2007 Nissan Cube Review

84 Responses to “ 2007 Nissan Cube Review ”

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 » Show All Reverse Order

• BlueBrat :
  April 25th, 2008 at 9:44 am
  
  

  Why would you want a Diesel in this when it gets 40MPG on regular? That’s pretty decent from how I see it.

  The interior looks a lot nicer than an xB also, and being 6′3″, I could probably sit in this without hitting the roof as compared to the Honda Fit.

• NICKNICK :
  April 25th, 2008 at 9:45 am
  
  

  Parallels to the xB are obvious, so my first thought was “they’ll have it ruined in five years.” Then you said that an all new US-bound cube will debut this year.

  Five bucks says I won’t have to wait five years to see it ruined.

• Michael Karesh :
  April 25th, 2008 at 9:51 am
  
  

  And on Wednesday we heard that 306 horsepower is “meh.”

  When one direction is tapped out, people revert to the other extreme.

  I’m seeing it in the vehicles bought and sold by TrueDelta’s panel members. People are trending to smaller, less powerful, and more economical vehicles.

  Over at the most active forum for the Smart, SmartCarofAmerica.com, there’s a guy who traded a Dodge SRT8 for a ForTwo. Go figure.

• quasimondo :
  April 25th, 2008 at 9:56 am
  
  

  How cute,an iPod with wheels.

  Instead of lightly drubbing the Cube’s throttle, you just bury it.

  I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say that if you’re constantly having to bury the gas pedal to pass anything on the highway from a Smart to a tractor trailer, you’re probably not going to achieve the advertised 40 mpg.

  For that matter, it’s going to have to do better than a 15-second 0-60 time to get my attention. I don’t want a boulevard bruiser that can hang with a 350z, but I don’t want to have to time my on-ramp merges like I’m playing a game of double dutch either. Around where I live, the brake pedal is a magical mythical object, and I’d hate to have that asymmetrical rear end smashed in by somebody who couldn’t be bothered with slowing down or moving over a lane.

• italianstallion :
  April 25th, 2008 at 9:57 am
  
  

  excellent review.

  a fuel and space efficient, fun to drive, lightweight box with a commanding view of the road? this type of car would meets the needs of so many people and WAS briefly available in the US until Toyota/Scion screwed up.

  there have been rumors of an invasion of these JDM box cars since the Scion Xb was launched in 2003. what happened? it seems that Nissan has been talking about bringing over the Cube longer than GM’s been hyping the Volt.

  maybe all the manufacturers are afraid that this type of car (a mini minivan, MPV, tall wagon, call it what you like) would make TOO MUCH sense - with adequate safety equipment and less quirky styling, many americans may realize that this is all the car that they need. this genre of vehicle could put CUV and SUV sales in the toilet, especially with rising gas prices.

  want one now? buy a lightly used first generation Scion Xb.

• shaker :
  April 25th, 2008 at 10:10 am
  
  

  Cool little box; expect the “Americanized” version to cost more, as reversing the “asymmetrical” layout ain’t gonna be cheap.

  Edit: Nissan better get the efficiency up — the Fit (with its superior aerodynamics) will kick it’s butt in HWY MPG.

• SupaMan :
  April 25th, 2008 at 10:14 am
  
  

  Reading this review I could not help drawing a parallel to Scion’s xB. The Cube is all the previous xB was and the current model isn’t. It has just enough power (90hp now….120hp+ later) to feel quick around town, it’s very chuckable, agility is impressive and yes, it may be spartan but look at the tonne of space inside! No doubt, Scion buyers who hate the current gen xB (myself included) will flock to the Cube when it arrives (and that 4WD system is pretty nifty). With gas mileage all the rage now, that just drives home the point of the Cube being the kind of vehicle people want (who can argue with 40mpg!?) I’d be first in line.

• Orian :
  April 25th, 2008 at 10:17 am
  
  

  Quasi - they tested the JDM version. The US version will have a larger engine with more HP. I don’t know what that will do to the gas mileage though. Hopefully not much - even at 35mpg I’d be interested in this for the usable space and the fuel economy.

  Nice review - I can’t wait to see what the US version looks like and it’s specs/price. Hopefully they keep it low like that version.

• Sherman Lin :
  April 25th, 2008 at 10:29 am
  
  

  You nailed it Supaman, as a 1st generation Xb owner who is disappointed by the 2nd generation xb, I hope Nissan hits it out of the ballpark in sales compared to the 2nd generation Xb and hopefully Toyota will see the error of its ways.

• zenith :
  April 25th, 2008 at 10:30 am
  
  

  As someone who owned a 1984 Voyager with an engine
  rated at just 84 hp and was never run over trying to merge onto an Interstate, I say bring this one on! Just give it at least 5 gears–ya need lotsa gears with a small engine.

  With 16% more hp and about 1/2 ton less weight than an’84 Voyager, I don’t see how this vehicle is underpowered.

  Thi might be the replacement for my Ranger at city delivery. Even if I need to split the load in 3 instead of in 2, as I do now , the extra mpg will more than make up for the extra trip to the warehouse!

Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 » Show All Reverse Order

Leave a Reply Back to Top

You must be logged in to post a comment.