By now it seems like almost everyone is over the froggy, concept car looks of the 2011 Nissan Juke. Part of that has to do with the Juke being a darned good place to spend time and a fun partner on a twisty road.
But twisty roads have limitations like speed limits, other drivers and the occasional cliff. Our testing facility, however, has none of those limitations and is the perfect place to see how our Nissan Juke stacks up in 0-60, quarter mile, slalom, skidpad and braking.
188 horsepower, 3,170 pounds, AWD...Follow the jump to see how it did.
Vehicle: 2011 Nissan Juke SL AWD
Odometer: 2,497
Date: 3/8/2011
Driver: Mike Monticello
Price: $25,890
Specifications:
Drive Type: Transverse, front-engine, all-wheel drive
Transmission Type: Pulley-regulated continuously variable transmission with console shifter with Sport mode
Engine Type: DOHC, four valves per cylinder, variable intake + exhaust-valve
Displacement (cc/cu-in): 1,599/98
Redline (rpm): 6,500
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 188 @ 5,600
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 177 @ 2,000
Brake Type (front): 11.7-inch vented discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Brake Type (rear): 11.5 -inch one-piece solid cast-iron discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Steering System: Electric speed-proportional rack and pinion power steering
Suspension Type (front): Independent MacPherson struts, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Suspension Type (rear): Mullti-link, coil springs, stabilizer bar
Tire Size (front): P215/55R17 93V
Tire Size (rear): P215/55R17 93V
Tire Brand: Goodyear
Tire Model: Eagle RS-A
Tire Type: All Season
Wheel size: 17-by-7 inches front and rear
Wheel material (front/rear): Cast aluminum
As tested Curb Weight (lb): 3,170
Test Results:
Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 2.9 (3.5 with T/C on)
0-45 (sec): 4.9 (5.5 with T/C on)
0-60 (sec): 7.4 (8.1 with T/C on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 7.1 (7.7 with T/C on)
0-75 (sec): 10.9 (11.8 with T/C on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 15.5 @ 88.9 (16.1 @ 87.8 with T/C on)
Braking
30-0 (ft): 32
60-0 (ft): 122
Handling
Slalom (mph): 67.3 (61.8 with T/C on)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.84 (0.84 with T/C on)
Sound
Db @ Idle: 39.5
Db @ Full Throttle: 74.0
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 65.8
RPM @ 70: 2,300
Comments
Acceleration: Extremely laggard-like off the line, then moves smartly once turbo spools up. Sport mode proved no quicker than normal as it uses shift points instead of holding the revs high like in CVT/rubber band mode. Quickest run was in normal, ESC off and some power braking. Once the CVT gets to 6,500, it holds the revs there. Manual shifting via console lever; does not hold gears, blips throttle on downshifts.
Braking: Minimal nosedive, yet the rears would still lock up slightly, causing the car to squirm to the right. Stops with violent motions like its diving then squatting over and over. Good pedal feel. The travel didn't lengthen any, but each stop proved longer than the last.
Handling: (done in AWD) Skidpad: ESC-on / ESC-off numbers identical, as the stability system hardly cut in at all. I had to work the throttle on and off even with the system on as the ESC would let it understeer off the circle before it would finally cut in. Slalom: ESC can be fully defeated -- nice. Steering is very quick and the Juke changes direction well, feels like it has a relatively low center of gravity. Short wheelbase also helps it sneak around the cones. ESC-on was frustrating, though, as it added so much brake at times that it would force the Juke to drive straight instead of completing the turn.
