So, August is already in full swing.
The 4th summer (calendar) of operation of this Qashqai, purchased new in 2011, is coming to an end.
Since this is a weekend car and a tourist car, I will fly on an airplane for my upcoming vacation in Sochi, and before September 1 I will hardly go far with it, then we can definitely draw some conclusions.
Strengths:
Weak sides:
Review of Nissan Qashqai 2.0 (Nissan Qashqai) 2010 Part 2
So 5 years have passed. Mileage 45,000 km. I didn’t go to TO-4, I changed the engine oil, oil and air filters myself. Doesn't eat butter.
What has been done: changing the front wipers. Replacement of burnt out front low beam lamps at 32,000 km. At one time, a metallic clicking sound appeared in the engine area when the selector was switched to the “drive” mode. The official service did not say anything intelligible about this, and the Internet is also silent. Scored. There was a crunching sound in the grenades when turning the steering wheel. I scored on him. It just passed. In winter, a creaking sound appeared when turning the steering wheel. The Internet writes that this is some kind of rubber on the steering shaft. At positive temperatures, the squeak disappears. Scored. One mudguard under the bottom flew off (like wings), the other was simply removed for symmetry :) The fasteners that hold the foil protection between the exhaust pipe and the bottom were loosened several times. The battery died, replaced with a new one. Moreover, his death at first raised doubts. Happened at the most inopportune moment.
When driving from Astrakhan to St. Petersburg, somewhere near Tver, on the highway, at night, from Saturday to Sunday, the car did not start. Everything works, turn signals, lighting, but the car will not start. The starter will crackle and that's it. Frankly, I experienced some unpleasant sensations. More reflexively than on a whim, I removed the terminals from the battery and went to bed. About 3 hours later I tried to start it again. And, lo and behold, the car reluctantly started! Until Peter, I didn’t turn off the engine. Ironically, this happened literally a couple of kilometers from the Tver Nissan showroom. Upon arrival, I took the battery from another car. Thus it turned out that this was the problem.
Strengths:
Reliability
Build quality and finish
Weak sides:
Gasoline consumption is 12-13 liters in the city.
Review of Nissan Qashqai 2.0 (Nissan Qashqai) 2011 Part 8
So, in two days, the 4th winter (calendar) of operation of this Qashqai, purchased new in 2011, ends.
Since this is my weekend car, and now it’s parked, and I’m unlikely to go anywhere with it before March 1, then we can definitely draw some conclusions.
During all this time, there were no breakdowns on the car. Well, don’t count the replacement of consumables for maintenance as breakdowns, and one burnt-out light bulb in the headlight (bought and replaced myself). There are no crickets, extraneous noises or rumbles. The car does not consume oil at all, no liquids leak from anywhere. Gasoline consumption for 45 thousand km. average for checks (Moscow + region + some highways) - 10.7 liters. Service - from the officials, according to the full program recommended by them (usually they offer to do something else besides the regulations).
Strengths:
The car is unpretentious to Russian roads, services, gasoline, etc., with a wide service network, without problems with consumables (except for front wipers) and spare parts (ugh 3 times).
Not particularly susceptible to theft (inexpensive CASCO).
Large gas tank (65 liters).
Does not get splashed with dirt (neither the face, nor the sides, nor the rear, nor the roof), there is no aerodynamic noise up to 150 km/h.
There is a good range of adjustments in the front seats (anyone without back problems can find a comfortable seating position).
Excellent visibility through mirrors and glass with no blind spots. The glass does not sweat.
Excellent geometry for driving through city potholes and curbs (this is its element).
The brain does not float either on long journeys (you can sleep inside) or in daily city use.
I like the performance of the CVT in city traffic jams (while it works for me, ugh 3 times).
In its warranty period (3 years or 100 thousand km) - most likely it will not cause any trouble.
Weak sides:
In severe frost and snowfall, the blades of the standard wipers freeze (it would be nice to heat them or at least select non-frosting ones, but I’m too lazy to bother).
