levers generally worked OK, but sometimes had a slightly awkward feel. Headroom, front and rear, is OK for taller people, even with the sunroof housing and the slightly-dropped rear roofline. Legroom and footroom are also OK, front and rear, even with the front seat adjusted back a little.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
Open up the solid hatch-lid assembly, and a fairly nicely-appointed cargo area greets you. The rear roofline and raked-forward rear window does compromisethe cargo-room a little, but not badly, and certainly much less than in the similiarly-sized Infiniti EX35. The cargo-area is generally well-trimmed and well-finished for a vehicle of this class, though it does lack remote-releases at the rear end for the rear seat folding. On my test-vehicle with black interior, the trunk floor (and lower-walls, if my memory is right) were covered with a reasonably nice, plush, black carpet. The S model, as stated earlier, lacks the spring-loaded, cargo-cover pull-shade, but that can be added as a dealer-accessory (the salespeople, at that dealership, quoted around $150). My particular test-car had the optional ($185) floor/cargo-area mats that protect the trunk's carpet, but, unlike Subarus, the cargo-area piece is MORE carpet, not vinyl/rubber, for all-weather use. Underneath the trunk floor is the temporary spare tire (one of my pet peeves, as I believe cars should come with real spares), and, on top of the spare, a rather awkward-to-use cover with several trim-pieces that have to be inserted/removed just right for the cover to fit and/or be removed properly.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the ubiquitous Nissan 2.5L four with an old-fashioned key and side-column ignition switch (many vehicles, today, have converted to START/STOP buttons and proximity keys, but, in this class, it's not a big deal). The engine comes to life with fairly good refinement and a fairly smooth, quiet idle (the aforementioned underhood insulation pad does its job, but you still know it's not a Lexus V8). Once underway, the 4-cylinder combines with the CVT, despite the added weight/drag of the AWD, to give adequate all-around pick-up for everyday driving, at least with a lightly-loaded vehicle. Starting up from rest, things bog down a little for a couple of seconds, and, initially, acceleration is rather slow, but then starts to pick up noticeably. The CVT has a smooth, slick-operating shift lever but only two shift ranges.....D for normal driving and L for "Low" when downhill engine-braking or more power is needed for steep hills. On the S model, there are no column-shift paddles, and no separate gate for manual-shift "ranges" like with some other CVTs. Engine noise is rather low, even on hard acceleration, with less-than-intrusive exhaust noise. The CVT is, of course, smooth and quiet, though there is a small amount of the traditional CVT "rubber-banding" and "motorboating" effect, where RPMs climb at first, before acceleration follows.
The chassis is fairly well-done for a small SUV, keeping in mind that this was not designed to be a sports car. Steering response (by small SUV standards), despite the tall 70-series Continental tires on the test car that were designed for comfort more than handling, was not bad, though with abrupt steering input, there is noticeable body roll from the fairly high center of gravity. The seating position is high enough, even for a small SUV, that you are up above the roofs of most cars and looking down on a lot of the traffic in front of you. You can't see much out the rear, though, because of
the smallish window, slightly droop-rear roofline, and big, bulky D-Pillars. The S-model, of course, doesn't have a built-in camera for rear viewing on the NAV screen. Wind-noise control is generally muted and well-done, though there is a small but noticeable amount of road/tire noise from the all-season Contintntals. Braking action, though generally effective, showed some initial softness/sponginess in the brake pedal. It is hard to find almost any American, Korean, or Japanese-designed SUVs with really firm brake pedals, which seem to be mostly the realm of German-designed SUVs. The brake pedal, though, is fairly well-placed in relation to the gas pedal, so I didn't have any problems with my big size-15 circus-clown shoes hanging up or catching on the bottom or edge of the brake pedal while moving from gas-pedal to brake.....as I have written before, that, for me, is a problem in some vehicles.
