Californians designed it. Italy’s glass blowing artisans lent it their name. A Franco-Japanese alliance headed by a Brazilian CEO builds it in a Japanese factory. The Murano is a twenty-first century multinational mutt. Introduced in 2002, this strange beast has faithfully served owners in the great melting pot of America’s sprawling suburbs. In dog years, the model’s now 67 years old. And the CUV market has suddenly become more crowded than a backwoods puppy mill. So has Nissan’s crossbreed aged well, or is this old dog ready for the vet’s needle?
The Murano’s funky design caused quite a stir at launch. Ghosn’s goons had decided to break out of the generic Japanese gestalt with some bold moves; there was no mistaking the Murano for, um, anything else. Although it was not the first car-based CUV, it was the first to show sheetmetal that openly flaunted its pavement-only intentions– and how.
Aside from a minor facelift, the 2007 Murano’ strange sheetmetal remains largely unchanged. Its beak is still a long, severely swept proboscis with a toothy checkerboard grille. Its high waisted body carries the bulk of its bulk below the belt – not unlike Ralph Kramden of The Honeymooners’ fame –terminating in a wide, bulbous butt. The upswept rear D pillar continues to symbolize the design’s quirky aspirations; in direct contrast to the current CUV vogue for a downwards triangle.
In short, looking like an oversize anime Terrapin, the Murano’s styling says off-roader like a Lara Flynn Boyle pictorial says all-you-can-eat buffet.
My Glacial Pearl (i.e. white) test car offered executive class accommodations: supportive seats and elegant doors slathered in café latte leather (i.e. beige), tastefully accented by brushed aluminum panels. Meanwhile, the Murano’s instrument cluster serves up a modern interpretation of a classic sports car binnacle, in front of a windshield so steeply raked Swiss pistonheads will be tempted to yodel towards the distant intersection of glass and metal.
But wait, there’s more! The Murano also embodies an SUV’s yeoman work ethic. Its flat paneled center console is all right angles and plain Jane, glove-friendly switchgear. Unfortunately, it’s more work than it should be; learning how to navigate this maze of indistinct buttons and menus requires more practice than beginner’s chess.
Nissan calls the Murano’s motorized mélange “modern design meets instant versatility.” I call it multiple Murano disorder.
A 3.5-liter V6 Maxima hand-me-down engine powers Nissan’s not-so-cute ute. Fire up the Murano’s 240hp mill and it quickly and quietly settles into a distant hum. With AWD stifling potential wheelspin and 244 ft. lbs. of torque thrust available at 4400rpm, you’re free to jump on the throttle. And… wait.
As the Murano’s tachometer climbs to its peak, sporting drivers instinctively anticipate an upshift that never comes. Thanks to Nissan’s Xtronic CVT (Continuously Variable Transmission), the Murano’s motor simply drones on unwaveringly, like a speedboat. On the positive side, the tranny is silky and efficient (20/24mpg). Nevertheless, the CUV’s CVT is dreadfully, unavoidably, interminably D-U-L-L. Trying to wring speed from this Godot-like drivetrain is like trying to get a cell phone company to waive an early termination fee.
Once you get the Murano up to speed, Nissan’s two-ton CUV is not so light on its feet. The Murano’s front strut and multilink rear suspenders keep the machine reasonably level through corners and during emergency stops. In SE trim, the Murano gets “sport-tuned” springs, and firmer struts and shock absorbers. Even in this guise, the Murano’s narcolepsy-inducing ride and handling have been tailored for the comfort-oriented driver.
Even worse, the Murano’s steering is squirrelly under full-throttle (both FWD and AWD models), squirrelly when tracking down the freeway, squirrelly over uneven surfaces and squirrelly through the twisties. When the tiller isn’t busy gently undulating in synch with the suspension’s motion, it’s as vague as a politician’s promise.
Of course, this complete lack of satisfying driving dynamics is endemic to all high-riding CUV’s with long suspension travel and thick sidewall tires. Except it isn’t. CUV’s from Acura, BMW and Honda steer with absolute squirrel-free precision, and not a small amount of tactile feedback.
That’s not to say that the Murano is either unsafe at any speed or uncontrollable through the bends. (Note: Loving parents should take care not to hoon with kids; the slick leather bench could result in an untidy pileup of children.) However, its [lack of] on-road personality underscores the $37k Murano’s niche: lux-o-barge on stilts.
The redesigned ’08 Murano is on its way– and just in time. Although Murano sales are still strong (up nearly 10% vs. last year) first-class CUV’s are everywhere; including the Honda Pilot, refreshed Toyota Highlander and Mazda CX7 (to name a few). What’s more, Nissan’s new Rogue threatens to steal sales from its slightly bigger brother. If the new Murano gets better driving dynamics and a proper slushbox, the model will continue to find plenty of willing homes.
William, how do you know that the Murano in was designed in California? I am pretty sure that it was designed in Japan.
The SE’s CVT has a mode where it mimics a manually-shiftable automatic. Did you have a chance to check that out?
The problem I’ve always had with the Murano is the minivan-like view over the IP. Also, it’s pricier than most competitiors.
I also had initial concerns about the CVT’s reliability, but have not heard of common failures.
To compare prices and real-world fuel economy:
http://www.truedelta.com/models/Murano.php
Here’s an example of a vehicle which breaks some of the moulds: it’s a funky design and packs a CVT.
Will, what’s your conclusion?
You think that maybe in the next generation they won’t make a so obviously badge engineered Infinity FX 35 (or whatever they call it)? I like the design but would not consider it because the Infinity was exactly the same minus the grill and tail lamps.
