Yep, it sucks.

 

Well I wouldn't say the Rogue sucks.....it's just not the right fit for Halwg, but for others it could be, my friend has one, mind you he is shorter and weighs less, does not play golf, is retired and drives around only when he needs to, does not require lots of cargo room, as he does not haul around anything, loves the smaller footprint as it allows him to get into smaller parking spaces, it's usually himself alone in the vehicle, and or with his wife, his kids are grown so no one has even sat in the back seats. He finds the Rogue just perfect for his needs and wants, a bit larger than a car, but smaller than the Murano

 

The Rogue engine is possibly the most underpowered I’ve ever driven. Seems absurd to me.

Plus they don’t offer discounts on the Rogue nearly as huge as the Murano.

All things considered it’s a no-brainer.

 

31 mpg in a murano?! do you have a 50 mph tailwind??

 

When I had my 2015 Platinum FWD...I easily got 29-31 mpg on the hwy. My best mileage was 32.3 mpg over 400 miles in the terrain of the AR Ozarks driving 55-65 mph. It always dropped to less than 30 mpg after 75 mph, usually 27-29 mpg. Over the 26k miles I averaged 25.4mpg.

 

Right off the bat I want to be clear I'm not trolling because I know some may get upset because this is a Nissan forum.

I've driven 2 Rogues over the year since my Murano was at the dealer getting warranty repair work done. Both new. One had just over 100km on the odometer and the other had just a little over 2000km on the odometer. Both cars drove like junk. When stopped at the red light I could see the passenger seat vibrating significantly. The engine was under powered and the interior quality left allot to be desired. On one of them the phone didn't pair to the Bluetooth. As well I found they seemed to rattle allot over bumpy roads.

If it was my money, I would never consider a Rogue. I think there are better options out there.

It's all subjective and everyone has their own opinion but I honestly think the CRV and Rav4 are a better put together cars. I would even consider a Tuscon before the Rogue.

The Murano on the other hand is a great option in its class. Even though I've had many issues with mine within just the first year. I still think it's a better car than it's competitors in terms of how it drives and comfort. That's why I got it. I just wish it was a bit more reliable then it is. 8 dealership trips within the first year doesn't really give me much confidence. All of them for different issues... so it's not just a bunch of trips for one problem.

Just my two cents.

 

I have 2015 Murano platinum AWD and have often gotten right around 30 on a highway if I keep it under 70. I usually average slightly over 25 in combined driving.

 

My sister and best friend both has the new rogue sv and sl. They regret their decision after riding in our Murano and said they wished they would have gotten a Murano to start with. We are all starting families and the rogue just doesn't have enough room for a second kid comfortably.

 

Yeah, I dont get how the Rogue is so weak. My sister has a CRV and my dad has an Outback. They both have comparable 4 cylinder engines and feel way peppier, even when loaded with passengers.

 

Rogue is Nissan's high volume CUV, so it appeals most to folks looking for something taller than a sedan, good on gas, and cheap.


Seems like I see 50 Rogues for every Murano on the road these days.

 

It needs a 2.0L turbo engine to start, then some additional sound deadening.

 

What I don't understand among other things, is why the Rogue is available with ProPilot Assist but not the Murano...That doesn't mean I would buy a Rogue but normally this feature is found on higher end models. It seems Nissan is offering new technology on the Rogue first then later on the Murano. The foot operated tailgate is another example, first available on the Rogue.


The Rogue is the best selling SUV/crossover in my area but that doesn't mean it's the best. It's outselling long time favorites like Escape, RAV4, CRV. Car experts put it in lower tier of the group. Not as fast as a CRV turbo, not handling as well as a CX5, not as reliable or spacious as a RAV4 but nice packaging and options with reasonable prices. It's also available in orange>

 

I'd say, undoubtedly, it's because of what you said in paragraph 2. It's their high volume seller. Of course they're going to throw new tech at it first. Just a thought.

 

Rogue is #1 or #2 seller in the US. Something like 37,000+ a month. Hard to believe.

