Toyota C-HR Nissan Juke comparison test – Toyota c-HR Nissan Juke car, how to win the hearts of Japanese ladies “children”
The high ground clearance of the Nissan Juke is not a hindrance to precise and reckless handling
In the climate block "hidden" parameters of driving modes
Bose speakers placed in including headrests
On the second row for adults, you can go, but it’s better to put the children
The rear door handles have been successfully tucked into the C-pillars
Under the trunk floor in Nissan has a roomy compartment
Routing test-drive Nissan Juke in 2017
Toyota CH-R is operated safely and reliably, providing comfort and peace of mind for driver and passengers
An 8-inch touchscreen display dominates the cabin
Indicator lamps installed in the mirror
The second row, despite the compact dimensions of the crossover, is very hospitable
Like a competitor to Toyota, the door handles are hidden in the C-pillars
The luggage compartment is small, so big luggage, it is better not to take
Routing test drive, Toyota C-HR 2017
The editors thank the administration of the country club Mechta Hills Club for their help in organizing the shooting
On the eve of March 8, we took for comparison the crossovers driven by the representatives of the beautiful half of humanity can be seen more often than men
Both cars look very bright on the verge of shocking. And although the appearance of the Nissan Juke has long been accustomed to, and the latest updates, it has not changed much, the crossover looks quite fresh. The Toyota C-HR has a bolder faceted shape, but the silhouette is very similar to the enemy, and the door handles disguised in the C-pillars clearly indicate who the toyotausa is used as an object to follow.
Nissan Juke for sale there is no alternative to the 1.6-liter "aspirated" with a capacity of 117 liters. with., front-wheel drive and stepless variator. The most affordable package is available for 1,190,000 conventional units, and the most expensive – for 1,359,000 conventional units. Compared to a competitor – almost nothing. Because the cheapest c-HR costs more than the most expensive Juke, if we consider the corrected version. However, in addition to the Nissan, you can choose more expensive body colors and special colored inserts on the body and in the cabin, and then it will cost a little more than most affordable Toyota cars, but not by much.
So, s-h with a 1.2-liter turbo engine with a capacity of 115 liters. with., front-wheel drive and a manual 6-speed gearbox is estimated at 1,367,000, and if you choose the same engine with a CVT and all-wheel drive, the price of the car will increase to 2,169,000! There is also an option with a 2-liter 148-horsepower “aspirated", front-wheel drive and a 1,756,000 CVT. This is exactly what we took for comparison as the closest to the Juke model in terms of drive type, transmission and nature of the power source. Let’s see if Toyota can justify the higher price.
Design Issues
In the cabin, both rivals are trying to outdo each other in the originality of stylistic decisions. Thus, the Toyota interior surprises with an unprecedented riot of lines for the brand, embossed diamond on the doors and ceiling and a large bulging 8-inch touchscreen tablet in the center of the front panel. In short, gadget lovers will enjoy. But the superb build quality and soft plastics are positive without exception. The only complaint: due to the low roof, when landing in the salon, regularly apply first with your head on its arch.
With ergonomics with-HR order. Controls are easy to reach for all keys, power windows are automatic and backlit, and the steering wheel is adjustable for both tilt and reach. It would seem that God knows what achievements, but the Juke of the auto power window (with backlit keys) is only the driver and the steering wheel, you cannot assign it yourself. It is not visible in the dark and the mirror control joystick. And the location of the keys, heated seats between the front seats keeps you distracted from the road when you turn it on or off. Another downside is the lack of a center armrest from Nissan, while Toyota does. Unlike the rival, Juke and dual-zone climate control cannot.
But this car is so forgiving, looking at the cockpit design with its sleek lines and original details, such as the central tunnel shaped like a motorcycle fuel tank. Even hard plastic is not annoying, because it immediately lifts the mood. Also, despite the lack of reach adjustment, a comfortable seating position is easy to find, and the snug-fitting Nissan seat is better than the Toyota. Roof and Juke do not need to bend down when landing. However, the s-HR geometry behind the steering wheel is still slightly better due to the steering wheel adjustment. And the chairs are very good.
On the second row, Toyota is noticeably more spacious. So, if a person of 180 cm adjusts the front seat for himself and changes back, about 8-10 cm will remain in front of his knees, while in Nissan with the same gap the order will remain. Overhead on C-HR, same 8-10cm, and Juke 5-6cm, but if you try Nissan to put it (head) on the headrest, nothing happens – the ceiling collapsed on the head. Toyota doesn’t have this problem, but the sofa is more welcoming. Therefore, it is better to transport adult passengers from behind in C-HR. But in Juka, this can only be done in case of emergency. However, children will be quite comfortable there.
