# Funny thing happened during our test drive!



## pgames38 (May 12, 2005)

My wife and I test drove a 2006 SE AWD today. Our impressions:

PROS:
1) We thought it was fun to drive and very nimble. 
2) We both loved the seating position, visibility and access to controls.
3) There was a lot of torque steer (in both 2WD and Auto), but it wasn't annoying. Rather, it was nice to feel the power.
4) Love the low end torque, and the get-up-and-go of the vehicle.
5) 1 word: Panaroof.
6) Nice, powerful sound system. 

CONS:
1) The road noise was excessive. Very loud!
2) The interior finish seemed cheap.
3) We felt every bump on the road. I wasn't expecting a car-like plush ride, but it was very stiff. It was especially bad when we crossed a (highway) bridge and felt/heard every expansion groove we crossed. The noise seemed to come from the rear, maybe from the two small rear cargo panels which do not latch closed. Would a cargo mat help with the noise?
4) The funny thing.... one bump on the bridge caused the top passenger side storage compartment to open by itself! We had opened it earlier, but closed it properly. Has anyone ever experienced this? All I could think off was shoddy workmanship.

Overall, we were pleased with the vehicle, and are in negotiations for a price (salesperson needs to check our offer with the boss, as it was Saturday and the dealership was not fully staffed). 

We're about 75% sure we'll be going with the X-Trail, although we do want to try out some other makes (after our first test drive, we were 100% sure). Has anyone else had the same feelings? What tipped the scales on your decision?

pgames


----------



## Rockford (Jan 28, 2005)

Yes, we've noticed that top glove box pop open on its own a few times.
Yes, the carpet is a little chinsy. No complaints with the interior other than that though and we knew what we were getting so we can't really complain now.
Haven't noticed the torque-steer. Then again, I also have a supercharged Honda CRX. THAT has torque steer. Maybe I'm just more used to it and don't notice it in the X-trail.
Harsh ride? I don't think it's any worse than its immediate competition.
As for tipping the scales, there was no one thing that made us say YES. It's the whole package. That being said I really like the pana roof and ability to control the AWD system. Those were two things none of the competition had when we were looking.


----------



## ERBell (Aug 7, 2005)

The only things I don't like about the X Trail are 1.) floor mats are of the cheapest quality. 2) I don't like the rear cargo floor. Stuff slides all over the place and slams into the rear door when you accelerate. Also the material the floor is made of is NOT as durrable as you think. 

Overall it is the total package. The only other small SUV I was considering was the CRV. I went with the Nissan because of the heated seats with the sunroof without paying for leather. Also the rear hatch opens up out of the way, not to the side. The spare tire is in the floor not on the back. More Horsepower and torque, and it looks a lot tougher.


----------



## Avery Slickride (Jan 6, 2005)

ERBell said:


> The only things I don't like about the X Trail are 1.) floor mats are of the cheapest quality. 2) I don't like the rear cargo floor. Stuff slides all over the place and slams into the rear door when you accelerate. Also the material the floor is made of is NOT as durrable as you think.
> 
> .


1. No, they're not. It's a dense, low pile that's easy to clean
2. Put $10 worth of Home Depot foam floor matting on top. The multiple tie-down points and free cargo net help, too.
I like my X-Trail very much, but I'd like it better with a side-hinged tailgate -- so much more convenient and practical. I can't understand why anyone would prefer the liftgate, but the vehicle is so excellent I can put up with it.
The ride is a little firm when it's empty, but it gets better the more passengers and stuff you cram aboard. It's the class of its category.


----------



## XTrail1 (Feb 24, 2005)

I like the way the cargo are is configured, it's made for abuse. I pile up the hockey bags in there and off we go. It's firmer than most others in this class but I like that and I know it can take a bit of pounding, I don't like this soft girly stuff like a Tucson.


----------



## T69 (Oct 23, 2005)

pgames38 said:


> Has anyone else had the same feelings? What tipped the scales on your decision?
> 
> pgames


I have my XTRAIL for a month. So far glove compartment opened on itself three times. I am not sure if it can serve as an excuse for Nissan, but it happened on the streets of Montreal  

What i do not like... I think the gas tank should be much bigger. And it is a shame that side airbags are not available in XE and SE version.

I was looking for a kind of compromise car: not too big, not too fuel thirsty yet still with "real" 4x4 and not too scared of few inches of the water, snow or a little of mud.
After long research and a few trials the only two (and VERY different) cars left on the battlefield: XTRAIL and Jeep Liberty 2.8 Diesel. I felt that Jeep's off-road capabilities would be just overkill in my case and I didn't want to pay premium for it... so I went for XTRAIL. Time will tell if it was good decision or not


----------



## pgames38 (May 12, 2005)

After some thought, we've decided to go with the X-Trail if the price is right. We should be getting a call from the dealership tomorrow night, and we're interested in sealing the deal. I'll let you know what we decide after tomorrow evening.

pgames


----------



## jww (Apr 22, 2005)

pgames38 said:


> My wife and I test drove a 2006 SE AWD today. Our impressions:
> 
> Overall, we were pleased with the vehicle, and are in negotiations for a price (salesperson needs to check our offer with the boss, as it was Saturday and the dealership was not fully staffed).