THE VERDICT:
The overall conclusion, here, I'd say, is a good small SUV for the money. Most Rogue models, but especially the base S model, are attractively-priced, and, IMO, offer good value for the money. Nissan, though still cost-cutting on some convenience items like the hood prop-rod and temporary spare, has come a long way, especially in the quality of interior materials, from the old days of Ghosn's excessive cheapness. I find the interior a little plain-looking for my tastes, but there's no doubting its improved quality. The overall reliabilty record has generally been good, with few customer complaints.Road manners, by small-SUV standards, are generally good, and the underhood layout, for those who do their own work, is excellent. The powertrain, though certainly not dragster-quick, is adequate for most normal driving.
But there are a couple of flies in the ointment, too. The rear window and D-Pillars need redesign for better vision. The front seats need softer cushions and more-supportive side-bolsters. The brakes, though perfectly safe, could use a little more pedal-firmness. The CVT, though, is my main concern. It has not really been on the market that long (just the last few years), and some CVTs, though OK in the short run, have proved unreliable as miles built up, especially with higher-powered engines that put a lot of stress on them. The Nissan CVTs are, of course, covered by the standard 5 year/60,000 powertrain warranty (3/36 bumper-to-bumper), and Nissan has extended the factory warranties on the CVTs in some of their other models because they have been troublesome. Consumer Reports has given the Rogue a good reliability rating, but much of that data has been with the conventional transmissions of the past.
Still, if you basically like the vehicle, I wouldn't let the admittedly small possibility of a CVT breakdown stop me....especially if you plan to keep the vehicle only 5 years/60,000 miles or less. And IF the Rogue CVT units do prove troubleome over time, Nissan, recently, has been a very responsible company, and will probably extend the warranties on them, too.
As always, of course............Happy Car Shopping.
MM
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-26-10 at 08:32 AM.
06-25-10, 07:31 PM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
Nice review Mike, they really are great reads. . My wife and I would disagree about the interior though. Our opinion was the same, it was cheap and blah. We also noticed the seats felt like they had no cushion at all on the sides. It really is basic transportation and to me should be about 5 grand cheaper. We also think the exterior is pretty bad. She had 0 interest in it.
They had some "Rom" package or "Black" package on the lot that helped though, gave it a center exhaust, some red stitching and a different front grill which helped.
They had some "Rom" package or "Black" package on the lot that helped though, gave it a center exhaust, some red stitching and a different front grill which helped.
06-25-10, 07:43 PM
#3
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
Yes, the interior, especially in all-black, is somewhat dull-looking....I thought I made that clear in the review. But, unlike some Mitusbishi and Dodge/Chrysler interiors (and, yes, Nissan interiors of 2000-2005), the materials inside are not a bunch of cheap junk. I do agree, however, that the seat cushions and bolsters are not the best...I also tried to make that clear.
The best way to describe the exterior, as I see it, is a somewhat less in-your-face version of the Murano.
(But that, of course, is not a long-enough description for a formal review)
That was probably the S "Krom" package that I mentioned in the opening part of the review. They have it on the website, but not in the sales brochure.
The S-version is a pretty good value for the money as it is....only some 22K as reviewed. If they kept the AWD and dropped the price 5K, they would have to make it the size of the Munchkin Suzuki SX-4, which sells in that price range.
. My wife and I would disagree about the interior though. Our opinion was the same, it was cheap and blah. We also noticed the seats felt like they had no cushion at all on the sides.
We also think the exterior is pretty bad. She had 0 interest in it.
(But that, of course, is not a long-enough description for a formal review)
They had some "Rom" package or "Black" package on the lot that helped though, gave it a center exhaust, some red stitching and a different front grill which helped.
It really is basic transportation and to me should be about 5 grand cheaper
Last edited by mmarshall; 06-25-10 at 07:52 PM.
06-26-10, 02:33 PM
#4
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
BTW, just out of curiosity.....does anybody on CL own a Rogue, particularly a newer one with the CVT? How has it held up....any problems?
06-27-10, 05:24 PM
#7
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Sure. Anytime.