The Murano was designed 100% in Japan, by a very small japanese design team. I know Wikipedia says differently but we shouldn`t always believe what we read!! I just confirmed with the designer himself, who is a friend of mine.
So many times in the design world people are given credit for things they did not touch.
Nissan`s California design studio is a fantastic studio but they didn`t design this Murano.
Cheers.
My sources say designed in
CA
I was recently in the market for a CUV. I thought the Murano was overpriced compared to what else is out there. The Equinox and the Edge were a lot less money. I wound buying the Edge because of it’s new powertrain and it simply had a lot more value than it’s competitors.
Wow, you had me until “$37k.” I had no idea this was that much, I always put it just a small notch above the CRV/RAV and below the real midsize SUV crew. I suppose its being based on the Altima platform led me to believe pricing would be nearly in line with the sedan. Just seems too plain and common for that kind of money…
I know those are stock photos, but the version with the Euro plate looks like it’s on some low-profile rubber and aftermarket rims (20″+? It’s hard to tell on these larger vehicles).
windswords, the FX 35/45 is not a badge engineered Murano.
The FX is based off the 350Z platform, and as mentioned above, the Murano is based off the Altima platform.
They are not even close to “exactly the same”.
My wife has recently leased a Murano S (base model) and I have not found the steering to be squirrelly or vague maybe the upgraded sport suspension has something to do with this. Granted it is not as direct as my Accord V6 6M but it is much better than the Highlander she turned in. Otherwise everything else in the article is spot on. I would like it more with a proper manual gearbox but then I think every car should have a manual.
I believe sales are up due to better offers and incentives. 3 years ago we could not touch this car for budget reasons. This year we paid less for it than we were paying for the Highlander with no money out of pocket.
f the new Murano gets better driving dynamics and a proper slushbox, the model will continue to find plenty of willing homes.
Judging from NIssan’s recent Sentra with CVT and the Maxima with CVT only I’d say it’s a good bet that the next Murano will get an updated Xtronic CVT… Nissan seems pretty dedicated to the technology.
I haven’t driven a Murano in a while. But the CVT in the new Altima 3.5 behaves so well that I cannot imagine people not buying the car because of it–unless they’re operating off of preconceptions.
On the design, I saw a similar concept inside GM back in the mid-1990s, designed by a GM designer while working at Bertone in Italy on a GM-sponsored project. That and other concepts supplied by Bertone were the first time I saw headlamps extending well up into the fenders.
This has always led to suspect that Toyota and Nissan similarly contracted Bertone to create some concept cars, or that they were at least influenced by some Bertone concepts.
On the other hand, Bertone could have borrowed details from others, they may have just been floating around the global automotive design community at the time. People move around, and take what they’ve seen with them.
We have a 2004 Murano, bought last year for $25k with tax. It had about 35k miles and was loaded with everything but navigation. In 6 months and 5000 miles I found not a thing wrong with it. Well, one thing: there is a bit of sharp plastic in the rear door pocket, it can scratch your hand. Also, the car could be a little taller. I’m 6’3” and like to sit fairly vertically. My hair touches the ceiling (damn sunroof) when it starts getting too long. Time for a haircut!
We live in Chicago and were about to have a baby, so we wanted to get a roomy awd vehicle. I considered every non Detroit awd sedan, wagon and suv. The (all used) semifinalists were E300 4-matic wagon (has emergency only third row seats, maintenance too expensive), RX300 (doesn’t depreciate enough, too boring), various Honda and Toyota SUVs (the wife nixed them all as ugly), MDX (too bulky), 3-series wagon (too small), X5 (best driver in the bunch, maintenance too expensive), and the Murano (decent, wife liked the styling). We also considered a new FJ and the xB, just because the wife liked them. Eventually it came down to the X5 vs. Murano. For the same money, the Murano was 3 years younger, had more goodies, and Edmunds true cost to own was $10k lower over 5 years. So now we have a Murano. Whenever I start thinking we should have bought the X5, I go for a ride in my Boxster (2.5L) and all is forgotten.
I always appreciated the Murano for being different, even if I am not 100% behind the looks.
Notably, CAR magazine (UK) thinks of the Murano as a Lexus RX300 competitor. Not a horrible thought, really, and a better comparison on paper than the RX and Infiniti FX.
i dont have the need for a vehicle like this, but if i did, it would be on my short list because it is so cool looking. Also there would be the Mazda and Acura offerings, they are cool looking too.
So it is not a sports car! Does anyone really buy these things cause they want to have fun driving? I really hope not!
Excellent review! Thanks!
also – it looks like a Bertone design to me
Ash78,
I think the black Murano is the GTC high performance concept. It was tested by fifth gear, the video is on youtube.
“windswords, the FX 35/45 is not a badge engineered Murano.
The FX is based off the 350Z platform, and as mentioned above, the Murano is based off the Altima platform.
They are not even close to “exactly the same”.
Then they sure went to a lot of trouble to make them look badge-engineered.
Then they sure went to a lot of trouble to make them look badge-engineered.
Both the Murano and FX do share some design similarities inside/out, wouldn’t be surprised if the same folks did both vehicles. They were done in the days that Nissan had little money and got a controlling interest bought by Renault.
What?
The Murano and the FX don’t even sorta, kinda look alike.
One is innovative, athletic and a pure design statement — the other one is a Murano.
Thirty-seven THOUSAND Dollars for a Datsun? I thought it was the current iteration of the B-210.
