Nissan Qashqai was by no means the first C-class hatchback with high ground clearance, but to its credit, the number of cars sold on the world market in 10 years reached 3 million. The closest competitor is the Suzuki SX4, a little less “hyped”, but no less effective. Having started its journey with a hatchback, Nissan has grown in size over time and now more closely fits the description of a crossover. After the start of production in St. Petersburg, the Qashqai prevailed with characteristics adapted to the harsh Russian conditions: on the domestic market it began to be produced with an updated suspension adapted for cold weather, new shock absorbers and an extended front and rear track. In turn, the last generation Suzuki SX4 acquired similar features to the Nissan: the ability to switch all-wheel drive mode, a CVT and even a similar rear pillar. But after 2014, the Russian market fell, car prices increased and sales of the SX4 “stalled.” Soon, the Suzuki concern nevertheless resumed deliveries of cars to Russia, albeit with minor modifications to its model. Thus, the ineffective variator was removed, a turbo engine with a chrome grille was added, the size of the headlights was increased, etc.
Pros and cons of both models
Let’s start our comparative review of these cars with what each of them has to offer. Nissan is distinguished by the presence of soft plastic with carefully calibrated details and glossy piano lacquer inserts. What makes this car unique from the rest are all-round cameras and a huge sunroof that opens to the full roof. The model has a built-in navigation system that instantly calculates the route taking into account traffic jams. The interior of the Suzuki SX4 also features a soft front panel and modern navigation, which, however, is more modest than that of the Nissan. The Quashqai is much more spacious and has a longer wheelbase than the Suzuki, but it is undeniably more comfortable: the loading height of the SX4 is lower, the sofa cushion is higher, and there is an additional compartment in the “underground”.Nissan Qashqai | Suzuki SX4 |
|
Country of assembly | Great Britain | |
Average price of a new car | ~ 1,172,000 rub. | ~ 1,539,000 rub. |
Body type | ||
Transmission type | Variable speed drive | |
type of drive | Front (FF) | Front (FF) |
Supercharger | ||
Engine capacity, cc | ||
Power | ||
Maximum torque, N*m (kg*m) at rpm. | ||
Fuel tank volume, l | ||
Number of doors | ||
Trunk capacity, l | ||
Acceleration time 0-100 km/h, s | ||
Weight, kg | ||
Body length | ||
Body height | ||
Wheelbase, mm | ||
Ground clearance (ride height), mm |
We compared four crossovers that are some of the most affordable on the market today. We have two newcomers in our quartet - Suzuki New SX4 and Nissan Qashqai. Mitsubishi ASX is not new, but relatively recently it has undergone a light restyling. The Skoda Yeti is also after a recent facelift and will compete with the Japanese trio. Yes, it just so happened that the honor of European automakers will be defended in our country by only one of their representatives, and obviously the most expensive one. Well, it’s all the more interesting to find out if it makes sense to overpay.
Coincidentally, our editors decided not to miss the favorable situation in the car market and at the same time choose a car for themselves. However, let’s make a reservation that we had our own criteria when choosing a car, namely: an economical gasoline engine (preferably naturally aspirated), a manual transmission, front-wheel drive, not the poorest equipment. Spacious trunk, as there is always something to carry.
We looked at dealers for the most affordable versions and we almost succeeded. It turned out to be especially difficult to maintain equality in the choice of engines. Starting from our “stove” Suzuki New SX4, we began to look for cars with “mechanics” and a 1.6-liter gasoline engine, because the Japanese crossover, alas, is not offered with other engines. Only the Mitsubishi ASX could make an identical pair. In the basic version, it is equipped with a 117-horsepower 1.6-liter gasoline engine and a five-speed manual transmission. For the Nissan Qashqai, the base engine is a new 1.2-liter turbocharged unit with 115 hp, but there was no such car in the test fleet. I had to be content with a two-liter car with a CVT. The Skoda Yeti has a 105-horsepower 1.2-liter turbo engine in its base. But there is also a 1.4TSI with 123 hp. With front-wheel drive and six-speed manual transmission. So we took him to the team. Unfortunately, it was not possible to achieve complete identity, but that’s how it is.