Like I told Mike above, the exterior is best-described as a slightly smaller Murano with less in-your-face front/rear styling. The interior, as you note, uses good-quality materials (I liked all of the materials used except for the El Cheapo sun-visors). But the all-black version, despite some nice chrome/brushed-metal trim here and there, is somewhat like a coal mine.....that is also the case with some other all-black interiors I've looked at as well.
it looks so much like the murano. but the I agree, the interior is very well made.
Trending Topics
06-27-10, 05:33 PM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Though I wouldn't call it a vulgar word like that, I agree that the exterior styling is not quite to my tastes either, as it is somewhat Murano-like, which is another vehicle whose styling is not my forte either. But, since Nissan already does the boxier, more traditional Cube, Xterra, Pathfinder and Armada in its SUV line, I think that both the Murano and Rogue were attempts to do a more sleeker-looking SUV.
I'm not sure where you come up with the interior being "space-ship" looking, though I'll respect your opinion on that (and I invite disagreements when I post reviews). It is definitely NOT space-ship-like, though, in the simplicity of its contorls/*****/buttons, which is a feature I definitely like.
While driving and trying to keep my eves on the road, I find few things more irritating and distractive than trying to fool around with overly-complex electronic controls and devices like I-Drive, MMI, etc.....
06-27-10, 07:50 PM
#9
Lexus Champion
I've seen a lot of these during my vacation in America. They look quite nice (like a mini-Murano)
However
They just can't seem to sell these in Taiwan though. I guess it competes too much with the X-trail over there (which is cheaper and local-made versus a US-import).
Still a good vehicle from what I've seen so far (it's like an American Dualis/Qashqai).
However
They just can't seem to sell these in Taiwan though. I guess it competes too much with the X-trail over there (which is cheaper and local-made versus a US-import).
Still a good vehicle from what I've seen so far (it's like an American Dualis/Qashqai).
06-27-10, 08:02 PM
#10
Lexus Test Driver
Great report.
CVT's do have a past and a track record. Audi started using them in 2002 and Nissan has had it since the Murano. Other brands like Subaru have also used them. They have proven to be no more unreliable than conventional automatics. The days of worrying about these things is over.
Biggest issue with the Rogue is the front end styling. Like many recent Nissan SUV's and trucks, it's a mish mosh of shapes that looks plain weird.
CVT's do have a past and a track record. Audi started using them in 2002 and Nissan has had it since the Murano. Other brands like Subaru have also used them. They have proven to be no more unreliable than conventional automatics. The days of worrying about these things is over.
Biggest issue with the Rogue is the front end styling. Like many recent Nissan SUV's and trucks, it's a mish mosh of shapes that looks plain weird.
06-27-10, 08:10 PM
#11
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
I've seen a lot of these during my vacation in America. They look quite nice (like a mini-Murano)
However
They just can't seem to sell these in Taiwan though. I guess it competes too much with the X-trail over there (which is cheaper and local-made versus a US-import).
Still a good vehicle from what I've seen so far (it's like an American Dualis/Qashqai).
However
They just can't seem to sell these in Taiwan though. I guess it competes too much with the X-trail over there (which is cheaper and local-made versus a US-import).
Still a good vehicle from what I've seen so far (it's like an American Dualis/Qashqai).
I would imagine (or at least guess) that the Rogue's brother XTerra (or whatever Nissan calls it in Taiwan) sells pretty well over there. It is more rugged than the Rogue, truck-based/full-framed for off-road capability, and is more useful in areas where the roads aren't that good.
06-27-10, 08:21 PM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Thanks.
I hope you are correct (and you may be), but not all the news is reassuring. Some have been reliable; some haven't. Ford had trouble with the CVT in the AWD Five Hundred/Mercury Montego, and replaced it with a conventional 6-speed. Subaru just recalled the 2010/2011 Legacy/Outback 4-cylinder CVTs for a fluid-hose leakage. And Nissan itself, though without a recall, has extended the warranties on some of its troublesome CVTs...I don't know exactly which ones (they use them on a number of different vehicles).