Here are the differences between a CUV and a hatch back:
1) the CUV weights 500 lbs (or more) than the hatch back
2) the CUV probably has a AWD option while the hatch back probably doesn’t (and in a good portion of the country, the AWD opton doesn’t matter)
3) the CUV might have a 3rd seat which could seat, but if you really needed a 3rd seat, you’d probably opt for a bigger car
4) the CUV gets far worse gas mileage and worse handling than a hatch back
5) the CUV sits up higher than the hatch back, but with all the big SUVs out there, does it really matter???
These are just some of the reasons why an A3 will probably replace my 4Runner. And yes, I know the GTI is basically the same car for less money, but my wife insists she doesn’t look nearly as cute in the GTI as the A3.
The 2003 Altima which is FWD, has rear trailing arms with holes in them to accomodate RWD. This was a cheap way to make the same part for the Murano, FX35 and FX45 as well as the Atima. So under the skin, they’re all the same, but none of the others are as hideous, IMO, as the Murano. It is pure dreck to my eyes.
The same can be said of virtually all new cars to these old eyes. The new Acura RDX is particularly nasty up front, all conflicting angles, and the MDX follows suit. The Civic is completely wacko, and the new Camry, well, who had the nightmare?
We are not in a period of gracefully-shaped cars, and the Murano pretty well started the rot, if you can forget the Aztek.
We’ve had our Murano for four years and driven it 60,000 miles. It’s been a comfortable, serviceable, versatile, reliable, and generally enjoyable vehicle. It accelerates well enough for fast merges. It’s easy to handle on around-town chores and does well on long highway trips. The only problems: a slight rattle (sometimes) in the driver’s window, poor visibility of gauges in daylight (since rectified in later versions), and a failed alternator, replaced under warranty. (Just try to FIND the alternator!) Ours is the SL AWD version and averages about 21 mpg. Funk that works.
For 35k, you are almost in FX35 territory (with discounts). Now THAT is a gorgeous work of art on the road to hoonery….
How much easier is it to get kid seats out of this compared with the CX7, an Explorer type full size SUV and a sport wagon such as the Subaru or Audi offerings? We’re looking at trading in my wife’s 3 series lease, and with kid on the way, am curious to hear any parents’ thoughts on this.
Thanks!
dreamtech: what you say may well be true, especially if you have an inside contact with Nissan. Strangely, Nissan’s current North American marketing materials are silent on the matter. However, I have reviewed half a dozen other references that credit Nissan Design American in La Jolla, California.
One of these sources is a Jeremy Clarkson article that has been reprinted on Nissan’s official Ireland Web site. And if Jeremy Clarkson says it’s true, who am I to say otherwise? (Just kidding.) Thanks for the feedback.
Perspective people perspective. Keep in mind this has been out since Fall of 2002 and it still looks damn good (subjective of course). I had an 03 for three years and I’d have to say it was a very fine vehicle. Not the right vehicle for me or any enthusiast but very good. Now that the competition has finally caught up with it I’ll be interested to see how Nissan redesigns it. My 03 was an SE AWD model and found it to be fairly sporting for what it is (high center of gravity and over 4k lbs). Better than a Pilot, Highlander and competitors at the time. If you want to go you really need to us the S mode and floor it. The CVT will rapidly hit the peak power and stay there giving you the most go with no jerky shifting. Is it engaging? No. Is it efficient and smooth? Hell yes.
For the average consumer of this type of vehicle the Murano is one I couldn’t recommend enough. Quality interior, good driving and lots of bells and whistles with huge room for five. For anyone who enjoys driving and the man machine interaction the Murano is not for you.
Fun read!
My idea of a SUV is a Porsche Cayenne Turbo S, Primer black with ballistics glass and titanium functional brush, push and roll guards. Kind of a modern urban warfare meets Mad Max…
That would be nice.
jkross22: My kids are now teenagers and they would be very happy in the back seat of a Murano due to the ample room and comfy bench. I can’t speak for the CX7, but ingress/egress of the rear quarters in the Murano struck me as quite accommodating.
Oddly, the car seat anchor is at the very rear of the cabin right next to the lift gate latch, a couple feet away from the rear seatback. I suppose this makes anchoring a car seat easy but it also means that a tether will be stretched across the rear storage compartment.
Timeless good looks. Utility. Athletic road presence. Almost min-van like hauling capacity. CVT – some may not like it but there you go. What more could you ask for? Yes a little pricey but I see these all over the roads here in Central Ohio.
I remember when we bought our 2005 Sienna we briefly considered a Murano. Saw it and fell in love at the car show. Looked at the sticker, and lost the love real fast. Then there was Nissan’s so-so quality and reliability history – certainly not in Toyota territory.
nichjs: Here’s an example of a vehicle which breaks some of the moulds: it’s a funky design and packs a CVT.
Will, what’s your conclusion?
For me, the Murano falls into a classification of vehicles that I would never buy but I am really glad that they are out there to add variety to what would otherwise be a dreary world. Some of the other funky cars that I include in this category are the VW Beetle, Chrysler PT Cruiser, Honda Element, and Scion xB. Vive la Différence!
As a gearhead, I love the idea of a CVT but have been disappointed by every implementation that I have driven.
If you like the anime styling and want a cushmobile ride, it is still a compelling option. The Murano is hardly decrepit but in this highly competitive class, it is high time for an update.
You guys are kidding when you write that the Murano and the FX twins look different, right?
MRL: I’m not kidding when I say theyMurano and the FX twins look and are very different. They are built on completely different platforms, and the FX has a north-south drivetrain.
Looks?: The Murano is primarily a modified parrallogram in profile; the FX is dramatically more deeply sculpted, with much more curvature in almost every plane. Please take a good, long, slow look from every angle. A quick glance is not enough.