Suzuki New SX4 1.6 MT (2WD)
Dimensions (LxWxH) - 4300x1765x1590 mm. Ground clearance - 180 mm. Trunk - 430/1269 l. Dynamics (0-100 km/h) - 11.0 s. Fuel consumption (average) - 5.4 l
Arguing about appearance is a thankless task. But let’s say a few words anyway. Qashqai and SX4 are not twins at all, but there is something similar in their style. They look modern, but a bit bland. The ASX is lean and compact, although it lacks refinement. Simple. And Yeti still stands out with its unusual proportions. It’s a pity that during the restyling, the designers removed the unusual round foglights integrated into the upper part of the bumper. However, even in its current version, Skoda looks good, having become somewhat stricter and more solid.
Nissan Qashqai 2.0 AT (2WD)
Dimensions (LxWxH) - 4377x1837x1595 mm. Ground clearance - 200 mm. Trunk - 325/1585 l. Dynamics (0-100 km/h) - 10.1 s. Fuel consumption (average) - 6.9 l
The largest in both appearance and size is the Nissan Qashqai - 4377 mm. But the Skoda Yeti turned out to be the most compact - only 4223 mm in length. If you're being picky, it could be sent to battle with subcompact crossovers like the Opel Mokka. But in fact, everything got mixed up not only in the Oblonskys’ house, but also in the compact crossover class. Therefore, the same Yeti acts, in fact, in two classes at once, however, like everyone else. ASX and SX4 are almost bumper to bumper - 4295 and 4300 mm, respectively. Size, of course, matters, but we'll get to that a little later.
Mitsubishi ASX 1.6 MT (2WD)
Dimensions (LxWxH) - 4295x1770x1615 mm. Ground clearance - 195 mm. Trunk - 384/1188 l. Dynamics (0-100 km/h) - 11.4 s. Fuel consumption (average) - 6.1 l
The Skoda Yeti has the highest quality interior. Despite some dullness, it feels expensive and solid. And it all starts with heavy doors that close with a dull slap, as if being sucked into the opening. They are echoed by metal door handles rubberized on the back side. A small detail that eloquently indicates attention to detail. The front seats are the most comfortable in the quartet. Rigid, dense, regular shape and with a wide range of adjustments.
Skoda Yeti 1.4 MT (2WD)
Dimensions (LxWxH) - 4223x1793x1691 mm. Ground clearance - 180 mm. Trunk - 322/1485 l. Dynamics (0-100 km/h) - 10.5 s. Fuel consumption (average) - 6.8 l
The Skoda Yeti steering column is adjustable for reach and tilt. But, having sat comfortably behind the wheel, you understand that with an optimal fit, the plump donut of the steering wheel covers the upper part of the instrument panel. And if you raise the steering wheel, you will spoil the landing geometry. As an option, you can raise the chair by sitting upright, like on a bus. But this is the only ergonomic flaw in the Czech crossover. Otherwise, he gives no reason to complain.
Despite having the shortest wheelbase, the Yeti's rear seats are comfortable. Legroom was achieved by vertical seating for passengers. The chairs can be moved back and forth and the angle of the backrests can be changed. But due to the high central tunnel, only two passengers will feel comfortable.
The Yeti instrument panel is laconic and informative; you just need to get used to the Czechs’ signature feature - the speedometer and tachometer numbers drawn in a circle. Yeti boasts plenty of storage space for small items, including a glove compartment on the front panel under the windshield a la GAZelle.
Qashqai pleased with full-fledged door handles, the presence of places for small items and the peaceful nature of the interior. The instrument panel looks great and is readable at a glance. The small color display of the on-board computer is especially good. The graphics are beautiful and the resolution is high. Despite the rather low-lying cushion of the rear sofa, it turned out to be comfortable to sit there. There is enough space for both legs and head, and the low central tunnel allows three people to sit there.
Among its Japanese counterparts, the Nissan Qashqai looks the most attractive inside. And although there are no bright accents in it, nothing confuses or interferes with the driver’s seat. The profile of the chair is not as precise as that of the Yeti, and there is not enough lateral support. But the finishing materials are pleasant both to look and to the touch. Although the abundance of glossy plastic is somewhat confusing. It just attracts dust and fingerprints. A fingerprintist's dream. No special ergonomic miscalculations were noticed in the interior of the Qashqai, except for the front armrest that does not extend forward. The only pity is that most of the interesting “bells and whistles” like a 7-inch color screen or a 360-degree viewing system are only available in expensive trim levels.
