By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Nay
When I test drove Quest04, and questioned salesperson, he told me the engine was built and tuned to run on premium (same engine as Maxima and Murano) but will run OK on regular. He said that the sensors and computer will automatically adjust timing, etc to avoid engine knock (and engine damage) but that these automatic adjustments will also decrease performance a little, and also cut MPG a bit. Can anybody tell me if this is just salesman BS? Any current owners who have tried both? And if it's true that premium gas will give better acceleration and better MPG, what would this have done to CR rankings?
CR reports the "clearance required by the from bumper for a U-turn" - which will usually be somewhat larger. This explains the 40ft/ 44ft discrepancy in Quest specs. In my opinion, the CR measurement is a better everyday comparison - when maneuvering in a parking lot, I'm concerned about what I might "bump into to", not just what my wheels might "run over".
I'm still trying to decide whether I want to upgrade my '93 Quest (190 inches long) to the new '04 (204 inches long), or go over to a Mazda MPV, which is almost the same size as what I am used to.
Thanks
FUEL RECOMMENDATION
Use unleaded regular gasoline with an octane rating of at least 87 AKI (Anti-Knock Index) number(Research octane number 91).
For improved vehicle performance, NISSAN recommends the use of unleaded premium gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91 AKI number (Research octane number 96).
I'm a mechanical engineer (in major appliances) that dealt with Consumer Reports impact on my own job. I would like to say that they do provide a positive service to "raise the bar" of products, both in performance and in durability. They come up with novel tests, some very good methods of evaluation, but others not necessarily true representations of product performance.
They can sway results wildly one way or the other in their rankings by the particular model they choose to test. For instance, if a washing machine is selected, you could have a heavily featured electronic model of one manufacturer compared against a bare-bones electromechanical model. No doubt the electronic will score higher. They also will buy a variety of the higher volume manufacturers products, but may select just one or two models of the lowest volume manufacturers which can severely slight ratings. That said, they do try to obtain the "flagship" product of a manufacturer to a degree, and I still say they can provide a service by instilling manufacturers to do a better job. Be aware that problems aren't necessarily dissected between the main (think expensive) guts and the peripheral extras that you may not even use or opt for.
They also don't evaluate the entire "field of products available." For riding lawn tractors group evaluation a few years back, their review picked a standard entry level mower, with the most basic mulching feature, for their review of mulching mower ratings. Yet Deere's true mulching deck (Freedom) with a novel approach to blade rotation was not tested (kicks butt for the record!).
Back to cars/vans/trucks - things they have done well is to emphasize the issue of roll overs on SUV's (very real in an evasive maneuver). Still subjective on anything beyond an emperical evaluation (like braking distances, acceleration times).....
steve
central wisconsin gearhead
I have experienced slowness even without full load. It happend few times. I took it to the dealer and no problem found. I think there is some issue and I couldn't reproduce it when I took it to the dealer. We took it to long drive and it ran very well. Got 25 mpg with regular gas. Thinking of using premium next time to see if that will eliminate the sudeen slowness!
Look at it this way: the major gains in V6 performance in the last 10 years have come from variable valve timing, which puts a lot of punch into an engine in the mid-upper RPM range, but does precious little for low RPM, i.e. < 2,000 RPM. Torque ratings are what matters for off-the-line performance, especially under load, and horsepower becomes more important at higher RPM. Hence you find less than tremendous performance at low RPM, and quite excellent performance at high RPM.
This is why there is still a market for V8's, and also why a 4.0L inline six cylinder Jeep with 190 HP and 225 lb/ft of torque has a 1,500 lb greater towing capacity than a late model minivan with 242 HP and 240 lb/ft of torque. By the numbers, this makes no sense (especially since a heavier minivan is better equipped to handle a heavy trailer from a "trailer whip" perspective), so you have to look at the numbers throughout the RPM range, as "max" engine figures aren't terribly relevant unless you drive at over 4,000 RPM. The Jeep engine puts out 95% of max torque at 1,800 RPM. The various Japanese V6's probably haven't crested 150 lb/ft of torque at 1,800 RPM. Hence the sluggishness under load at under 10 mph (low RPM), but the impressive performance at 3,000 RPM and up.
Of course, the Jeep 4.0L also gets 16-18 mpg as a consequence - pretty bad for a six cylinder only moving 3,300 lbs. You want low end torque, you give up fuel economy. You want to achieve fuel economy with variable valve timing, you give up low end torque (or rather you don't increase it much from previous iterations of these engines that had lower max torque and HP figures). To my knowledge, nobody has achieved both, although these new V6's remain extremely impressive for the power/economy figures they achieve.
Although I don't favor the Sienna, I will admit that Toyota has done the most impressive job with a smaller displacement engine (3.3L vs. 3.5L) and max torque about 1,000 RPM sooner (3,600 RPM vs. ~4,500 RPM for Quest & Odyssey). This is what explains CR's test scores in acceleration. Yes, the Sienna has less max torque and horsepower, but it may be achieving as much or more power in the 3,000 RPM range with a smaller, and therefore slightly more efficient engine. Although I didn't feel that difference in my test drives - I put the Sienna last in engine performance to the Quest and Odyssey...but suspect that was engine/transmission combo and not a lack of engine power.