There is not enough heating for the steering wheel (you have to sit down in winter and wear gloves the first time).
The reliability of the variator (and the price of its repair or replacement) is still in question. Some (very rarely) are unlucky (jerky or even break). Replacement with a new one is expensive, but repairs and maintenance are no more expensive than an automatic transmission.
A small trunk (its own set of tires barely fits) and not a spacious back row. For those who like to carry a lot, this is not the best option.
The dynamics of the car are not for those who like to “burn out”, but for driving according to the rules - more than enough.
There are too many of these cars on the streets not only in Russia, but all over the world (in Europe for sure).
On a standard (bought from an official) roof rack (two crossbars) at car washes, a jet of water from a Karcher can tear off the film on the support brackets. If you ignore this (there will be bare iron instead of a black film), then this is the best option for a trunk (I tried several different ones).
“Yesterday there were five very big ones. And today there are three, but small ones.” Now imagine the experiences of the hero of the famous miniature by Mikhail Zhvanetsky about crayfish, if “big” and “small” cost the same. Our case! The new Nissan Qashqai and the updated Kia Sportage are more compact than the MazdaCX-5 and Toyota RAV4 - the difference in length is from 10 to 19 cm. And the “small” Skoda Yeti is four decimeters shorter than the largest ones. But the starting prices for all-wheel drive versions of all five crossovers with gasoline engines producing about 150 hp. almost identical. Unless those that are smaller will be better equipped. However, the key question is the same as in the case of crayfish. Which are better: those of today or those of yesterday?
The larger the car, the more spacious it is? Yes, but... On the one hand, Toyota is beyond competition in this quintet: you sit in the back as if in business class. You can also take a nap, leaning the back of the sofa back like an airplane, you can cross your legs. The rest of the four are tighter. But thanks to the vertical seating position, the most compact Skoda is no worse in terms of space for passengers than Mazda, Nissan and Kia - a person 176 cm tall has more than ten centimeters of space in front of the knees behind the same driver!
Moreover, if it is comfortable to sit in the CX-5 and Yeti, then the Qashqai and Sportage conspired - they offer a low, grasshopper-like seating position, with raised knees.
The new Qashqai is like a diet hamburger: it looks appetizing, but tastes bland
0 / 0
What about trunks? We measured their volumes using “tared” balls, and... Here the connection with body length is direct: Skoda holds only 343 “ball” liters and can be compared with Nissan (404 l) and Kia (413 l) only if move forward or completely remove the three rear separate seats. By the way, only the Yeti has this feature, as well as an optional folding front seat.
"Fat!" - the highest praise for Qashqai from aggressively progressive youth. The whimsical composition of pliable plastic, glossy decor and “accessories” of the new Teana looks rich
But even if you limit the freedom of passengers to the limit and get the coveted 447 liters under the curtain, you still won’t be able to load the Skoda with as much belongings as Mazda (540 l) or Toyota (537 l) allow. Moreover, the RAV4 has an optional electric drive for the fifth door, and the loading height is significantly lower. Since the spring of this year, Russian Rafiks have been equipped with a stowage kit: the trunk floor has been lowered, and there is no longer a hump for a full-size spare tire.
The Nissan Qashqai crossover has established itself as a fairly budget option, if this definition applies to cars costing more than a million rubles. But is this saving worth it? To answer this question, let's try to compare the CX 5
Off-road
Nissan Qashqai or Mazda CX 5 – which is better? Everything is relative! Many people know that the Qashqai shares a common base with Nissan hatchbacks, so they believe that the car only has the shape of an SUV, but will drown in the first puddle. Is it so?
Indeed, the most powerful engine in the Kashkaev line is a two-liter petrol engine with a power output of 144 hp. Very modest compared to the 150 hp that a Mazda engine of the same volume produces. But the torque of the Qashqai power plant is not so bad - 200 N*m, and sometimes it is the torque that is decisive when attacking off-road conditions.
