Nissan will add a hybrid powertrain to the Rogue and bring the smaller, European Qashqai to the U.S., AutoGuide is reporting.
A few days ago, we reported that Nissan would be ending production of the last-generation Rogue in Japan, which is sold as the Rogue Select in the United States. Now it appears the Qashqai will effectively replace the Rogue Select in Nissan’s lineup, giving the Japanese automaker another small crossover to sell stateside.
And Nissan is selling the snot out of crossovers in the U.S.
Nissan made rumblings about a hybrid Rogue back in April and it believes the already huge market hasn’t yet been tapped.
“We haven’t hit the ceiling yet. We have more opportunity there if we can get our dealers more [crossovers],” Fred Diaz said, Nissan’s senior vice president of U.S. sales, said according to AutoGuide.
The Qashqai is built on a similar platform as the Rogue, but is 10 inches shorter, and also sports a 1.6-liter four-cylinder that may or may not make the ride over to the states.
No word yet on whether Canada will be getting the Qashqai.
In case you’re wondering:
Eww… stop Instagramming!
That car looks like an oily cockroach!
Smart move for Nissan, as the mini CUV market is exploding. Theoretically, the Juke is already in this space, but with the odd styling and sporty feel, it is missing most of the market (i.e., HR-V buyers).
The challenge for Nissan will be to differentiate the Qashqai from the Rouge – I had assumed they were the same until this article. Also, they need a new name.
“Also, they need a new name.”
Oh, God, yes. Qashqai sounds like stepping on something at a seafood market.
Yeah I thought the Qashqai and Rogue were the same other than local market differences like engine size and headlight design and such. I had no idea the Qashqai was almost a foot shorter.
The Qashqai could definitely use a new name in the US. They could follow Hyundai’s structure and call it the Rogue Sport. That would especially make sense since it’s replacing the Rogue Select in the lineup.
I thought this too. I really believed the names were just for different markets, with different headlamps.
But really, this is just a very tall Sentra hatch.
Does Nissan have a trademark for X-Trail in the US?
Now we’ll have two hybrid CUVs – the Rogue and RAV4.
Hybridizing CUVs is essential. I’m put off by the minivan-like fuel economy in today’s CUVs – their weight is killing them. And the surge toward CUVs is probably hurting CAFE for many mfrs.
If Kia put their hybrid drivetrain in the Sportage, I’d buy it tomorrow. But I believe their next-gen is much better, and it still uses a proper 6-spd auto instead of a CVT.
Even w/o a hybrid powertrain, CUV fuel economy is starting to get close to sedans when you factor in that most buyers of sedans opt for CUVs that are one segment down in size (so previous Accord buyers would opt for the CR-V and previous Civic buyers, the HR-V).
As for hybridization – the future is in e-AWD (battery-powered) systems taking the place of mechanical AWD systems – so while the batteries would add some weight, would also lose some weight by not having a mechanical AWD system.
Most buyers who want AWD get it for snowy conditions – which for most isn’t that many times a year.
Hyundai is working on an e-AWD system for the new Tucson so the new Sportage should get it as well and maybe even the Soul (Soul’ster).
I’m not convinced hybrids lead to meaningful improvements in fuel economy. The Lexus RX450h gets 32/28, while a similarly sized CR-V gets 27/34.
Doesn’t seem worth the effort.
First, that’s a poor comparison given that the RX450h is vastly faster and quite a bit heavier than the CR-V. The comparison should be RX450h FWD (32/28) versus RX350 FWD (18/25).
Second, how much a hybrid helps with mileage really depends on the type of driving you do. If you’re in a dense city, where mileage can go even lower than the EPA city number as you slog block by block, a hybrid can literally double your mileage. If you spend most of your time cruising at 55 mph on rural roads, a hybrid is a complete waste of money.
@VoGo:
My Optima Hybrid is rated at 36/40 (it gets 34/42 in the real world), but the conventional Optima is rated at 22/34.
Since I got the car new for $20k, there is a substantial gas savings vs the conventional drivetrain – in my case, about $650/year.
Hyundai/Kia’s (and Infiniti’s) use of the conventional automatic is a minus, not a plus. Toyota’s and Ford’s “CVT” isn’t a conventional CVT, it’s a simple planetary gearset that uses an electric motor/generator spinning at an arbitrary speed of the powertrain controller’s choice to allow the engine to vary its speed independently of wheel speed. Unlike the conventional CVT this is a mechanically simpler and more reliable arrangement than a conventional automatic. It’s also smoother and, if tuned in a way most hybrids aren’t, has the potential to be more responsive.
H/K’s AT for their newest hybrid system is different as well in that it houses an electric motor and clutch in place of the torque converter with the ability to decouple the gas engine from the rest of the drivetrain.
In addition, H/K use a 1-motor hybrid system instead of a 2-motor that much of the competition uses.
This is a good move. Qashqais were all over the place in Panama when I was down there last.
Also, relative to their competition, they’re fairly handsome in the flesh.
Good move by Nissan. Demand for compact SUV is still rising and the Quashqai is an great (if not unpronounceable) way to meet it.
Holy latte hipster junction, Batman! Now there’s an on-trend commercial! I love my new Kash-Cow!
…I want to punch everyone in there, with some localvore sourced PBA-free gloves on.
So this is the HRV competitor. I’ll say this, it’s better looking than the HRV. I saw my first one this past weekend, and it caught my eye in all black. It looks rather cheap and dated to my eye, like it was conceived in 2004. By Hyundai.
Almost anything is better looking than the HR-V, but admittedly, the Rogue and Qashquai are 2 good-looking CUVs and 2 of the better current Nissan designs.
IMHO, Qashqai is too close to the word “quash”, which probably won’t go over well with CUV buyers, who apparently live in fear of being “quashed” on the roadways by semis or even larger more expensive SUVs. How about the Xterra II?
You make a nice point, and they probably will change it for N.A., but honestly I could see the old name being used simply because its so ridiculous. Somehow, ridiculous sells.
To me, Xterra II harkens back to the mid-80s when the Bronco II, S10 Blazer, and XJ Cherokee effectively launched the SUV/CUV craze by casting themselves as more practical versions of their rugged bigger brothers. Throw in some Xterra styling cues and this situation could be analogous.