Of course, as I said in the review, Nissan is a responsible company, and, no doubt, will stand behind the Rogue CVTs if they do fail prematurely, just as they did with several (non-related) design/quality issues with the 350Z.
The Rogue's grille and headlights appears to be more-or-less taken from the Altima/Maxina.....especially the Maxima.
CVT's do have a past and a track record. Audi started using them in 2002 and Nissan has had it since the Murano. Other brands like Subaru have also used them. They have proven to be no more unreliable than conventional automatics. The days of worrying about these things is over.
Of course, as I said in the review, Nissan is a responsible company, and, no doubt, will stand behind the Rogue CVTs if they do fail prematurely, just as they did with several (non-related) design/quality issues with the 350Z.
Biggest issue with the Rogue is the front end styling. Like many recent Nissan SUV's and trucks, it's a mish mosh of shapes that looks plain weird.
09-24-14, 01:47 AM
#13
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: MA
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice review Mike, they really are great reads. . My wife and I would disagree about the interior though. Our opinion was the same, it was cheap and blah. We also noticed the seats felt like they had no cushion at all on the sides. It really is basic transportation and to me should be about 5 grand cheaper. We also think the exterior is pretty bad. She had 0 interest in it.
They had some "Rom" package or "Black" package on the lot that helped though, gave it a center exhaust, some red stitching and a different front grill which helped.
They had some "Rom" package or "Black" package on the lot that helped though, gave it a center exhaust, some red stitching and a different front grill which helped.
09-24-14, 06:32 AM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Welcome to CL as a new poster.
I see you bumped up an old review of mine. Glad you enjoyed your Rogue,
When you have a flat tire on a car-based AWD system like your Rogue, make sure, with the use of any tires regular or temporary), that, if the AWD is not disconnected by pulling the fuse, that all four of them are as close to factory-original size as possible, even allowing for tread-wear. That's because the center-differential creates heat when it works to redistribute front/rear torque because of differences in tire-rotation speed. Worn or smaller tires will rotate slightly faster than fresh ones, and, if the difference in rotation speed is constant, enough constant heat from the differential could (?) be produced to shorten the life of the unit...an expensive piece of hardware to replace. Check with your Nissan Service manager for the Rogue, but Subaru's recommendation for similar AWD systems with a flat tire is that, no matter which tire is flat, to put the two best tires up front, disconnect the AWD with a fuse-puller, run the car in FWD, and put the temporary spare on the rear until the tires are repaired or replaced. That's just one of the compromises that (sometimes) has to be made with AWD.....which is why many people just use Roadside Assistance.
I see you bumped up an old review of mine. Glad you enjoyed your Rogue,
When you have a flat tire on a car-based AWD system like your Rogue, make sure, with the use of any tires regular or temporary), that, if the AWD is not disconnected by pulling the fuse, that all four of them are as close to factory-original size as possible, even allowing for tread-wear. That's because the center-differential creates heat when it works to redistribute front/rear torque because of differences in tire-rotation speed. Worn or smaller tires will rotate slightly faster than fresh ones, and, if the difference in rotation speed is constant, enough constant heat from the differential could (?) be produced to shorten the life of the unit...an expensive piece of hardware to replace. Check with your Nissan Service manager for the Rogue, but Subaru's recommendation for similar AWD systems with a flat tire is that, no matter which tire is flat, to put the two best tires up front, disconnect the AWD with a fuse-puller, run the car in FWD, and put the temporary spare on the rear until the tires are repaired or replaced. That's just one of the compromises that (sometimes) has to be made with AWD.....which is why many people just use Roadside Assistance.
Last edited by mmarshall; 09-24-14 at 06:36 AM.
09-24-14, 09:25 AM
#15
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
a donut spare should be used basically only to get your car to a shop to put a new tire on. it may make noise because it's not a 'real' tire and not designed for speed, handling, or anything other than to crawl to a shop.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