At first, the interior of the Suzuki SX4 is not impressive - it’s too rustic. But in reality everything turns out to be not so bad. There are a minimum of buttons and they are all at hand. The seats, however, are of a simple shape and do not hold too tenaciously in turns, but the back does not get tired in them. The instrument panel looks colorful, but it's not for everyone. But the front armrest, unlike the Nissan Qashqai, moves forward. There is a little less space in the back than in the Qashqai, but the central tunnel is also low, so a third passenger will not be out of place.
The interior of the Suzuki SX4 loses the respectability of the Qashqai. There are also good finishing materials here, but there is no glossy plastic, and overall the interior looks neat, but without frills. It is felt that when developing the interior, the desire to somehow combine the pleasant with the not very expensive, without pretense of “premium”, was at the forefront. And so it happened. However, it is worth noting the good geometry of the driver’s seating position and the wide range of adjustments of the steering wheel and seat. It’s just a pity that they weren’t honored to make full-fledged door handles instead of cheap “pockets”. Places for small items are standard - a small glove compartment, pockets in the doors, a box armrest, a niche in the center console.
In its basic configuration, the Mitsubishi ASX looks dreary. In expensive versions, the grayness of the interior slightly accelerates the large color display of the multimedia system. However, there are no special complaints about the ergonomics, but how could they be if you can’t get confused with ten buttons even if you want to. ASX assumes a high driving position, even with the seat fully lowered. With the longest wheelbase and high-mounted front seats, the ASX offers rear passengers maximum legroom. But the sloping roof will put pressure on the heads of tall passengers.
The interior of the Mitsubishi ASX is perhaps the most nondescript. Its essence is the same as that of Suzuki - the economy should be economical. But gloomy colors and echoing plastic on the door cards spoil the impression. The only bright spot in this interior is the instrument panel. The speedometer and tachometer with bright red, almost sporty needles are hidden in deep slanted bells. The central tunnel has three cup holders and a spacious armrest box. The driver's position is not ideal; I would like to be able to pull the steering wheel towards me a little more.
As for trunks, the Skoda Yeti wins in terms of transformation capabilities, although in absolute terms it loses to its competitors in terms of cargo compartment volume, providing only 322 liters in normal condition. All three rear row seats in the Yeti fold separately to form a flat loading area, and the trunk volume increases to 1485 liters, and this is already the second result after the Qashqai. In addition, in the Yeti you can fold not only the backs of the rear seats, but also fold their cushions forward or even remove the seats one by one from the cabin, increasing the volume of the trunk. A full-size spare tire is stored deep underground, and on the side walls there are powerful guides with hooks on which it is convenient to hang supermarket bags.
The Suzuki SX4 also boasts a double trunk floor. This creates an almost flat loading area when the rear seatbacks are folded down. This is where all the transformation possibilities of the SX4 end. In the normal version, the trunk is the most spacious - 430 liters, but the increase when folding the rear seat backs is small. The useful volume after such a transformation will be only 1269 liters, and this is only slightly more than that of the outsider - Mitsubishi ASX.
The Mitsubishi ASX's trunk was prevented from showing outstanding volume figures by the high floor, under which a full-size spare tire is stored. In the normal version, the trunk volume is 384 liters, and with the rear seatbacks folded down it is only 1188 liters. Thank you at least for the fact that during the transformation a flat loading area is formed.
In the Russian version with a full-size spare tire under the floor, the trunk volume of the Nissan Qashqai is small - only 325 liters. But if you fold the backs of the rear seats, you get a record volume - 1585 liters. The trunk of this crossover has nothing else to boast about.
Since our crossovers are front-wheel drive, we deliberately did not conduct any off-road testing. The habitat of these cars is limited to city streets and smooth highways. Although the geometric parameters of cross-country ability, in particular, high ground clearance, allow for exits from the asphalt. But mainly the high ground clearance helps in the city not to catch bumpers on curbs and steep ramps. The highest ground clearance declared by the manufacturer is the Nissan Qashqai - 200 mm. However, in reality it is slightly smaller. In addition, the rather large front overhang does not add cross-country ability. In terms of geometry, the ASX looks the most preferable, despite its 5 mm lower ground clearance. But the SX4 and Yeti boast a 180 mm ground clearance, which in real life is also slightly less than that stated by the manufacturer. The problem of a long front overhang has not escaped these crossovers, but this problem is most pronounced in the SX4. However, for urban off-roading even such modest capabilities are quite enough.