Nay
Thanks anyway!
Thanks and a good day to ya!
IN-CABIN MICROFILTER
The in-cabin microfilter restricts the entry of airborne dust and pollen particles and reduces some objectionable outside odors. The filter is located behind the glove box. Refer to the "NISSAN Service and Maintenance Guide" for change intervals.
If replacement is required, see your NISSAN dealer.
backy---I haven't been able to locate a service manual at the Nissan web site. I'll keep looking. I would guess that to replace the filter, the glove box would have to be removed.
It was easy to access on my Venture; a plastic panel that was removable by hand through the glove box.
Steve, Host
Thank goodness.
Steve, Host
Otherwise, we like the many other features, power and styling. We also tried to see a Sienna but they did not have any. We were told that the Toyota dealer would call when one comes in but "we better drive right on down to see it before it's gone". I have aneighbor who was offered a Sienna for $1,000 OVER MSRP.
Steve, Host
Have the same issue with the warm/hot air from the center console foot vents with AC ON, but I noticed when you turn the fan off, the air that comes in from the outside is much cooler.
Told the dealer about it, but they weren't aware of it. We will bring it in as soon as a solution is found.
Overall, really happy with the Quest!
Steve, Host
If you are having similar issue please call Nissan 1-800-Nissan-1. If more customer call then they might try to get the fix soon.
I also noticed in Problem discussion board that some one got this issue fixed by getting the Heating System replaced. When I called Nissan they said they are still working on it.
Regarding MPG. I am getting around 17 in city and 24 on Highway. Some times I gives only 15 in city.
Otherwise, I am extremely happy with it. I love it.
Also, how long does it take you to get used to the center-mounted instrument panel. Seems pretty unusual to me.
Thx.
The center mounted speedometer console is not a problem for me. After the first 2-3 days of driving it, I looked right at it. I do like the center pod a/c and radio controls. They are very easy to find and use.
Overall, I love the van. I have a SL trim with the leather. Sort of wish now that I had gotten the built in DVD. But you know how it goes. Gotta decide at some point.
I really think Nissan could trump Toyota with the driver's side power sliding door add on to the SL trim. I think they were in cahoots on this though. Not having a van before, I really didn't know how much I'd like the power doors. But I didn't really want the skylights in the south.
The center-mounted instrument panel was something I got use to very quickly. After driving mine for two and one-half weeks, it is like it has always been there; that feature I really like.
There is one thing that is somewhat annoying and that is, depending on which direction the van is headed, when the light shines into the instrument panel, it really dims the ability to read it, especially the lcd display. For example, when this happens it is difficult to see whether or not the cruise control is on or set as well as other functions that appear on the lcd. The visibility of the speedometer and RPM seems to be okay.
In spite of this, I am still thrilled with mine. I was star stricken from the very first time I saw it. I really just love it.
Averaged 20.2 MPG at 80 MPH with 3 people and around 400 pounds worth of stuff (Not bad! should improve in time).
No noticeable reflection problem, but weather was mostly overcast, so...
I have found I like(!) the instruments in the center. It took 10 minutes to get used to everything, and I find I can scan all the main and auxiliary functions much easier than with the dashes of my other cars. The layout of the pod is quite functional and it makes everything very accessible. It's just non-traditional, so don't knock it for that reason alone. I think it's actually more user-friendly compared to my 3 Mercedes'.
I'll post a more in-depth evaluation of the van and my TOP-10 likes and dislikes as soon as I catch up on email, calls, etc.
According the specs, while the door is closing, when you put an object or apply a force in the opposite direction, the door is supposed to open automatically and should not close all the way. It works fine when the door is about 8 (or less) inches open before it fully closes. But the first problem is when you apply the pressure earlier (more than 8 inches open) it does not work. It keeps closing. I think it should open automatically at any point when there is a pressure in the opposite direction. The second and more serious problem is that while the door is half way or more open and when you put the pressure and keep the pressure on, it keeps closing all the way!!! I tried it several times and it did the same all the time on both doors. I put a medium pressure with my hand and pushed it the other way. It keep closing all the way till the end and I had the pull out my hand just before the door fully closes. PLEASE BE CAREFUL WHEN YOU DO THE TEST, THE DOOR IS HIGHLY LIKELY TO FAIL AND CAUSE A SERIOUS INJURY.
I will take the car to the Nissan service and keep you updated on this issue. Please let me know if yours work fine or if this is how it supposed to work in general with power sliding doors.
quest0904...read your owners' manual VERY CAREFULLY...it will explain all this. obviously, your salesperson didnt know jack diddly about his product...these are things i normally go over with my customers before they leave.
I notice that sometimes when I accelerate from a halt, I can peel the wheels (they spin). I thought the traction control would take care of this.
We are talking dry (not wet) road.
Any thougths?
According to computer, I am getting 18.1 MPG on city driving on my Quest SE...
Not bad...
Regular Gas is more volatile... burns faster and a lot of the energy is wasted in heat. Higher Octane gas burns slower and translates into more power.
Not sure if that is the cause of your problem...