Performance Tested - 2016 Nissan Titan XD

Edmunds.com

Performance Tested - 2016 Nissan Titan XD

The Nissan Titan XD visited our test track to see how it performs.

Read the full story here

500rwhp

0-60 in 9.6 is painfully and maybe dangerously slow. My F150 supercrew with similar towing and payload capabilities does this in about 5.7 seconds.

bohio

Even my RAM 1500 EcoDiesel (2016, crewcab, 6'4" bed, BigHorn) beats that 0-60 time by at least a full second. And if I'd been willing to pay $51k (instead of $41.4k as my truck cost, total), I could have purchased the RAM 2500 with the mighty Cummins 6.7L with 370 HP and 800 lb. ft. of torque!! Hauls more, probably gets equivalent fuel "economy", and costs less than the XD. But Nissan thinks they've brought a winner to market. I guess the sales figures will tell, but this XD is just a head-scratcher. A very slow head-scratcher. Pricey too.

daryleason

I'm not sold on this truck either. But then again, most of the new trucks to me seem over-priced. Right now, if I were looking to get another truck, I'd probably lean towards a Ford F-150 or one of the GM Twins. While I like the Colorado/Canyon, I'm NOT a fan of the size or the price. Ford's supposedly coming out with a new Ranger, but you know it'll be "Mid-Size" which means it'll be about the size of a late 90s/early 2000s Full Size, and probably still over-priced.

I think Nissan is trying to sell based on hype. I don't know that I genuinely believe that there's a particular market that this truck will fall into that will drive sales. A "Heavy Half" sounds good, in theory, but it'll never be a big enough market to really draw people in. GM tried it at least twice that I know of. Once in the early 80s with a "Heavy Half" package and then with their "HD" Series in the early 2000s. It seems that the people that spent the money on it wanted it either for the bragging rights or because the HDs looked nicer/tougher than the "regular duty" versions.

desmolicious

So, to sum up it's ugly and slow.

500rwhp

desmolicious said:

So, to sum up it's ugly and slow.

Funny because it's true.

allthingshonda

Keep in mind that diesel engines take much longer to break in than gas equivalents. I'm sure that it will get a little quicker after it gets a few thousand miles on the clock.

Who is this truck marketed to? Why would you buy this truck when, for a couple of grand more (or less depending on rebates), you could get a F-250 with the 6.7 diesel and tow 6,000 more pounds than this truck.

bohio

Let's conduct an extremely unscientific poll: excluding dealer inventory, how many XDs have you seen in your area? I've seen one here in New Hampshire, and it was parked at the SIG Academy in Epping. (The only other one I saw was at a Nissan dealer's lot in Manchester, and was not for sale. It was just there to gaze upon and sit in. And that's when I realized the truck I'd been eagerly awaiting -- and for which I delayed making a buying decision for almost a year -- was a boondoggle.)

allthingshonda

Never saw one on the road. And I live in the south where Mercedes gets parked in the back and a Ford F-250 King Ranch 6.7 PowerStroke Diesel is valeted up front.

bohio

Come on, Edmunds, you've had this XD for two weeks now. We'd like an update. Or, is no one interested in taking this behemoth out for a spin? I am really interested in the fuel economy figures. I read another article about this truck, wherein the driver/reviewer was unable to get better than 12.7 MPG. Single digits in city driving, if I recall correctly. Good lord, if that's true, then it will surprise me if Nissan sells more than a thousand of these trucks in 2016. So, Edmunds, please get to it; start driving the tub-o'-lard.