Jonny Lieberman:
February 13th, 2007 at 11:19 am
What?
The Murano and the FX don’t even sorta, kinda look alike.
If you think that the Murano and the FX don’t “sorta, kinda look alike” Then I guess the new Edge and MKX don’t look at all alike either. You gotta be kiddin’ me! And now from a previous post we know that both vehicles share components from the Altima.
Maybe badge egineering was too harsh since the tailights are horizontal on the FX and their vertical (somewhat) on the Murano but still. They’re not badge engineering to the degree that say the old Dodge Spirit/ Plymouth Acclaim were but the Murano/FX look more alike than the old Dodge Daytona and Chrysler LeBaron coupe & convertible.
My beef with the Murano is that it is the official car of Whipped Husbands/Boyfriends.
My evidence? Nissan’s own advertising. I distinctly recall one of their TV commericials where a Young Couple goes antique-ing (sp?) out in the countryside. Young Man finds old jukebox, puts on rebellious youth anthem (Born to Be Wild?).
Young Woman approaches, observes Young Man grooving out, gives Young Man “THE LOOK”.
Cut to scene of Young Man loading Louis XIV-style dresser into the Murano.
Young Couple drives off with Young Man still whistling rebellious youth anthem.
Now *there’s* a vehicle I really want to own…:-D…
Well then there are plenty of manly-boring vehicles out there for you. Some decide they don’t want an SUV/CUV that looks like rectangle on wheels. Low and behold the rest of the industry is following suit, Ford Edge, Mazda CX7, etc.
The Murano and FX45 don’t look much alike at all. Their similarities are no greater than any they share with their other Nissan/Infiniti stablemates.
They have very different profiles, very different hood designs, headlights, taillights, etc. They share no sheetmetal, and I would be mildly surprised if they shared any interior components. The only thing they have in common mentioned in this thread is also shared with the Altima, so unless someone wants to make the claim that the FX45 is a badge-engineered Altima, I think those who claim similarities need to come up with some actual things that are similar.
From my own experience with the two vehicles, they have a dramatically different presence. The Murano is clearly the practical but stylish vehicle, and the FX is the really fat sportscar. I simply don’t understand how a person with average visual acuity and spatial awareness could experience these vehicles in person and not see a huge difference.
The MKX and the Edge, by contrast, share a huge number of things. While they are certainly more differentiated than say, a Taurus and a Sable, it is clear that they are only a change of clothes apart. I like them both, and their visual styling does convey a distinct character for each of them, but their similarities are far greater than those the Murano and FX.
I don’t see any resemblance between the FX and Murano. None at all. They’re totally different platforms, too. I wouldn’t even guess them from the same manufacturer if I didn’t know any better.
This thread is the first I’ve heard of anyone seeing similarities.
Murano. Sounds like a Pepperidge Farms cookie.
Front end makes me think of a cheshire cat with braces.
Infiniti FX = badge-engineered Murano?
As previously noted, they do NOT share the same platform (Murano uses Nissan’s “D” platform, FX uses the “FM” underpinnings)
As for styling, compare for yourself….
http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2007/Nissan/2007.nissan.murano.20103134-E.jpg
http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//pictures/VEHICLE/2007/Infiniti/2007.infiniti.fx35.20105181-E.jpg
I’m gonna go to the manufacturer websites to check out the wheelbase, track, etc. on these. But I looked at the pictures linked above and what I see is a diiferent roofline. That’s about it. Oh and the back side windows are a different shape as well. Yes the sheetmetal doesn’t swap, but the same could be said for the Edge and MKX. The overall size is the same, door sizes look similar, wheelbase is close if not the same (although it’s impossible to know for sure just looking at pics). The tailgate doesn’t look that much different. I’ll let you know what I find on the websites.
Nice review.
Of course the Murano looks like an FX, much like the way Peyton and Eli Manning look like their father. Its a compliment, not an insult like the Edge and Lincoln MKX connection.
And the Murano was an American styled product made specifically for America. Nissan doesn’t have a California design studio sitting around for nothing, ya know. Last I heard, they are considering its sale in Asia and Europe.
I think Toyota did a good job differentiating the RX from the Highlander, and that may be the best example of brand engineering done right. Perhaps similar expectations were placed on Nissan, but the QX carries over too many of the Armada’s styling cues.
The telltale difference I see between the FX and Murano is the angle between the hood and the windshield.
Ok here are the specs for the Murano:
Wheelbase 111.2
Overall length 187.6
Overall width 74.0
Overall height 66.5
Track width (front/rear) 64.2/64.0
Head room (front/rear) 40.7/39.7
Head room (front/rear) with sunroof 39.2/39.2
Leg room (front/rear) 43.4/36.1
Hip room (front/rear) 56.2/56.6
Shoulder room (front/rear) 59.6/59.1
Step-in height (front/rear) 18.0/18.2
Cargo Space
Length (with rear seat up) 30.7
Width 54.8
Height 33.5
Here are the specs for FX:
Wheelbase 112.2 inches
Overall length 189.1 inches
Overall width 75.8 inches
Track width 62.7 inches/64.6 inches (front/rear)
Overall height 65.9 inches
Interior
Headroom without sunroof 40.8 inches/39.5 inches (front/rear)
Headroom with sunroof 39.6 inches/39.3 inches (front/rear)
Legroom 43.9 inches/35.2 inches (front/rear)
Shoulder room 56.9 inches/57.4 inches (front/rear)
Hip room 54.3 inches/55.0 inches (front/rear)
Most of these specs are within an inch or two of each other. Like someone said if they are not platform engineered then they tried real hard to make them look like they were.