EDIT: And here's a link to our full test of a front wheel drive Nissan Juke for comparison. Speed read: 0-60: 7.3 (7.0 w/ro); Quarter: 15.5 @ 89.9 ; slalom 66.2; skidpad 0.83.
hellishfiend says:
11:06 PM, 03/20/11
Wish we could see a track test for the FWD model too. Isn't it supposed to be a bit quicker? Still, the AWD definitely does seem to fit the bill for a fun car. =)
93aero says:
11:21 PM, 03/20/11
Its still hard to warm up to the troll face. Always looks like its trying really hard to not laugh at something hysterical. A shame, since it seems to be pretty fun to throw around. Maybe a redesign will change all that when it comes around... like the first gen Murano. when people thought "OH THATS WEIRD" ....then nissan changed it. and you get the whole, "The 1st one wasnt so bad" speech. We'll just have to wait and see if this is a murano all over again.
church123 says:
11:21 PM, 03/20/11
I take it that this car suffers from the standard Nissan/Infiniti issue of not allowing brake torquing of any reasonable magnitude? Seems like that would really boost acceleration if you could wood the throttle to build some boost on the line.
Also, is the tach accurate? Seems weird that it would hold revs so far above the power peak....
7driver says:
11:23 PM, 03/20/11
"By now it seems like almost everyone is over the froggy, concept car looks..."
You mean everyone on staff? Seems to me the peanut gallery isn't nearly so.
zcalvert says:
11:43 PM, 03/20/11
not sure how the development engineers missed this:
"yet the rears would still lock up slightly, causing the car to squirm to the right. Stops with violent motions like its diving then squatting over and over"...
no exactly confidence-inspiring.
bimmerjay says:
12:10 AM, 03/21/11
"no exactly confidence-inspiring."
Agreed, they sound scary.
Slalom is surprisingly good with ESC off... and the time with ESC on is dramatically slower - that's the biggest gap I've seen in a long time. So is it a low intervention threshold or poor calibration?
elgac says:
05:24 AM, 03/21/11
"Handling: (done in AWD)"
Why AWD mode and not AWD-V mode?
stephen987 says:
06:11 AM, 03/21/11
Looks like it takes Puumba a while to wake up!
northsparrow says:
06:48 AM, 03/21/11
Imagine Howard Cosell saying the following,
" The manual beats the CVT"
"The cheaper, front, wheel, drive, manual beats the more expensive CVT all, wheel, drive, version"
revaholic says:
07:06 AM, 03/21/11
I don't get it, InsideLine. How is it that you make a video of the NITRO being track tested, but not an infinitely more interesting car like the Juke?
engineear says:
07:50 AM, 03/21/11
I don't care what anyone says or how good it handles or how fast it is...it's still an ugly frog..IMO.
technetium99 says:
07:51 AM, 03/21/11
revaholic: They tried, but the camera kept breaking from the sheer ugly.
elgac says:
08:13 AM, 03/21/11
@engineear: "don't care what anyone says or how good it handles or how fast it is...it's still an ugly frog..IMO."
So you're boring and enjoy a boring drive. Got it.
blueguydotcom says:
08:31 AM, 03/21/11
Nice handling numbers for something so tall.
louiswei says:
09:04 AM, 03/21/11
Faster than the Regal...
Just sayin'.
ed124c says:
09:42 AM, 03/21/11
From a human's point of view there is no such thing as an "ugly" frog. Just as there is no such thing as a "cute" frog. Frogs pretty much look like frogs, and that is it.
Would those who must continue to concentrate on the Juke's looks be happier if it looked bland, or like every other hatch/CUV on the market? I like the Juke, and the looks are... the looks. This is a unique vehicle, inside and out. Nissan has given us a genuinely refreshing vehicle, with polarizing styling, great interior, fun to drive, good pep, reasonable utility, and decent gas mileage (although the mileage is still suspect.) I can't imagine a current package being any more desirable (at this price point.)
yellowperil says:
10:55 AM, 03/21/11
Regular or premium unleaded gasoline?
(I think Donna D last posted that she put regular unleaded in the tank.)
rokketride says:
10:58 AM, 03/21/11
Nice photo!
elgac says:
11:04 AM, 03/21/11
@yellowperil: "Regular or premium unleaded gasoline?"
Now that is a good question.
jaeger1 says:
12:44 PM, 03/21/11
Is this car with its teeny tiny little turbo engine actually quicker than IL's Buick Regal CXL "Sports Sedan"?
louiswei says:
02:34 PM, 03/21/11
@ jaeger1,
Yes it is.
