| Eric L. |
http://www.autoblog.com/entry/1234000777063665/
Looks pretty nice I think. It has a 2.4L I-4 from the current Mitsu lineup but paired with a manumatic 6-spd CVT (like the SE Murano). The third row seats look ridiculously small (doesn't even look like it will fit children comfortably), and the interior is pretty Murano-like. |
|
|
| SugarRushMurano |
quote:
Originally posted by Eric L.
http://www.autoblog.com/entry/1234000777063665/
Looks pretty nice I think. It has a 2.4L I-4 from the current Mitsu lineup but paired with a manumatic 6-spd CVT (like the SE Murano). The third row seats look ridiculously small (doesn't even look like it will fit children comfortably), and the interior is pretty Murano-like.
yeap, i like it too. Much better than the current outlander. :4: |
|
|
| nissanlove |
| hmm. looks like an extended 07 rav 4. it's alright i guess. the third row is rediculous. it's nice to see that nissan has set a new fad with the up sloping rear window. nice led tails also and the split gate is pretty cool. |
|
|
| ekaxel |
I don't understand why the mfg insist on stuffing a third row of seats on the small SUV. This is one of the beauties of the MO - no third row seat option, no compromise of 2nd row comfort or cargo space.
This is the biggest complaint against the MDX and Pilot. The second row is cramped, and valuable cubic feet of cargo space are taken up in storage of and almost useless third seat. At least the Tribeca did it right (I think, haven't seen one close up) in making the second seat sliding. |
|
|
| nissanlove |
| i don't think the second seat is sliding on the tribeca. not in the 7 seater we tested at least. |
|
|
| ekaxel |
| Literature says it is - 8" |
|
|
| Eric L. |
| Would be nice though, for the next model Murano to come with a sliding rear seat. That seems to be one of those no brainer ideas that every crossover will adopt, much like how Honda pioneered the magic foldaway third row seat, and now every minivan has it (except GM's). I think it may have been the RX300 that first had a sliding second row seat (for a crossover). |
|
|
| ekaxel |
| Why does MO need it? It was only put in to make room for the third row. I hope Nissan NEVER even considers the third row in the MO. RX330 gets along fine without it. |
|
|
| Kris |
| If i ever needed 3rd raw I would go for a minivan..... |
|
|
| Eric L. |
Having sat in a Honda Element and seeing how it has about half a foot more rear leg room than the Murano, I can appreciate how for the long legged, its nice to have "stretch out" leg room. As is, the Murano's rear leg room is very good, but its not quite "stretch out" for those of us over 6' tall. I think a sliding rear seat would be convenient in that regard, since most of time I don't carry much luggage in the back but I do drive people around frequently.
I agree with everyone else here that a 3rd row seat in the Murano would be plain silly. |
|
|
| jaak |
quote:
Originally posted by Kris
If i ever needed 3rd raw I would go for a minivan.....
Which is why I got a Murano.
Anything with a third row was crossed off the list as a product that was driven by marketing and spec sheets, not a practical vehicle for a few people.
If I wanted a Bus, I'd get a Bus. Having useless seats just annoys me.
Even if the Element has more room, it still suffers from the fact it's the second ugliest vehicle next to the Aztek. |
|
|
| Murano_driver |
quote:
Originally posted by Eric L.
[url] It has a 2.4L I-4 from the current Mitsu lineup but paired with a manumatic 6-spd CVT (like the SE Murano)..
I test drove Outlander before I got the Mo. It was so underpowered than it some point I was thinking to go outside and start pushing it. It was 3 people in the car and about 2% uphill. I do not think this one will be better even with CVT. |
|
|
| jaak |
I don't know if it's changed, but I was generally disappointed with the HP of all the Mitsu vehicles I looked at...
All I could think was "Have they not been looking at their competitors spec sheets???" |
|
|
|