I tend to agree on the likeness. Without seeing them side by side, they look to me about as different as a Cobalt does from it’s Pontiac sibling. Honest.
The price of the Murano is a bit steep, but maybe they were expecting people to compare it to the Infiniti, which is ridiculously expensive.
In any case, I at least find their looks interesting, with the Infiniti being much better looking.
As TTAC goes mainstream, the way TTAC can improve is not to have enthusiasts writing car articles, but rather journalists who put evaluate the cars not from their own perspective, but from the perspective of the target market.
This article seemed to have been written from the perspective of an enthusiast. So I would probably share his opinions, but I doubt my wife would emphasize the same things. And my wife is alot more likely to buy this car than I would be….
When you mention full throttle, hoon, D-U-L-L drivetrain, I’m not so sure the target market of this car emphasizes those factors…
As TTAC goes mainstream, the way TTAC can improve is not to have enthusiasts writing car articles, but rather journalists who put evaluate the cars not from their own perspective, but from the perspective of the target market.
The way TTAC can make sure I never read the website again is if journalists and not enthusiasts start writing articles. Puff pieces don’t belong on The Truth About Cars. I can go elsewhere for that.
I bought my wife a brand new murano (we call it ‘the Moron’) in 2004 for 25K. It was the base model and she loves it. We haven’t had one problem with this thing. 2 recalls (one for rear seatbelt and a plastic cover for the gas tank) and no other problems. I would highly recommend it to anyone. You don’t need the AWD unless you live in Upstate NY! We had looked at the FX-35, lexus and acura and all were nearly 15K to almost double the price. Tell me this: Are those SUVS twice as good?!?!
One thing are the tires: 19 inch rims, 4 new michelins will set you back A LOT.
racerx74
Good call on the tires. Many people are of the traditional belief that “a nice new set of tires is $400″ (except for trucks). But in the past decade, the almost totally cosmetic shift toward bigger wheels can easily double, sometimes triple that estimate.
It’s ridiculous…and don’t get me started on the aggregate reduction in fuel mileage and performance because of them. This thing should be on 16″ wheels, or whatever the minimum needed to clear the brakes. The designer pen them with 22″ wheels, the engineers and accountants want 15”, so I guess this is the compromise.
“The way TTAC can make sure I never read the website again is if journalists and not enthusiasts start writing articles. Puff pieces don’t belong on The Truth About Cars. I can go elsewhere for that. ”
I guess you won’t like Robert’s changes then…
I too came here because I’m an enthusiast, and I drive an enthusiasts car. I love reading about fun cars. I love reading about unattainable cars. But when we are evaluating a grocery getter or soccer mom car, I’m not sure the same criteria applies.
Since their launch I’ve always assumed the Murano and FX35/45 were platform shared. They sure as heck look like they could be.
Now, looking at them closely side by side it’s clear they are on separate platforms. But as windswords pointed out, they are VERY similar designs – why did Nissan bother? Wouldn’t they have been better off with a little more differentiation?
“similar designs”:
About as similar as a Chevy Equinox and Trailblazer. Do you really take your time and LOOK at these “similar” cars?
I think the FX fulfills the “cheap Cayenne” segment pretty well. 20″ gunmetal wheels; weird, impractical proportions; carlike performance.
It’s just a sports car on stilts, with far less usable space inside (based on my subjective “feel”) than the Murano, which is the more practical choice all around.
You might say there are similarities (which I don’t see), but I guess I just don’t consider them to be cannibalistic products for NiMoCo.
“Tell me this: Are those SUVS twice as good?!?!”
Yes. Drive an FX35 and you will not be asking this question. It is amazing how competant the FX35 is on the road. Like a previous poster said, the FX35 is a fat sports car.
My company get employee pricing with Nissan/Infiniti and I picked up a 2005 FX35 with the sport package for my wife. We’ve put 27,000 miles on the car and have loved every mile.
It’s ugly, ugly, UGLY. If I had a dog that was that ugly, I would shave its hind end and make it walk backwards.
how do you know that the Murano in was designed in California? I am pretty sure that it was designed in Japan.
The reason you can’t figure out where it was designed is that the designers were put in a witness protection program in a neutral country to protect them from the wrath of automobile lovers everywhere.
The moment you change your reviewing style will be the moment I start a TTAC deathwatch.
Paul Niedermeyer:
February 13th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
“similar designs”:
About as similar as a Chevy Equinox and Trailblazer. Do you really take your time and LOOK at these “similar” cars?
Come on, anybody can see the Trailblazer is a size larger than the Equinox while the Murano and FX are within an inch. Plus the overall shape is the same. It’s not like one is angular or squared like a jeep and the other is flowing like a CX7.
>>Ghosn’s goons had decided to break out of the generic Japanese gestalt with some bold moves; there was no mistaking the Murano for, um, anything else.
Well said. This is one plug-ugly vehicle.
Murano’d eyes need Murine.
You have an earache in your eye?
/cheech & chong for the win
ktm:
….. the FX35 is a fat sports car.
well, that’s always been on my short list… if i could figure out what it meant. Like a fast slow car? Or an ugly nice car? WTF?
[quote]Since their launch I’ve always assumed the Murano and FX35/45 were platform shared. They sure as heck look like they could be.[/quote]
And I sure as heck think the mid 90s Toyota Corolla and Nissan Maxima are too. We had a Maxima burned down at work and people all though that it is a Corolla.