Like many cars from Japan, our heroes have problems with sound insulation. And they are heard especially clearly in the interior of the Mitsubishi ASX. Solo starts the engine, which is silent only at idle. And if you spur him on, he completely drowns out all other sounds with his voice. The Suzuki SX4 does this a little better, but its wheel arches are prominent. But the motor, even in extreme conditions, is not so loud.
Due to the difference in power units, it would be incorrect to make direct comparisons of dynamics. Although no, we managed to push two of the four crossovers head-on. These are Suzuki SX4 and Mitsubishi ASX. Almost equal power, five-speed manual transmissions and front-wheel drive. Technical data suggests that the difference in acceleration to hundreds of cars is only 0.4 seconds in favor of the SX4. In reality, this is difficult to notice. But the nature of the engines and, accordingly, acceleration is different. The Mitsubishi engine loves revs, although it pulls well at the bottom. But after 3,000 rpm it produces noticeable pickup. The Suzuki SX4 unit has a more even character, spinning up to maximum speed without a pronounced pick-up. I liked the gearbox performance better on the Suzuki. And the lever strokes are small, and the inclusions are soft and clear. But the manual gearbox lever in the ASX is like that of some frame SUV - tall, with large strokes and vague fixations. We need to get used to it.
From the point of view of acoustic comfort, the Skoda Yeti looks the most preferable. All background noise in the car is balanced and does not cause discomfort. The Nissan Qashqai is also not bad, but the sound insulation of the wheel arches still needs work.
The Skoda Yeti gearbox is a role model. Short strokes and weapon-like clarity of the inclusions. You can feel the German roots. The dynamics are good without reservations. Still, 200 Nm of torque, developed over a wide speed range. The main thing is to work the lever of the six-speed “mechanics” with dexterity.
The maximum capabilities of the 144-horsepower two-liter gasoline engine of the Nissan Qashqai are good, but they all dissolve somewhere between the CVT pulleys. In a moderately calm rhythm of movement you can’t find fault with the operation of the variator, but when you want to go fast, typical defects of this transmission appear. There is not enough linear connection between pressing the gas pedal and acceleration.
In terms of handling, the Skoda Yeti has no equal. Tight and assembled suspension, minimal roll, juicy force on the steering wheel. A thrilling car, which is a pleasure to take a bunch of turns at the limit. It’s only a pity that the suspension lacks enough energy capacity, and the shock absorbers lack rebound travel. When passing “sleeping policemen,” the front suspension “thumps” unpleasantly.
The SX4 and Nissan Qashqai are somewhat similar. They are good on smooth asphalt, but on the “comb” they transmit small vibrations to the body. And even on deep uneven surfaces there is not enough energy capacity. You can't go fast on a broken country road. The steering of both cars lacks information content. Whatever one may say, there is a feeling of a computer simulator. The SX4 steering wheel seems to be completely pinched in the near-zero zone, and with small deviations the steering wheel does not even want to return back on its own.
But the Mitsubishi ASX has the most successful chassis from a crossover point of view. The energy consumption is amazing. In the city, you can completely forget what it means to slow down in front of potholes, manholes, tram tracks and “sleeping policemen”. The suspension forgives everything. At low speeds the steering is a little lacking in informativeness, but on an arc the car already shows its rally genes. The only car in which you can drive quickly and with pleasure on bad roads.
The range of prices in our quartet turns out to be serious. Of course, the first winners are those dealers whose prices are tied to the Russian ruble. These are Nissan and Suzuki. Let's start with the SX4. So, today the basic version of the crossover costs... hold on... 749,000 Russian rubles or $16,299! At the same time, already in the “base” the car has air conditioning, 7 airbags, a complex of active safety systems (ABS, EBD, ESP, BAS), cruise control, electrically adjustable and heated mirrors, front and rear electric windows, a stereo system with steering wheel controls wheel, heated front seats, central locking with remote control. Checkmate. The car that took part in the test was in the GLX configuration, which, in addition to the above, has bi-xenon headlights, LED lights, fog lights, light and rain sensors, an intelligent system for accessing the interior and starting the engine with a button, dual-zone climate control, front and rear parking sensors, hill start assist, R16 alloy wheels. Price - 849,000 rubles or 18,475 dollars.
