Thoughts on 2017 Nissan Qashqai

tebore wrote: ↑ You mean the Rouge sport but with a stupid Name?
It's horribly under powered.

dealerguy wrote: ↑ Just did a quick comparison with its competition:

Mazda CX3 - 146hp @ 6,000 rpm, 146 lb-ft @ 2,800 rpm
Qashqai - 141hp @ 6,000 rpm, 147 lb-ft @ 4,400 rpm
HRV (1.8litre) - 141hp @ 6,500 rpm, 127 lb-ft @ 4,300 rpm

Are you saying all are under-powered. Only GLA has more hp and torque in its class. I am just trying to make myself knowledgeable before making a decision.

AstulzerRSX wrote: ↑ Even with the engines screaming, these subcompact SUVs are a couple seconds slower to 60, and in highway merging (80-110kmh) than a standard compact.
This can make a big difference in whether or not you're able to make it up a hill or keep up with faster traffic in low noise, or pass confidently.

Here they are in order of speed, measured by Car and Driver with the engines screaming

The CX-3 AWD does 0-60 in 8.1, 50-70mph in 5.7s
The HR-V does 0-60 in 9.5, 50-70 in 6.8s
The Rogue Sport does 0-60 in 10s, 50-70 in 6.9s

In comparison, the current Civic weighs about the same as the HRV, but has either 160/138lbft (base 2.0), or a 174/160lbft (1.5T).
These subcompact SUVs also have a taller profile and worse aerodynamics on the highway.

Civic Hatch: 0-60 in 6.9, 50-70 in 4.8s
Golf Sportwagen TSI: 0-60 in 7.8, 50-70 in 5.3
Mazda 3 2.0: 0-60 in 7.9, 50-70 in 5.4s
The Fit CVT does 0-60 in 8.5, 50-70 in 6.1s

dealerguy wrote: ↑ Thanks for the details. I was dead set on Civic Hatchback but Sport and above trim need Premium fuel and I don't want to spend that extra money. LX trim doesn't come with some features I need.

tebore wrote: ↑ You mean the Rouge sport but with a stupid Name?
It's horribly under powered.

AstulzerRSX wrote: ↑ I'm getting the sense that reliability might be important to you.
What features is the LX Civic Hatch missing?

At 25k, the Qashqai SV is also getting close to a well negotiated FWD RAV4, which is a whole class larger than the subcompact SUVS.
You might want to check out a lightly used Mazda 3 Sport with the 2.5 (GT trim?).

tinbitz wrote: ↑ I don't understand Nissan, they keep on churning out these new small suv crossover whatever they are but they refuse to update the other models that people care about.

tebore wrote: ↑ You mean the Rouge sport but with a stupid Name?
It's horribly under powered.

Swerny wrote: ↑
Pretty sure the Rogue is a NA only nameplate, rest of the world is Qashqai. Why Nissan waited until now to use it here makes no sense

LadyBug420 wrote: ↑ That Qashqai is massive in Europe. It's being renamed "Rogue Sport" in America because they are not as tolerant, like Canada.

The next big trend in North America is the subcompact SUV, the CUV. Qashqai is at the top of that category.

iamskyhigh wrote: ↑ Don’t expect to pick up chicks in a car called the Qashqai.

tebore wrote: ↑ The CX3 and HRV take are the champs right now. Spiritual successors to a segment that the first gen Toyota Matrix help create (but was way too a head of its time)

AstulzerRSX wrote: ↑ Wouldn't the spiritual successor be the Fit? Other than AWD, the Matrix had the flat load floor with cargo hooks that the Fit has with its magic cargo system.

tebore wrote: ↑ That's part of why it's stupid. It creates confusion for a newish launch.
The name also doesn't fall in line with any of Nissan's other vehicle names. It doesn't inspire anything.
The Rouge Sport (tho the sport part is a joke)actually makes more sense in North America because it's so similar to the existing Rouge.



Top of the category how? It has a laughable 0-60 time that borders on dangerous. The rest of the drivetrain is just as bad as the rest of Nissans underpowered CVT (their CVTs aren't terrible it's just the choice of engines, CVTs need torque)cars less the handling found in some of the mid sized offerings. The 6 speed is the only way to go(however I don't think it's offered in the higher trims)

Interior finish is not great. Mileage also is bad for a car with that many compromises

The only car this thing tops is the hilarious bad Toyota CHR (it's got a good chassis but just outgunned every which way by the HRV[no AWD and even more underpowered]).

If the CHR AWD Hybrid ever makes its appearance This thing becomes totally irrelevant.

The CX3 and HRV take are the champs right now. Spiritual successors to a segment that the first gen Toyota Matrix help create (but was way too a head of its time)

I haven't even touched on Trax and Encore cuz you know RFD don't like domestics.

RCOnline wrote: ↑ So your saying this assessment is total wrong: http://wwwa.autotrader.ca/expert/201709 ... pact-suvs/