For windswords:
How about:
Wheelbase 112.4
Overall length 188.3
Overall width 75.9
Overall height 66.9
etc, etc.
I guess maybe the Murano is just a badge engineered Porsche Cayenne. Or maybe its just roughly the same size as a bunch of other CUVs.
IH8SUVS,
but that being said, I do try to keep up with all things automotive, even distasteful bits like this barge.
Chalk me up in the “Looks the same” column. I absolutely think it looks like the FX. Even the images that Eric_Stepans posted above look similar. (Both look like chuck taylors from the side.)
The FX does make a cool growling sound under hard acceleration. But its still an SUV, so…
I like this car
I dont like the fx
“# SkinnyFats:
February 13th, 2007 at 6:43 pm
For windswords:
How about:
Wheelbase 112.4
Overall length 188.3
Overall width 75.9
Overall height 66.9
etc, etc.
I guess maybe the Murano is just a badge engineered Porsche Cayenne. Or maybe its just roughly the same size as a bunch of other CUVs.”
Sorry, Cayenne is made by another company. Last time I checked Nissan and Infinity were the same company. So you have a vehicle that looks the same and is with an inch and a half in dimensions and it’s no wonder they look like platform mates.
If Nissan had come out with the FX and GM or Ford had made the Murano a lot of people would be saying that the domestic maker had copied Nissan. That’s how close they look.
Ok, this was my favorite machine when selling Nissans.
I’ll grant you one negative thing you hit on is that the CVT takes a second or two to decide it wants to go. RPMS will spike but the machine pauses to say “really, I have to go fast?” It was nice and smooth though when driving. Acceleration was like me vs Carl Lewis in the 100 meter sprint.
The target market for this is older and not likely to want to hop on the gas at the lights to roast the ricer next to you. As a side note, I was worried about CVT in the Maxima/Altima but they seem to have it figured out a bit better, undoubtedly it will get reworked a touch in the next Murano.
The trainer for Nissan told us that the CVT has a long life expectancy (800,000km if mem serves) and the failure rate on it has been less than conventional transmissions at Nissan. He said it was due to less moving parts. The cvt sorta sucks the power out of the engine. If they reconfigure the cvt and downstroke the engine a bit (ie somewhere between the VQ 3.5 and VQ 4.0) it’d be much more quick off the line. I heard about one failing in our market it was a rental that was put into reverse on the highway. (not sure if that’s true or not, seems pretty sketchy to me.)
This machine is still built in Japan (at least when I still worked at nissan) and the engineering is a cut above what’s being made in NA by Nissan. No doubt about that in my mind.
The dash is similar to the maxima and does take some time to figure out what all the buttons are about. Confusing as all hell. The heads up display is color and has a nifty backup camera.
The lux o barge comment is not quite apt. It’s a luxury machine but barge isn’t the right feel for it. My comment was always that it’s the perfect city SUV. Stylish, good on gas, all wheel drive, classy. Pearl white fits the machine nicely, I’m also a fan of Merlot(or ravishing plum as they also called it).
It’s design is to directly counteract Toyotas vanilla is best feeling.
The review is accurate, but the thing with all car reviews is you have to consider the target market vs. the reviewer. Nissan doesn’t build this one for the masses and it needs to be noted as such in any reveiw.
When I first saw the Murano and FX I, too, thought they were platform mates. 30 seconds and Google disabused me of that notion. I never thought they looked the same, though.
I like both, and was shopping a Murano until I decided $40k was way too much money. The FX35 starting at $57k (Canadian) was in another league altogether. That said, the first time I saw an FX on the road I was mumbling “Holy f*ck, what is that?” In the sense of “I want me one of those.” Not many vehicles have given me that kind of reaction.
dreamtech:
Please, give your friend kudos for somehow evoking visions of the AMC Gremlin and the mid-80’s Mercury Cougar with that unmistakable up swept rear pillar :)
I can’t be the only one who sees it, right?
from tfa:
A 3.5-liter V6 Maxima hand-me-down engine powers Nissan’s not-so-cute ute.
Couldn’t find any other way to put down every last part of the car? Somehow I don’t think an article about a 350z would call it’s engine a ‘maxima hand-me-down’.
For some –
The Murano and the FX have similar dimensions. As do many other vehicles in that class. I never once thought they were badge engineered twins. Once I drove both, I never once thought they shared platforms, or almost anything. VERY different vehicles to drive. The FX is a pleasant surprise, from the growl of the exhaust to the interior.
For the rest –
I considered both of these when purchasing our latest RX. I personally liked the FX the best of the 3, but since the wife is the primary driver, I deferred, and she chose the RX.
I don’t recall the exact price of the loaded Murano, but it was close enough to Infiniti and Lexus pricing to make me want to skip it – just because the purchase/service experience difference between an Infiniti dealer and a Nissan dealer, or a Toyota dealer and Lexus dealer, is more than enough to make me swallow the extra sticker price.
I thought it was a decent enough car, but the Murano needs to hover much closer to 30K, decently optioned, before I consider it. Some posters make mention of $25K models – I didn’t see any of those on the lot.
I sold these things before I retired in 2003 and I agree with one of my customers who said: “Two words: Butt Ugly”. There is a toad-like look to this thing that’s hideous. The Infinity version is even worse….looking like it was designed by the team of animators who draw Loony Tunes characters. My wife and I always expect Yosemite Sam to exit the car.
well, when I was with nissan my average commish with Murano’s was very good and I was very good at selling them. Proportionately with other cars I was way ahead of everyone else. I even sold one to my mom. hahah.