But the volume of the trunk in the lead comes from Nissan. If you open up our rivals, the branch’s fifth door seems almost the same, but the Juke delivers a pleasant surprise in the form of a three-dimensional space under the floor where you can put a lot of things, hiding it from prying eyes. If we raise the second floor, it will show up in the "free rider" section. Toyota also has it, but it is located immediately under the first (and only) floor. To increase the crossover is equipped with folding in the back of the sofa.
Not the appearance of the One
In the city, the atmospheric 117-horsepower Nissan engine is enough for the eyes. The engine spins briskly, and it successfully helps with a stepless variator. And only outside the metropolis, where speeds increase, with intense overtaking, traction begins to be missed. The CVT displays the power supply at maximum torque, but the car slowly accelerates with the engine howling loudly and strainingly. So the driver overtaking Juke must be calculated with a large margin.
Toyota, despite the advantage in engine size, power and torque in urban conditions, practically does not differ from the enemy. The engine pulls, and the CVT will gear ratio. In addition, the transmission settings, with-HR, seem to be even more melancholic than the Juke due to the response to fuel delivery being not as fast, although there does not seem to be a pause. Opens the engine outside the city, where, unlike Nissan, overtaking is no problem. The motor doesn’t bother because it sounds better since it rarely goes at high speed.
But Juke takes on a winding road. Both cars do bagels about 2.8 turns lock-to-lock, but the Nissan’s steering feels sharper. This is because, due to the stiffening of the suspension, this SUV reacts to the movement of the driver’s hands than the enemy. In addition, the Juke bagel has a more intense reaction effect, which enhances the sports mood, and is better educational. Combined with Nissan’s hard-tuned chassis, the filigree handles through curves of varying curvature, which is a huge pleasure for the driver.
Toyota steering more background, very informative no different. However, this is not required, since c-HR preaches completely different values, the main point of which is not to strain the driver. He does not need to know what is happening from the steering wheel, because the crossover does everything on its own: it is accurate in turns and clings to the trajectory. That is, it is managed perfectly, just not recklessly.
As for the terrain, given that our wards are equipped with front-wheel drive, one should not expect feats from them. Toyota, after a snowfall, sat on its “belly” in an ordinary Moscow courtyard, demonstrated this to the fullest. In order to free her, we spent a good half an hour to work actively, shoveling snow (in the absence of a shovel, I did this manually). Nissan in the same place was on the verge – thanks to two additional centimeters of ground clearance.
The leader’s ride on Toyota is expected to be most noticeable on the small bumps that she barely notices. On large bumps, however, not everything is so rosy, even at normal speed it throws quite a blow, especially in the rear seats. Against the backdrop of a competitor, Nissan feels stronger than a "small", but on a "big", its loss is not so great, and the frankly broken roads of our competitors are compared, showing good intensity. In terms of sound insulation, everything is also smooth: both crossovers have a soft hum from the tires, and the engines start loudly only at high speeds.
If we put in dozens, then this test would win Toyota, improved ergonomics and a more spacious interior. In reality, however, not everything is so simple. Because Nissan rulitsya is so great that forgive all other shortcomings. But when you consider the fact that it is much cheaper, then making a choice becomes even more difficult.
|
Specifications Nissan Juke 1.6
Overall dimensions, mm
|
4135х1765х1565
Wheel base, mm
|
2530
Turning radius, m
|
10.7
Ground clearance, mm
|
180
Trunk volume, l
|
354
Curb weight, kg
|
1225
engine’s type
|
P4 diesel
Working volume, cm3
|
1598
Max. power, l. s./rpm
|
117/6000
Max. torque, Nm/r/min
|
158/4000
Disk
|
rack
Broadcast
|
stepless variator
Front tires/rear
|
215/55 P17
Max. speed, km/h
|
170
Acceleration 0-100 km/h, s
|
11.5
Fuel consumption (average), l/100 km
|
6.3
Tank volume, l
|
46
|
|
Specifications Car Toyota C-HR 2.0
Overall dimensions, mm
|
4360х1795х1565
Wheel base, mm
|
2640
Turning radius, m
|
10.4
Ground clearance, mm
|
160
Trunk volume, l
|
297
Curb weight, kg
|
1420
engine’s type
|
P4 diesel
Working volume, cm3
|
1987
Max. power, l. s./rpm
|
148/6000
Max. torque, Nm/r/min
|
189/3800
Disk
|
rack
Broadcast
|
stepless variator
Front tires/rear
|
215/65 R16 on
Max. speed, km/h
|
195
Acceleration 0-100 km/h, s
|
eleven
Fuel consumption (average), l/100 km
|
6.9
Tank volume, l
|
fifty
|