But torque is not the only way the Qashqai makes up for its lack of power. Its main feature is the 4×4-i all-wheel drive system, to which Nissan mechanics paid special attention. The driver has three driving modes available:
- 2WD – as you might guess, only two wheels (front) will be driving in this mode, regardless of driving conditions;
- Auto – the on-board computer decides when to use all-wheel drive. By default, the car remains front-wheel drive; the automatic system engages the rear axle when entering a turn, slipping, or danger of skidding. Analogue mode.
- Lock - the car turns into a full 4x. At the same time, smart automation itself will distribute the torque between the wheels depending on the grip on the road. At speeds of 80 km/h or more, the system automatically switches from Lock to Auto.
How will Mazda vs Qashqai respond? According to Mazda designers, the driver’s job is to enjoy high-speed driving without being distracted by the transmission. The only rear-wheel drive operating mode available by default is an analogue of Nissan's Auto. Forced blocking is available as an option.
The Mazda team clearly placed emphasis on power and speed: the 2.5-liter gasoline unit produces 196 hp with a torque of 256 Nm. Clearly better than Nissan. Excellent performance on the highway does not show itself adequately in the mud - the automatic transmission constantly tries to increase the speed, causing offensive slipping.
Despite the very good ground clearance for a crossover (210mm), Mazda strives to scoop up dirt with its outstanding radiator grille. The Nissan Qashqai's ground clearance is 190 mm, but on Russian-assembled cars it has been shrewdly increased to 200 - taking into account the specifics of the operating location. True, it’s easy to leave the bumper’s mudguard apron on a particularly unfortunate bump.
If you compare the radiator grille, in general the Mazda is well protected from dirt. Massive sills almost completely cover the doors and sides of the car from dirt and splashes. The rear door is protected from splashes by a matte wide bumper cover.
In the city and on the highway
Despite the wide "Jeep" style, the CX 5 handles well, responds instantly to the steering wheel and easily turns into turns. Precision control allows you to make quite risky maneuvers, which is also facilitated by the excellent visibility from the driver's seat.
Overtaking maneuvers are also facilitated by Mazda’s very good (in its class) dynamics – the car “jumps” from a standstill to a hundred in 9.4 seconds, as well as the SPORT mode in which the engine “squeezes out” higher revolutions.
When turning, the ground clearance also makes itself felt - the roll on bends is quite sensitive. Not so much as to expect a coup, but you still need to get used to this feature of the car.
Well, if you still fail to get around a traffic jam, the i-STOP system will help you avoid unnecessary fuel consumption by turning off the engine during a long stop.
The Nissan Qashqai is clearly not designed to break speed records. The dynamics of acceleration to hundreds is a very modest 11.1 s. The steering wheel is free, the number of revolutions from edge to edge is three and a quarter, a relatively good indicator of a city car without pretensions to sportiness.
Sports mode – yes. And this is the only thing that can be said about it, as well as about the “eco” mode. But the variator behaves well, accurately maintaining the desired speed. If desired, you can switch to manual mode.
Exterior and interior
Appearance is a matter of taste. If the Mazda CX-5, even taking into account the extreme restyling of 2015, has already managed to “blur” the eye, then the Qashqai 2016 is quite fresh and attracts attention. But it is clear that this phenomenon is temporary, especially since Mazda’s people are not asleep - a new version of the CX-5’s appearance is on the way.
If you look at objective data, the picture is like this:
Although the Nissan is wider, this space is “eaten up” by the transmission tunnel, so there is still more space in the Mazda’s cabin. And the luggage compartment is larger - 443 liters versus exactly 400 for the Qashqai.
Both cars being compared - the Nissan Qashqai and the Mazda CX 5 - are equally in the class of cars and awarding victory in this category entirely depends on specific tastes.
As for the hardware content, Mazda stands out with its excellent parking sensors, which pleasantly surprises with the accuracy of its operation. This is especially important given that the car is one of the longest in its class.