As I said before, lots of people don’t like this car, it was built with that in mind that it’d put alot of people off. I just happen to be one of those that really likes it (aside from the CVT torque sucker)
Lots of customers told me it was ugly and I accept that. It’s not foreveryone.
I drove the Murano and then the FX35 the differance is night and day. Yes they are similar in looks, but the FX35 is much more refined inside and out. TThe FX35 handles a lot better and is fun to drive.
Test drive them both and you will see what I mean. We bought the FX35 it was no contest.
The Murano and FX should drive markedly different, one is FWD biased and the other is RWD biased (in AWD versions).
I for one love the styling of both the Murano and the FX not so much for what they are as what they represent. Bold, avant garde design statements such as these add color to an automotive landscape largely made up of a thousand shades of gray. Even though I think they’re both ugly, I love the fact that they exist and that Nissan/Infiniti was bold and brave enough to put these designs on the street. The same can be said of the Bangle designs which I also loved and hated when they first came out.
You guys do realize that this “comparison” is literally like talking about how a G35 differs from an Altima, right?
The FX45 is my fave sports SUV. Better than the Cayenne.
I do hope more feedback from other design enthusiasts can contribute to my understanding of why the Murano’s architecture/styling polarizes opinions so remarkably. It’s kind of interesting.
Seems to be either love or hate. I can’t think of many that have been soooo controversial. …and, (including a near-brush with a car design career), I’ve been contemplating these things for most of my 48 years.
(Full disclosure: I rather dig it… admire it even! …I’ll spare the reader a detailed argument here for my already revealed subjective bias…)
As for the FX45 and the Murano appearing to be “badge engineered” twins…
It does remind me of the startling similarities between another Nissan, (nee Datsun), the 1976 F-10 (aka 120A FII coupe), in comparison to the 1935 Auburn 851 “Boattail Speedster”… See?: headlights, taillights, shiny hubcaps on all four (4) wheels?… Mere coincidence? I think not.
This is a nice little CUV my cousin has the SE version.
The Murano is good alternative to the CRV and RAV4.
I do not think the Murano is is ugly at all.
Early Jan 07, I bought a Murano Ti-L (as it is called here in Australia – top of the range model). This vehicle is sensational in all respects… a sheer pleasure to drive. Along the Stuart Highway (Darwin to Alice Springs) fuel consumption was 9.83 litres/100 kilometres cruising at 120 kph. Now that’s a very impressive fuel efficiency for a 3.5 litre vehicle. It is very comfortable, it is very quiet, it is very nippy and it drives really well. I can’t fault it. The ultimate compliment came from a Japanese cycling tourist I met at a service station along the Stuart Highway… “You have very very nice car!” Yes, it is!
Despite some flaws, I like the Murano. It’s a nice comfortable wagon. Yes, it is a wagon. Not a “CUV”, not a “crossover”. Are we intentionally inventing new classes of vehicles because we think they are actually different?
Most car savants recognize that the basic classes of vehicles are quite clear on body style, and each body style comes in a variety of sizes. How tall your vehicle sits or where the engine sits does not define your vehicle body type. Driveline and structural underframe don’t define a vehicle body type, although it is rare for heavy work vehicles to be functional without a dedicated frame to handle heavy loads.
– a Utility Vehicle is a tough vehicle designed for general work, including towing. example: International Scout, Chevy Blazer, Willys GP. They used to be all two-doors, though modern Jeeps and Tahoes now have 4 doors plus a hatch in back.
– a Sport Utility Vehicle is a utility vehicle on steroids (like “sports car”). example: Lamborghini LM002, Porsche Cayenne Turbo. most vehicles advertised as “SUVs” are actually quite anemic UVs or wagons.
– wagons are 5-door cars with generous luggage space, usually not designed to tow heavy loads
– sedans are 4-door cars with a relatively smaller luggage space than a wagon
– coupés are sedans that have been “cut” to a two-door configuration
– hatchbacks or “shooting brakes” are 3-door cars with relatively generous luggage space
– trucks are open-bed vehicles designed for hauling and towing
– vans are tall vehicles with side access doors designed for hauling and towing
– a roadster is a car without a roof
– a convertible is a car that can be converted to a roadster
– a targa is a car with removable hard roof panels
– a limousine is a stretched luxury vehicle
and so forth. Coachbuilding terms like Landau and Brougham seem to have become obsolete.
Thus, a CUV is one of the above, USUALLY A WAGON.
A “crossover” is one of the above, USUALLY A WAGON.
Please discontinue using stupid newfangled terms for vehicle types that have existed for decades. In most cases, your fat, tall, oversized wagon is neither sporty nor utilitatian at all. Stop kidding yourselves.
…But it’s a “sporty” wagon. Now, if we can only get it to Cross over…
:)
I absolutely love my Murano! I leased this one because I didn’t know that much about Nissans, but this won’t be my last Murano. This past winter, it handled like a champ! It’s quite possibly the best vehicle I’ve owned. Perfect size interior and exterior.
I have a 2003 Murano, I really enjoy the ride, however I do have a serious problem. When accelerating, the car does not sit for a couple of seconds tryig to decide if it should go, it waits for over 5-10 seconds. This can be a serious issue when accelerating on the road. The local dealer cannot seem to locate the problem, no warning lights. Any suggestions.
Sue…
I have a suggestion – I would certainly try another dealer or see a competent independant with the necessary OBD computer equipment. This is neither normal nor suitable (or safe) behaviour. Some dealers have better technicians than others – way better.