A basic Nissan Qashqai with a 1.2-liter engine costs 848,000 Russian rubles or $18,434. The basic package is also quite good. Full power accessories, air conditioning, cruise control, 6 airbags, ESP, remote central locking, start/stop system, stereo system. The LE+ version of the car tested was much better packaged. Xenon and fog lights, climate control, leather interior, intelligent entry system and push-button engine start, all-round visibility system, front and rear parking sensors, navigation system with a 7-inch color display and much more. The cost of such a car with a two-liter gasoline engine, CVT and front-wheel drive is 1,242,000 Russian rubles or $27,060. And this is also a very good offer.
The minimum price of the Skoda Yeti within the framework of the promotion is 17,990 euros or 22,345 dollars. This is for a car with a 1.2 TSI petrol turbo engine (105 hp), manual transmission and front-wheel drive in the Outdoor Active package. The package includes two airbags, central locking with remote control, heated windshield, air conditioning. Not much. All other joys of driving life are on a long list of options. Our car with a 1.4 TSI engine cost 22,500 euros or $27,946 and was additionally equipped with a proprietary multimedia system with navigation and a large color screen, a start-stop system, ESP, side airbags and a couple of other options.
The Mitsubishi ASX in the basic version with a 1.6 engine and a manual transmission (this is exactly the car we tested) is offered at a price of $23,500. For this money, the buyer will not receive anything special: electrically adjustable and heated mirrors, two airbags, air conditioning, a stereo system, power windows front and rear, heated front seats, leather steering wheel, central locking with remote control. Compared to their Japanese counterparts, they are expensive. This matches the price of the base Yeti, but the ASX loses to its European competitor in comfort and transformation capabilities.
Andrey Kazakevich (website editor-in-chief)
All models are quite good and each has its own advantages and disadvantages. Our editors' choice is truly rational - restrained in design, balanced and correctly priced Suzuki New SX4.
But Nissan and Suzuki, “tied” to the Russian ruble, look like the most attractive offer on the market today. After restyling, the Skoda Yeti lost its charisma, but remained true to itself, but you have to pay for it, and given the current market situation, the cost of the additional payment reaches 8-10 thousand dollars. Undoubtedly, the introduction of a Russian-assembled Czech crossover to the Belarusian market could change the situation and perhaps the outcome of this test turned out to be different, but we will start from reality.
The Mitsubishi ASX pleased us with its good omnivorous suspension and excellent geometric data. But you should understand that this is still not an off-road car, and therefore the ground clearance of its rivals is quite enough for the city. But the native of the land of the rising sun could not please the interior decoration and habits on the streets of the metropolis. But a colleague from the Japanese workshop in the person of Nissan Qashqai turned out to be a surprisingly interesting new product, if not for one thing. Despite the presence of a CVT and the most powerful engine among the compared models, it is the version with a manual transmission and a more economical 1.2-liter engine that begs for comparison. But we managed to test this version at Nissan’s off-site presentation in the Yakut Mountains, and this power unit caused mixed impressions. Not the best impressions from the alliance between the gearbox and the clutch pedal could not be overshadowed even by the abundance of soft plastic in the cabin. And let's face it, we're not ready to switch to turbocharged engines from Nissan just yet.
Therefore, for us, the version of the urban crossover from the no less legendary Japanese manufacturer of SUVs and crossovers, Suzuki, turned out to be the most optimal and balanced in terms of the main parameters. It was the absence of overtly weak moments with a fairly balanced chassis combined with an economical and time-tested engine that was the key factor in choosing this model. The well-coordinated operation of the gearbox and a well-tuned clutch are perfect for comfortable movement in city traffic. The ground clearance is quite sufficient to conquer the urban landscape, and the spacious trunk is capable of taking on board a lot of payload - from photographic equipment to family belongings for a summer house or a country picnic. The interior, although there are no claims to premium, pleased with its well-tuned ergonomics and good quality materials. Why lie - a crossover in almost the maximum possible configuration for $18,475 can convince any skeptic and convinced supporter of German SUVs!
Read impressions from a close acquaintance with the test drive heroes and the conclusions of the “Behind the Wheel” experts at.
Below are manufacturer data and other important technical information, as well as the results of testing crossovers on roller platforms.
RUNNING IN PLACE
To evaluate the performance of all-wheel drive, we not only go off-road, but also drive cars on.