 

Rogue is #1 or #2 seller in the US. Something like 37,000+ a month. Hard to believe.

It is cheap and it looks good on the outside.

 

I had both a 2015 Murano Platinum and still have a very well optioned 2016 Rogue SV (father's car, he is 81y/o) which is a lease that is coming to an end very soon.The two are of no comparison to each other nor should they be since they are in different categories and serve different purposes.

The Rogue works perfect for my elderly father for many reasons..... it sits up slightly, easy to get into/out of, plenty of "get up and go" for appointment/ store runs, very comfortable seats, AWD for winter driving, nice power trunk, not terrible on gas and it's quite a bit cheaper to get into than the Murano because most dealers sell it in volume.I got his 3yr/36K mile Rogue lease for $199 all inclusive (zero money down, with NYS taxes/fees, no trade in) back in 2016. His is an 2016 Rogue SV AWD with tech package, panorarmic sunroof and a premium color... and he's sported 6K miles in his 34 month lease.

Can you get an equally optioned Murano for that figure? Sure if you put a large amount of down payment.


In contrast my father finds it much easier to get in/out of the Rogue than the Murano.The Rogue is an appliance AKA "people mover" and it works perfectly for that purpose.I totally agree the Rogue is loud/unrefined with a lot cost saving measures.

When I first opened the hood I thought it had a lawn mower engine in it because that's what it sounds like, then again my father doesn't care about that, as long as it gets him reliably from point A to B.

Do you really see people looking at buying a Rogue and say any of these statements: "Can't wait to take this to the canyons", "this must smoke people in 0-60", "it's the most quiet ride I've had"?

There is a reason the Nissan Rogue outsells the Murano by a quite a wide margin in the US and that is because not everyone that buys a Rogue is looking for the Murano premium experience (quieter, smoother, nicer, etc).

 

I actually like the look of the Rogue, it reminds me of my 2012 Murano. But Nissan could do so much more with it. But to do those things would up the price. And I admit, it's a price point car. Most people could give a rat's patootey about their cars, and they care for them the same way. So a $25,000 Rogue makes more sense to them than a $45,000 Murano.


With a little better engine, I think it would make a nice 2nd car to the Murano.

 

The flat "D" shaped bottom steering wheel makes you think you're driving a German sport sedan!? I could not see the use of this in my Rogue loaner a few months ago; perhaps with a manual transmission your knee is not hitting the steering wheel when you let go the clutch pedal?


Could be worse with the new Kicks, 125HP FWD only

 

The flat "D" shaped bottom steering wheel makes you think you're driving a German sport sedan!? I could not see the use of this in my Rogue loaner a few months ago; perhaps with a manual transmission your knee is not hitting the steering wheel when you let go the clutch pedal?


Could be worse with the new Kicks, 125HP FWD only

The Rogue Sport (Qashqai) is pretty anemic, too.

 

Alright, I have been driving the Rogue for a week now, and it looks like it could be at least another week until parts come in and the insurance company decides what they are doing.


So, in that time, I have changed my perception of the Rogue. Yes, it still has an under powered 4 banger, and they have really screwed up the cargo room with the ridiculous "cargo management" system, which is pretty much an oxymoron. However, I can see why it sells so well. For what it is, a compact crossover SUV, it actually fills that niche pretty well. Interior room is good, and the safety and tech are pretty good. It actually has some features the Murano doesn't have.


Once I got used to the seats, and adjusted them about 100 times to find a comfortable position, they are OK. I'm driving the SV. I wonder if the SL with the leather seats would be more comfortable?


I think as a second vehicle, for local driving, errands, short trips, etc. it would be a decent car. The one I'm driving stickers for $17,000 less than my top of the line Platinum Murano, and they seem to deeply discount the Rogue. I'm sure the pricing and the packaging are very attractive to the many buyers of the Rogue.