Warning on this one - this is an age-old car sales technique meant to play with your head. I have learned over the years to put in writing my lowest price with a 24 hour acceptance condition right on the actual offer to buy/lease - making it very clear to the salesman that I am not in the mood for back and forth - and then walk away. BTW - I always have 2 vehicles and no less than 3 dealers on the final list playing one against the other for my best price. It is a bit gutsy, but hasn't failed me yet.



pgames38 said:


> We're about 75% sure we'll be going with the X-Trail, although we do want to try out some other makes (after our first test drive, we were 100% sure). Has anyone else had the same feelings? What tipped the scales on your decision?
> 
> pgames


I have a love-hate relationship with the X-Trail. I think it's a great package, but don't like the fit and finish - which is legendary for Nissan (I still have issues with the fit and finish with my 02 Altima). I also think Nissan has missed the boat on the level of safety kit. VTC is only available on the highest trim in Canada, no curtain aribags available at all, etc. I think this is downright neglectful of Nissan. Don't the other world-editions of the X-Trail do include a better level of kit (and a much better choice of engines).

Have you thought of driving the new Suzuki Grand Vitara? Other than 6 cylinder gas mileage and rear drums, it's a very good package indeed and probably worth looking at.

jww


----------



## Ryan_U (Apr 29, 2005)

jww said:


> Have you thought of driving the new Suzuki Grand Vitara? Other than 6 cylinder gas mileage and rear drums, it's a very good package indeed and probably worth looking at.
> 
> jww


I strongly disagree with this. The Suzuki is less reliable, will have terrible resale value, has less cargo, is uglier, will use 30% more gas, is slower, the 4x4 isn't as good, and there are fewer delaerships. The only car that compares to the X-Trail is the CRV. Any other car is sub-par.


----------



## jww (Apr 22, 2005)

Ryan_U said:


> I strongly disagree with this. The Suzuki is less reliable, will have terrible resale value, has less cargo, is uglier, will use 30% more gas, is slower, the 4x4 isn't as good, and there are fewer delaerships. The only car that compares to the X-Trail is the CRV. Any other car is sub-par.


I might have expected an emotional responst to my suggestion. I should have stated that I was simply providing options as asked for by the original poster, and not suggesting that I think the GV is better.

However, all things being equal, I still believe that the GV is a viable option in the soft-roader category. It has an impressive level of kit compared across the range of models with other like vehicles, and true 4-wheel drive capabilities - if perhaps with a somewhat harsher ride with a ladder frame construction.


----------



## XtrailRookie (May 17, 2005)

Like Xtrail1, I like the cargo area. I too throw the hockey bags (golf clubs in the summer) in there and away we go! I put some carpeting in the back so that stuff doesn't slide around as much.
We bought the Xty knowing that it was going to be roughed up a bit. Gas mileage was also a consideration. Its not the most luxurious of interiors. It is an SUV after all. The Xty has not yet disappointed us.


----------



## mike dockal (Dec 20, 2004)

What torque steer ? Try driving my modified CRX with 205 tires and small steering wheel.
My X-trail was sold to me with overinflated tires , I was surprised how much the ride quality improved after correcting the pressure.
Yes the interior finish is quite cheap but that's what you get with entry level SUV.
Grand Vitara looked good until I found out that their real 4x4 system is only available on the most expensive model


----------



## Rockford (Jan 28, 2005)

mike dockal said:


> What torque steer ? Try driving my modified CRX with 205 tires and small steering wheel.


Werd........................


----------



## Avery Slickride (Jan 6, 2005)

Ryan_U said:


> I strongly disagree with this. The Suzuki is less reliable, will have terrible resale value, has less cargo, is uglier, will use 30% more gas, is slower, the 4x4 isn't as good, and there are fewer delaerships. The only car that compares to the X-Trail is the CRV. Any other car is sub-par.


Yikes, it's not THAT bad. You don't know the Zuke is less reliable. It just came out. Previous models have been pretty good in that department.
It will be thirstier, resale value is iffy for sure, but the 4x4 capability should be better than the Xty's, not worse. And as for ugly, that's purely a matter of taste. I think the new GV is the best-looking small ute on the road. I sure didn't buy my X-Trail for its looks.


