Nissan Finds the 2018 Rogue Hybrid, Gives It a Sticker Price

by Matthew Guy

May 2nd, 2018 1:43 PM

nissan finds the 2018 rogue hybrid gives it a sticker price

The crossover Rogue Hybrid appeared last year, teaming a 2.0-liter engine and 30kW electric motor that made 176 net horsepower and worked in concert to achieve the magical 35 mpg figure. For what it’s worth, the regular Rogue makes 170 horses out of its 2.5-liter inline-four. We feel confident your day has been enriched with this critical information.

Nissan has now announced pricing for the 2018 model, along with a few tech updates. The sticker jumps northward a few dollars and is similar to its chief rival, the Toyota RAV4 Hybrid — but with one significant difference.

Available in two flavors, SV and SL, the Rogue Hybrid is offered as either a front- or all-wheel drive unit, starting at $27,020 sans destination fee for the front driver. This is in contrast to the RAV4, a machine that sends power to all four corners as standard equipment and carries an MSRP of $27,135 in base trim. That means shoppers can buy an all-wheel drive RAV4 Hybrid for only $115 more than a front-drive Rogue Hybrid.

There’s your significant difference mentioned before the jump, as it is not a lot of extra shekels for double the traction at a Toyota store. Adding AWD to the Rogue Hybrid SV juices the price to $28,370, a $1,235 walk from the RAV. You may recall those prices at the Toyota dealership have been

Like the standard Rogue, the 2018 Rogue Hybrid features a few extra electronic toys. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are now on board, as is a standard motion-activated liftgate on the SL — previously only available to those snooty SV buyers. Elitists. They will also enjoy adaptive cruise and all manner of driving aids. And, oh yeah, Nissan managed to find another USB port for the Rogue Hybrid. Heady stuff, here, folks.

The RAV4 Hybrid does top out at a much higher price than the Rogue Hybrid, running from the base model through to XLE and SE trims before landing at a $34,030 Limited model. The costliest Rogue Hybrid is a $33,730 SL AWD trim. I’d compare the equipment levels between the Toyota and Nissan but, as Steph noted the other day, it appears nowhere on the Nissan consumer website.

When it went on sale in ‘08, the Rogue sold 75,053 copies in America. Sales have soared, reaching 403,465 last year. Only the RAV found more buyers in the American compact crossover market, but not by much – the difference was merely a few thousand units.

The Rogue Hybrid is built alongside its pals at Nissan’s plant in Smyrna, Tennessee. In a twist, Nissan is first shipping it to dealers in four select market regions – West, Northwest, Mountain, and Mid-Atlantic. I guess Florida Man is out of luck.

[Images: Nissan]

#Electrified #Hybrid #Nissan #NissanRogue #NissanRogueHybrid #RAV4 #Rogue #Toyota

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 5 comments

Ttacgreg on May 02, 2018

And considering how the 2019 Camry hybrid made a huge leap in efficiency vs the 2018, I am expecting a substantial improvement in the RAV 4. We will know soon.

Like Reply
Kek on May 03, 2018

"The costliest Rogue Hybrid is a $33,730 SL AWD trim" There is typo here. Costliest Rogue Hybrid is 27,500 in SL AWD trim including Nissan rebates. MSRP in Nissan world means only poor suckers pay anywhere near that price.

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Keith Maybe my market's different. but 4.5k whack. Plus mods like his are just donations for the next owner. I'd consider driving it as a fun but practical yet disposable work/airport car if it was priced right. Some VAG's (yep, even Audis) are capable, long lasting reliable cars despite what the haters preach. I can't lie I've done the same as this guy: I had a decently clean 4 Runner V8 with about the same miles- I put it up for sale around the same price as the lower mile examples. I heard crickets chirp until I dropped the price. Folks just don't want NYC cab miles.
Max So GM will be making TESLAS in the future. YEA They really shouldn’t be taking cues from Elon musk. Tesla is just about to be over.
Malcolm It's not that commenters attack Tesla, musk has brought it on the company. The delivery of the first semi was half loaded in 70 degree weather hauling potato chips for frito lay. No company underutilizes their loads like this. Musk shouted at the world "look at us". Freightliners e-cascads has been delivering loads for 6-8 months before Tesla delivered one semi. What commenters are asking "What's the actual usable range when in say Leadville when its blowing snow and -20F outside with a full trailer?
Funky D I despise Google for a whole host of reasons. So why on earth would I willing spend a large amount of $ on a car that will force Google spyware on me.The only connectivity to the world I will put up with is through my phone, which at least gives me the option of turning it off or disconnecting it from the car should I choose to.No CarPlay, no sale.
William I think it's important to understand the factors that made GM as big as it once was and would like to be today. Let's roll back to 1965, or even before that. GM was the biggest of the Big Three. It's main competition was Ford and Chrysler, as well as it's own 5 brands competing with themselves. The import competition was all but non existent. Volkswagen was the most popular imported cars at the time. So GM had its successful 5 brands, and very little competition compared to today's market. GM was big, huge in fact. It was diversified into many other lines of business, from trains to information data processing (EDS). Again GM was huge. But being huge didn't make it better. There are many examples of GM not building the best cars they could, it's no surprise that they were building cars to maximize their profits, not to be the best built cars on the road, the closest brand to achieve that status was Cadillac. Anyone who owned a Cadillac knew it could have been a much higher level of quality than it was. It had a higher level of engineering and design features compared to it's competition. But as my Godfather used to say "how good is good?" Being as good as your competitors, isn't being as good as you could be. So, today GM does not hold 50% of the automotive market as it once did, and because of a multitude of reasons it never will again. No matter how much it improves it's quality, market value and dealer network, based on competition alone it can't have a 50% market share again. It has only 3 of its original 5 brands, and there are too many strong competitors taking pieces of the market share. So that says it's playing in a different game, therfore there's a whole new normal to use as a baseline than before. GM has to continue downsizing to fit into today's market. It can still be big, but in a different game and scale. The new normal will never be the same scale it once was as compared to the now "worlds" automotive industry. Just like how the US railroad industry had to reinvent its self to meet the changing transportation industry, and IBM has had to reinvent its self to play in the ever changing Information Technology industry it finds it's self in. IBM was once the industry leader, now it has to scale it's self down to remain in the industry it created. GM is in the same place that the railroads, IBM and other big companies like AT&T and Standard Oil have found themselves in. It seems like being the industry leader is always followed by having to reinvent it's self to just remain viable. It's part of the business cycle. GM, it's time you accept your fate, not dead, but not huge either.