 

Alright, I have been driving the Rogue for a week now, and it looks like it could be at least another week until parts come in and the insurance company decides what they are doing.
So, in that time, I have changed my perception of the Rogue. Yes, it still has an under powered 4 banger, and they have really screwed up the cargo room with the ridiculous "cargo management" system, which is pretty much an oxymoron. However, I can see why it sells so well. For what it is, a compact crossover SUV, it actually fills that niche pretty well. Interior room is good, and the safety and tech are pretty good. It actually has some features the Murano doesn't have.
Once I got used to the seats, and adjusted them about 100 times to find a comfortable position, they are OK. I'm driving the SV. I wonder if the SL with the leather seats would be more comfortable?
I think as a second vehicle, for local driving, errands, short trips, etc. it would be a decent car. The one I'm driving stickers for $17,000 less than my top of the line Platinum Murano, and they seem to deeply discount the Rogue. I'm sure the pricing and the packaging are very attractive to the many buyers of the Rogue.

I think the S, SV, SL all share the same zero gravity seat just the shell (leather vs cloth) that changes.

Having sat in both I actually prefer the seat finish for the 2016 vs 2018, they went from a black synthetic velour to a more resilient cloth.

As a side note the 2016 seats get much hotter vs. 2018 on a typical summer day.


2016

vs.



2018

 

My best guess...
The next gen murano (2010), will look more like the new Lexus rx series, or the 2019 Chevy blazer.

 

Yeah, that new Blazer looks pretty slick, considering its by GM.


More than likely, though, the new Murano's front will look something like this


https://www.autoguide.com/blog/wp-content/gallery/2019-nissan-altima-debut/2019-Nissan-Altima-01.jpg


And the interior, of course.


http://st.automobilemag.com/uploads/sites/5/2018/03/2019-Nissan-Altima-30.jpg

 

Yeah, that new Blazer looks pretty slick, considering its by GM.





And the interior, of course.


http://st.automobilemag.com/uploads/sites/5/2018/03/2019-Nissan-Altima-30.jpg

Hopefully not, I hate the screen that are sticking out like that

 

^^^ I think that looks great!

 

Screen is very ugly like an IPAD doc but fuglier.

 

Well, you are out of luck, the new 2019 Altima has the same type of screen, so I think this is the trend that Nissan will use on the newer models.

 

The outdated roundish cone on the steering wheel is very uninspiring. This is the areas Nissan fails. I took out a 18 Titan and the switches and wheel felt like my 87 Nissan King cab. Update to touch buttons and add tech, the 80s are over. Even the Murano switches are old. Add dials or electronic push buttons.

 

People like physical buttons/switches/knobs on center stacks because it's easier to find and manipulate an actual button versus a digital one while driving. Ask Honda. They went with a full ipad like interface on their last gen and the public screamed bloody murder about the lack of volume and tuning knobs. You'll notice in the new Accord, for example, they went back to physical knobs. Nissan would be wise to not go full digital.


The whole tablet style interface thing is just a fad. I'm not the biggest fan of it either, but it's not the worst thing I've ever seen and it'll pass once there is another bandwagon to jump on. As long as it's packed with relevant tech (now THAT is an area where Nissan has been behind the curve) I'm ok with it.


And I don't understand the gripe about the steering wheel. What is outdated about it? It looks (to me, at least) like one of their most modern wheel designs. Flat bottom design is modern, the center cone vaguely reminds me of a Wrangler (classic, not outdated, and good looking). You want uninspiring? The wheel on our Muranos looks like something out of a minivan from the 90s!

 

Everyone is doing it. Mazda was the first non-luxury brand to start doing it several years back. Honda is even doing it now.

 

I was thinking about the screen the other day. I also hate the "tablet sticking out of the dashboard" look that everyone seems to be going for. It just looks like its literally an afterthough.


But anyway, I was thinking it would have been really nice if they upgraded the screen tech to actually give richer blacks, instead of that blueish backlit black that it currently does, and if the screen was flush with the glass front, so it didnt have that little frame around the screen. It would look so much slicker that way.