----------



## mike dockal (Dec 20, 2004)

again - Suzuki does not have better 4x4 system unless you spend 30K for top model.


----------



## driftking (Aug 7, 2005)

mike dockal said:


> again - Suzuki does not have better 4x4 system unless you spend 30K for top model.


It may be better in carlike terms(the x-trail) but the current suzuki has better wheel travel and I think that even lockers availible...Even it has a 4L mode.

If you are going offrooading then the suzuki may be a better buy (NOT THE NEW ONE).

But the new one is softter, more carlike than offroader(liek the xzy).

Reliability, suzuki are very good in this department.


----------



## pgames38 (May 12, 2005)

We picked up our new silver 2006 AWD SE yesterday, and are very happy with our purchase! We opted not to get the adventure package, and found that our XT with 16" tires is more quiet and has a better ride than the vehicle we test drove last weekend (17" w/ adventure package). 

We had a chance to drive it for about 350 km yesterday, and are so far very impressed with the handling, visibility, feel, and overall package. I'm looking forward to some snow so I can test out the AWD system. We're going to baby it until we get to 2000 km, as the owner's manual suggests, then we can really test it out on the highway and up hills/trails.

Thanks to everyone for their advice. It was much appreciated and helped us narrow our list to the X-Trail. 

pgames38


----------



## XTrail1 (Feb 24, 2005)

pgames38 said:


> We picked up our new silver 2006 AWD SE yesterday, and are very happy with our purchase! We opted not to get the adventure package, and found that our XT with 16" tires is more quiet and has a better ride than the vehicle we test drove last weekend (17" w/ adventure package).
> 
> We had a chance to drive it for about 350 km yesterday, and are so far very impressed with the handling, visibility, feel, and overall package. I'm looking forward to some snow so I can test out the AWD system. We're going to baby it until we get to 2000 km, as the owner's manual suggests, then we can really test it out on the highway and up hills/trails.
> 
> ...



a big congrats on your purchase, mine turns 70,000km today.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

More congratulations!

Previous Grand Vitaras have had an excellent reliability record, despite being made in Ontario. The 2006 GV is made in Japan.

Yes, mileage is worse than the X-trail, because of a V6 rather than a 4-cyl, more weight because of the pseudo ladder frame, and because it can't be driven in 2wd. Rated at 30mpg vs 35mpg for the X-Trail. I bet an X-Trail in AWD won't get 35mpg.

Cargo room is 24.6cu ft, vs. 30 (?).

All 2006 GV's have stability/traction control and side air bags, available in Canada only on the most costly X-Trail.

Yes, to get the low range on a GV in Canada, you have to buy the most expensive model. $30,000. But, you get a longer feature set than the X-Trail LE, plus a low range, fob-sensing entry and ignition, mileage readout etc. etc, and it costs $4800 less than an X-Trail LE with the VDC option.

You can't get a ski pass-through on the GV, unlike the X-Trail, and you also can't get a ..... roof rack like Nissan offers for the X-Trail.

As for the styling, I think the side of the X-Trail looks better, but the styling of the whole GV definitely hangs togther better. Haven't actually seen one yet, though. I see X-Trails all the time now.

Since we "need" the low range, Nissan definitely lost a sale.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Ryan_U said:


> I strongly disagree with this. The Suzuki is less reliable, will have terrible resale value, has less cargo, is uglier, will use 30% more gas, is slower, the 4x4 isn't as good, and there are fewer delaerships. The only car that compares to the X-Trail is the CRV. Any other car is sub-par.


I didn't address the subject of resale value in the previous post. I checked asking prices for 1991 Suzuki Vitaras and Pathfinders, and there is not a significant difference. But when you consider the Pathfinders probably cost quite a bit more to begin with, it's possible the Vitaras have held resale value better.

That's not an exhaustive study, however it doesn't support any conclusion used Vitaras have poor resale value. Suzuki cars may well have poor resale values, but that's not of interest to me, and may or may not be true without something to back it up.

Oh, and 30mpg vs 35mpg is 15%, not 30%

I wouldn't be surprised if Nissan's traction control system is better than the Daimler-Chrysler system used on the GV. Probably based on the legendary All-Mode system. But that low range makes it hard to see how the GV's 4x4 system "isn't as good".


----------



## XTrail1 (Feb 24, 2005)

Ok this is an all things Nissan forum here  , why are we talking Suzuki here? Don't they have their own forums? A good place to talk anything and everything is CanadianDriver.com No offense people but it's the first time I see this here.


----------



## X-Traction (Dec 21, 2004)

Sorry about going off-topic. The X-Trail will inevitably be compared to the ____, and then it's only natural for people to post comparison information that may or may not call for rebuttal. By then the discussion seems far off-topic. Like mentioning CanadianDriver


----------