But the Qashqai takes its toll with a system of all-round visibility and control of “dead spots”. A light coming on in the passenger compartment on the right or left will draw the driver’s attention to the fact that someone has “grown in” on the corresponding side. We will never know how many motorcyclists owe their lives to such a useful device.
In the cabin of the top-end Nissan Qashqai, the first thing that attracts attention is the panoramic glass roof.
What is the price of the issue? The “default” Mazda CX 5 with a two-liter engine costs about 1,300,000 rubles, a Russian-assembled Nissan Qashqai is 200,000 cheaper. Whether it is worth supporting a domestic manufacturer, even under the auspices of a Japanese brand, is up to you to decide.
“Cars are usually pulled out from here by helicopter,” either joked or sympathized with the local “jeeper,” who “teared off more than one towing eye here.” Meanwhile, the Nissan Qashqai lagged behind the Mazda by several tens of meters: the crossover could not overcome the track overgrown with slippery grass. The all-wheel drive system works almost without errors, transferring the torque to the desired wheel, and it seems that the Qashqai is about to drive onto land, but is retracted into the ground by the suspension arms.
The ground clearance of the Russian-assembled Nissan was increased by exactly one centimeter compared to the English version - this was achieved due to stiffer springs and shock absorbers. As a result, the Qashqai's ground clearance turned out to be very decent for its class - 200 millimeters. So you can’t complain about the geometric cross-country ability of a Japanese crossover - if Nissan frankly doesn’t take it somewhere, then this is definitely not a problem with low bumpers.
The Mazda CX-5 risked remaining in the swamp slurry forever - the body slowly sank deeper and deeper, which is why we even had to turn off the engine. The Land Cruiser Prado seemed like a sure savior, but the problems began when the towing eye of the crossover got stuck in the mud. After the Mazda somehow managed to hook onto the dynamic sling, problems began with the Prado.
On a very viscous surface, even the Land Cruiser Prado, prepared for difficulties, turned out to be helpless - it simply does not have a “cowshed” mode. The Japanese SUV is equipped with a very smart Multi-terrain Select system, which finely tunes the operating modes of the engine, transmission and suspension to the current road conditions. For most road conditions, these packages are sufficient, where the electronics themselves decide how much slipping to allow, whether individual wheels need to be braked, and what limiting traction condition to provide in order to overcome a steep climb. In addition, the Land Cruiser Prado has “classic” locking center and rear cross-axle differentials. You can, of course, also turn on the lower row and raise the stern thanks to the rear air struts.
Prado, unlike its competitors, did not fall into the abyss - at some point it simply hovered in place, digging itself even deeper. What was under the wheels of the SUV can hardly be called earth. However, when the Land Cruiser cannot budge, another Land Cruiser comes to its aid - in our case it was the turbodiesel version of the previous generation. A towbar, a dynamic sling, locks - and the prepared SUV pulled out two cars at once.
Pieces of clay, monotonous engine sounds and a terrible roar are not military operations, but just a Nissan Qashqai whose highway tread is completely clogged. On the verge of a foul, he overcame another difficult section and was already preparing to turn around, when he refused to go along the right path and got stuck in the deepest puddle on the route. But Qashqai unexpectedly refused the services of the Land Cruiser Prado: a few minutes of rocking - and the crossover independently got out onto the asphalt without a hint of overheating of the variator.
Mazda CX-5 followed the path of the Qashqai gracefully, with almost no mistakes. Where there was a lack of grip on slippery surfaces, the 192-horsepower engine came to the rescue. There was no need to complain about geometric cross-country ability: the ground clearance from the lowest point of the bottom to the ground is 215 millimeters. These are already quite off-road performance, but the overall potential off the asphalt was slightly spoiled by the bulky overhangs. “Clack-clack-bang,” the CX-5 jumps over bumps, each time clinging to the ground with its rear bumper. It's better to be careful with speed than to look for bumper clips in the clay. But the crossover does not forgive mistakes: once we were modest with the gas, we run after the Land Cruiser.