The first task is for the crossovers to move off two platforms installed under the front wheels. The whole trio dealt with it in the blink of an eye.
The second stage is “diagonal”. We place platforms under one front wheel and under the opposite rear wheel. Suzuki SX4 is the first to approach the “projectile” - and confidently performs the exercise. Next comes the Nissan Qashqai. He was unable to cope with the task right away - only after the clutch was forcibly blocked did he manage to move off the platforms. But the Mitsubishi ASX - either with or without a lock - remained motionless: no traction was transmitted to the wheels standing on the asphalt at all. Moreover, after 10 seconds of slipping, the transmission overheating warning light came on.
Not a single crossover passed the final test - when only one wheel touches the ground.
Result: Suzuki SX4 - first place, Nissan Qashqai - second place, Mitsubishi ASX - third place.
Diagonal hanging is not an insurmountable obstacle for the Qashqai. It generally allows more than the SX4: wider suspension travel, ground clearance - 175 mm. He also has a beveled front bumper, and that would be just fine.
On the ASX, with an approach angle of 21.5°, you can more confidently force difficult terrain, although the ground clearance is the same 175 mm. But despite its good inclinations, the Mitsu is not a fighter: the driving electronics imitate differential locks poorly, and when hanging diagonally, the car freezes helplessly.
| | | |
GEOMETRIC PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS (ZR measurements)
MANUFACTURERS DATA
MITSUBISHI ASX | NISSAN QASHQAI | SUZUKI SX4 |
|
Curb/gross weight | 1515 / 1970 kg | 1575 / 1950 kg | 1260 / 1730 kg |
Acceleration time 0–100 km/h | |||
Maximum speed | |||
Turning radius | |||
Fuel/fuel reserve | AI-92, AI-95 / 60 l | ||
Fuel consumption: urban/suburban/combined cycle | 10.0 / 6.7 / 7.7 l / 100 km | 9.6 / 6.0 / 7.3 l / 100 km | 7.9 / 5.2 / 6.2 l / 100 km |
ENGINE |
|||
petrol | petrol | petrol |
|
Location | front, transverse | front, transverse | front, transverse |
Configuration / number of valves | |||
Working volume | |||
Compression ratio | |||
Power | 110 kW / 150 hp at 6000 rpm | 106 kW / 144 hp at 6000 rpm | 103 kW / 140 hp at 5500 rpm |
Torque | 197 Nm at 4200 rpm | 200 Nm at 4400 rpm | 220 Nm at 1500–4000 rpm |
TRANSMISSION |
|||
type of drive | |||
Transmission | |||
Gear ratios: | 2,35–0,39 / 1,75 | 2,63–0,38 / 1,96 | 4,44 / 2,37 / 1,56 / 1,16 / 0,85 / 0,67 / 3,19 |
main gear | |||
CHASSIS |
|||
Suspension: front/rear | McPherson / multi-link | McPherson / multi-link | McPherson / elastic |
Steering | rack and pinion, with EUR | rack and pinion, with EUR | rack and pinion, with EUR |
Brakes: front/rear | Ventilated | disc, ventilated / disc | disc, ventilated / disc |
Tires | |||
SERVICE IN NUMBERS
EXPERT ASSESSMENT OF VEHICLES
Points are assigned collegiately by a group of ZR experts. The rating is not absolute, it shows the car’s place in a given test with specific rivals. The maximum score is 10 points (ideal). 8 points is the norm for cars of this class.