Amazing isn't it? Well, not really... check out the weight.
xjayflyx says:
06:00 PM, 03/21/11
good question asking if they used Premium or Regular. Seeing as they say it effects full throttle performance!
v8vader says:
06:12 PM, 03/21/11
what an awesome car. i am a proud fan of that funky frog.
what a difference the traction control makes! 5.5 mph in the slalom! seatbelt on, engine started, and T/C off required to operate this vehicle.
engineear says:
08:16 PM, 03/21/11
So you're boring and enjoy a boring drive. Got it.
I own a 08 C30. Style, performance, speed, and NEVER a negative comment. Non-car people are surprised it's a Volvo. Boring it's not...course you know better. You think this frog car is exciting?...says a lot about your taste in vehicles and probably other things. Like I ended my post...it's my opinion. You can have yours too.
chrisa222 says:
11:24 AM, 03/22/11
Enough of the "ugly" comments. We get it..some of you don't like the cars looks. But some of us do...but its getting annoying reading the same comments all the time. engineear...some people don't like the Volvo C30. I like(d) it..and when I was with my buddy watching "Twilight" I commented on Edward Culens car (C30) and my buddy was like "that car looks like a bug". So to each his own...
As far as the Juke numbers go....7.4 seconds is the slowest 0-60 I have seen. I have seen as low as 6.8. IL timed the front-drive car at just a hair quicker at 7.3 seconds but that was also the CVT. I'm betting the 6MT is quicker still.
engineear says:
12:03 AM, 03/25/11
It's still ugly...I'm glad you get it.
zoolander1 says:
09:44 AM, 03/26/11
@engineear & elgac:
I just took ownership of a Juke SV with FWD 6MT and have the following to say:
It's a fun car for the money. Yes, it is ugly and/or weird to most, but we've talked about this. So lets get over it. Handling? Excellent, feels sporty with the stiff/taller ride and the 6 spd MT. I let go of my 2009 Audi A4 Quattro for this and the move makes sense as I lowered my overall debt.
Engineear, you Volvo is an upscale entry level premium vehicle: check; and it has a whole different approach and demeanor: Volvo (and Audi) have this understated subtle luxury and functionality. The Juke doesn't. I doubt anyone would cross shop these vehicles.
I'm trying to think what I could get which is as fun and with a very appealing level of connectivity and technology, 4 disc brakes, for $20k and cannot think of many choices.
Thanks for reading.
engineear says:
12:04 AM, 03/30/11
Yo Zoolander1...I respect your choice. I'm not cross shopping these, just voicing my opinions. If you like it, that's great, I'm sure you'll enjoy it and good luck with it. By the way, I got a great deal on my car...$20k, 100k mile warranty, free tint, free cargo cover, free hats, cups, 4 disc brakes, 227hp turbo 5cyl, enough storage for me and the wife and am averaging 26mpg in town and got 34 mpg to Monument Valley and back last year. Takes 87 octane. Also turned a flat 15 sec 1/4 mile with too much gas and spare stuff in the car.
zoolander1 says:
01:57 PM, 03/31/11
Engineear: Sounds like you got an awesome deal as you seem to be happy with your car. I wouldn't compare a new car purchase vs an old car as buying new makes no sense from a financial stand point. I don't work for Nissan so I'm not advertising for them. In fact, there are a few things I don't like about the Juke such as: VERY limited cargo space, no storage in the center console, only one 12V outlet throughout the vehicle and the engine revs high at highways speeds despite the 6th gear. MPG is a little disappointing at 27.8 mpg hwy when my larger, heavier, faster A4 Quattro gave me 30.5 hwy.
pitbullinajuke says:
04:32 PM, 02/15/12
You guys need to redo the handling test in awd-v
http://blogs.insideline.com/roadtests/2011/04/2011-nissan-juke-sl-awd-the-official-word-on-awd-vs-awd-v.html
awd-v is best for handling on dry pavement. awd is best for slipper surfaces like snow. I would love to see the skidpad numbers done on awd-v. It torque vectors more!