Model | MITSUBISHI ASX | NISSAN QASHQAI | SUZUKI SX4 |
Driver's workplace | The most comfortable seat is in Qashqai. In the SX4, the push-out profile of the backrest interferes, and in the ASX, the lateral support is too weak. There are no complaints about the ergonomics of Nissan and Suzuki, but we will criticize Mitsubishi for the CVT selector being too low. Visibility in the SX4 is worse - the mirrors are too small. |
||
8 | 9 | 8 |
|
Controls | 8 | 9 | 9 |
8 | 8 | 7 |
|
Salon | It is most convenient to get into a Nissan: the doors open wide and the thresholds are always clean. The Qashqai is also ahead of its rivals in terms of equipment, as well as in the space in the second row. The tightest rear seats are in Mitsubishi. In terms of trunk capacity, the SX4 leads. |
||
Front end | 8 | 9 | 8 |
Rear end | 7 | 9 | 8 |
Trunk | 8 | 8 | 9 |
Ride quality | Accelerating dynamics are Suzuki's strong point. Thanks to the turbo engine, it easily breaks away from its rivals. The SX4 and Qashqai received higher marks for brakes than the ASX, which was let down by an uninformative drive. In terms of handling, the leader is once again Suzuki, which handles at the level of a high-quality passenger car. |
||
Dynamics | 8 | 8 | 9 |
8 | 9 | 9 |
|
Controllability | 7 | 8 | 9 |
Comfort | In terms of comfort, Mitsubishi is a clear outsider: it has poor sound insulation and the most shaky suspension. Suzuki and Nissan performed much better in these aspects. For the microclimate, the Qashqai earned a point more than its rivals - the presence of heated steering wheel, windshield and rear seats helped. |
||
7 | 8 | 8 |
|
Smooth ride | 7 | 8 | 8 |
8 | 9 | 8 |
|
Adaptation to Russia | The SX4 has car-like ground clearance. Suzuki received the lowest score for service because there are few dealerships for this brand. In this matter, Nissan has no competition. The ASX gets nine points for operation: only it can boast of a full-size spare tire and the ability to digest AI-92 gasoline. |
||
Geometric cross-country ability | 8 | 8 | 7 |
8 | 9 | ||
Affiliate offers
City's legends. Nissan Qashqai vs Suzuki SX4 and Subaru XV
The ruble has mercilessly set priorities in the C-class crossover segment. Suzuki SX4 and Subaru XV in the past fought to the last for every customer, but today it is much more difficult to compete with the localized Nissan Qashqai
The Nissan Qashqai wasn't the first high-clearance C-Class hatchback, and its clean, spare lines weren't exactly a heady success. Nevertheless, in ten years more than three million cars were sold worldwide. Competitors - Suzuki SX4 and Subaru XV - are not so famous, but this does not mean at all that they have nothing to oppose to the bestseller.
With the change of generations, the Qashqai has become more massive and now looks more like a crossover rather than a passenger hatchback. With the launch of production in St. Petersburg, it began its third life - already in the role of one of the most popular cars in the segment. The localized crossover received a suspension adapted to our conditions, with new shock absorbers and an expanded track.
The all-wheel drive hatch Suzuki SX4 originally played in the B-class. The next generation grew in size and imitated the Qashqai of the first generation: a tilted rear pillar, large naive headlights, a variator, and a puck for switching all-wheel drive modes. It was not possible to repeat the success - the crossover, renamed S-Cross, did not radically change the position on the European market. In Russia, it started well in 2014, but then the ruble collapsed - prices rose and car deliveries stopped.
During the time that the SX4 was absent from us, Suzuki worked on the mistakes: it removed the CVT, added a turbo engine and tried to make the car more solid. She overdid it with the latter - the powerful chrome “I want to be a Prado” grille and the huge headlights seem to have been borrowed from an SUV a couple of sizes larger and do not fit well with the 16-inch wheels in the spacious arches.
Subaru XV is essentially an Impreza hatchback, but with increased clearance to 220 mm and a protective body kit. Despite its long nose, it looks more like an SUV than other test participants. This is a real exotic in the segment: a boxer engine with horizontally positioned cylinders, its own transmission. Being the most affordable crossover of the Subaru brand, it was still inferior in popularity to the older Forester. In 2016, the XV underwent restyling and received new chassis settings, and with them a price tag of 1.6 million rubles, making the crossover even more exotic.
The Qashqai immediately attracts attention with its abundance of soft plastic, neat fit of parts and the solid shine of piano lacquer. And also options - only it has a full-length panoramic sunroof and all-round cameras. Standard navigation learns about traffic jams via radio and instantly recalculates the route.
The restyled Subaru XV has got beautiful inserts with aluminum and piano lacquer, but the feeling of quality is spoiled by wide gaps and uneven stitching on the leather. The interior of the Suzuki SX4 has also changed for the better - soft front panel, modern navigation - but among the test cars it is the most modest. The top-end configuration still has the same fabric seat upholstery, only with contrasting stitching. Multimedia Subaru offers additional applications, Suzuki - advanced voice control, but they do not know how to calculate a route taking into account traffic jams.
The Nissan Qashqai is wider in the shoulders and has a longer wheelbase than its competitors. In theory, its second row should be the most comfortable and spacious, there are even additional air ducts. But in fact, the sofa cushion is set a bit low compared to its competitors. In terms of ceiling height and legroom, the Nissan matches the more compact Suzuki and is inferior to the Subaru. The SX4's trunk is equal to Nissan's, but if you fold down the rear seatbacks, the Qashqai takes revenge. Suzuki leads in convenience: the loading height is lower and there is an additional compartment under the floor. The XV has the most inconvenient and cramped trunk - only a little over three hundred liters.
The soft, wide seat of the Nissan Qashqai with adjustable lumbar support is calming; the thick A-pillars affect visibility, but look reliable, as if emphasizing the strength of the body. Subaru has the tightest, sportiest seat, and the view is like in an openwork airplane cockpit. The SX4's nondescript seat is unexpectedly comfortable and cozy, and the seating position is the lowest you'll find in a typical passenger hatchback.
The Nissan Qashqai accelerates lazily - the engine roars strained, the tachometer needle soars towards the red zone, but the output is rubbery acceleration. The Subaru XV has a second wind of acceleration: a good pickup at the start and another, but closer to 60 km per hour. The CVT here is faster and tries its best to resemble a traditional automatic. Suzuki SX4 gives the impression of being the most lively of the three - due to the turbo engine, which produces peak torque already at 1500 crankshaft revolutions, quick reactions of the six-speed automatic transmission and the smallest weight.
According to the passport, this is true: Suzuki accelerates to 100 km/h in 10.2 seconds, but objectively the dynamics of the crossovers do not differ so much, by tenths of a second. The Qashqai is 0.2 s faster than the XV. Subjectively, it is the slowest, which is why you abuse the accelerator. Surprisingly, only this car was fined for speeding.
The Nissan crossover also turned out to be the most voracious: in traffic jams, gasoline consumption increased to 11 liters. Subaru with a naturally aspirated boxer engine with similar weight and power turned out to be one liter more economical. The Suzuki turbo engine showed the least appetite: about 10 liters, according to the on-board computer.
All-wheel drive transmissions of crossovers are designed approximately the same: the rear axle is connected automatically by a multi-plate clutch. The difference lies mainly in the settings and additional modes. By turning the puck, the Qashqai can be made front-wheel drive - fuel economy is the most important for it. The Lock mode is designed for off-road conditions - up to 40 km/h, traction will be distributed equally between the axles.
The SX4's clutch can also be forced locked, but only this Suzuki has special Snow and Sport modes available. In the first case, the engine responds more smoothly to the gas, and the electronics transmit more torque. In the second, the clutch works with preload, the accelerator becomes sharper, and the grip of the stabilization system weakens.
Subaru does not allow interference with the all-wheel drive system - the electronics itself distribute the traction between the axles. The XV's multi-plate clutch is packaged into the same crankcase with the transmission and therefore is not afraid of overheating off-road. In theory, Subaru should be the most driver-friendly and sporty, but there are no special modes provided here.
The character of the Qashqai is the most peaceful and urban - even the sport mode of the electric power steering only clamps the steering wheel, without adding feedback. The stabilization system is configured for maximum safety and firmly suppresses any hint of slipping. It’s even strange that she completely switches off. The suspension of the Russian version has been adapted to bad roads, but it still handles potholes and ice build-ups a little harshly. In principle, for the sake of a smooth ride, it was possible to abandon the fight against roll and make the crossover even softer.
The Subaru XV demonstrates rally genes: it has the sharpest steering and the most comfortable suspension on dirt roads. But it won’t be possible to go to all the Subarov stars: the supervision of strict electronics can only be weakened, but it will not be completely turned off. Suzuki SX4 in Sport mode willingly and predictably goes sideways. Thanks to the thickest tires, the car handles potholes smoothly, but for the same reason its reactions are inferior to the Subaru in terms of sharpness. The crossover has the smallest ground clearance among the cars in the test, and all-wheel drive is combined with a semi-independent beam at the rear.
The main trump card of the Nissan Qashqai is the Russian assembly, which made it possible to adjust prices. And a wide selection of options, including even diesel. The simplest crossover with a 1.2-liter petrol turbo engine, manual transmission and front-wheel drive will cost just over one million rubles. The two-liter version with all-wheel drive and CVT costs from 1.5 to 1.74 million rubles.