Not one person who owned a murano has said they wouldn’t buy another. Most are totally happy. Why would you buy a toyota if you like the looks of a nissan more? How many times do we need to hear that the quality differences of top rated cars is so similar that statisticaly it is a dead heat. My nissan xterra scores higher than honda and toyota with consumer reports, but I bought it on looks and performance, it has not dissapointed. When a car is a clunker these columns are full of horror stories from unhappy owners, I don’t see it here. As for Faragos liking the infinity better, shouldn’t the one that cost thousands more deliver a better driving experience? All of this tells me that Nissan hit this one good as it has kept sales momentum for four years.
I am trying to decide on a Murano or a Toyota Rav4 these comments have been helpful. I fell in Love w/a Murano -beige leather- looks brand new -only problem it is a 2003 with over 80K miles- should I be worried about the mileage- based on average it should only be 57K I think
Help- don’t want to buy on looks alone-
I was hoping for a nice car- but older so I could offered the leather
Sandra
I would suggest you may want to consider more than just looks. The seats may be nice but you may want a bit newer model if you are concerned. These cars should go well over 100k miles but the 2003 is the first Murano model year and are only just now showing any age related issues. A used car should be checked out well by a mechanic YOU know and trust. Period.
Also, a similar vintage Rav4 is a 4 cylinder and the Murano is a 6 so fuel consumption will be different. Basically, they are quite different vehicles.
After looking at a lot of SUVs, and having previously owned an Audi A4, I found a lot to like about the Murano. I loved the A4, but also found a lot to dislike about it, notably you can’t do much more than drive it, and it really is not a road car, having driven it up and down the eastern seaboard of the US on I-95 with it, and reached true road fatigue in record time, it’s just not a road car don’t let anyone kid you. With the sport suspension and wheels it really isn’t designed for high speed despite the marketing, it actually is unsafe at higher speeds.
It’s also truly a rough slough on the reality of most US highways that are for the most part in mediocre condition and rough. I was exhausted after a road trip in my A4, but goddamit loved the Bose sound system. So my quest has been for a road car that doesn’t cost a fortune, doesn’t look like I belong to the Sopranos, or the mini-van crowd, and has a great sound system. My choices would be a Mercedes, or Lexus, or Lincoln Town Car, or some other monstrosity for true long distance driving, but then having to be laughed at for driving a retiree’s or police-wannabe car. Having said all that, I also don’t want to be cast with the mini-van crowd–gakkk! Lexus is also a great car but the cost is just too much for me to justify in a car. It’s great to spend the money but just ridiculous to throw it out the window for my ego. Audi, Mercedes, Lexus and BMW are always going to be there for that, and I can always go back to them when I need to be stroked.
Regarding the original review, I’m not sure where the reviewer lives, but we live in a major market, where our interstate system has a lot of trailer trucks. These days sitting in a car is like being a target so the SUV is where we want to be, up off the road more than a car. Again, the cost for an SUV either puts you in something ugly and low mileage, or in the poor house. I’m going to probably buy the Murano because it’s just about perfect in so many ways. Anybody who thinks we’re making a mistake please let me know. This is going to be our first Nissan, so we taking a risk on something we know little about.
What are my options? Most of the SUVs on the market are overpriced, expensive, or ugly, and a lot are pushed out for people who need approval from other people. I think the Infinity SUV is a cartoon car too, but having said that, most of the new Nissan line looks like cartoon cars–I told my wife that the other night in the dealer showroom! I had my fun with my Audi, but at the end of the day I need something today that gets us up off the road for safety, is able to work with real highways in the US, and is distinctive looking without being boring. I priced out a VW Tourage, and yes, it’s sharp and manly, but also 10K higher in price than the Murano, and less features. I can’t find a single SUV in the same price range as the Murano with as many features. I also went through two transmissions in my Audi, so I’m a bit apprehensive to jump back into another VW product.
So along comes this Murano thing. My wife and I are in our late 40s and each has definitely different tastes, but amazingly we agreed on the Murano. I don’t need to race track every stop light and impress the ganstas in their fast-and-furious beer-can-mobiles, I need something that can give us maximum gas mileage and allow us to go shopping without the trauma of where to put things. My Audi was simply ridiculous for most of what we need a vehicle for, and so the Murano has so many things to like, and the sound system is excellent. The A4 also was not as quiet on the road as the Murano. I know this is comparing apples to oranges, but the money spent is similar. If there is some reason we shouldn’t get the Murano other than being able to race track on city and interstate, please let me know.
Murano and many of Audi’s vehicles’ use CVT transmission. The problem is, because CVT is not non-continuous like gear of a bicycle, they can struggle when going up hill: for instance, when going up hill from a plane, many bikers will have to chance gear. The chain moves down to the lower set of gear, and off you go with a renewed input of torque.
However, imagine that the gear is like a rubber attached between two pulleys-the gear cannot suddenly jump from one torque band to another like convetional A/T and nissan EGR valves, just like the bike’s. Hence, the problem with Murano and Audis.
raymundojr
Do you have any idea what you are talking about? This is nonsense. Have you even driven a CVT equipped vehicle, let alone a Murano? There is no struggle going up hills – unless there is a technical problem with the transmission. The whole point of a CVT is it can adjust the gear ratio for the situation seamlessly – which it does. No rubber, no slip, just goes. Better fuel mileage also. Nissan has converted its entire product line of cars to CVT – and more makers will follow.
I’ read a report of one person having a transmission problem at 75,000 miles in her Murano
that cost her 3000 bucks. Any other such probl;ems reported?
I am often amazed at how many people are so concerned what “other people” think…I figure, I’m paying for it; and besides that most people out there I don’t even want to KNOW, let alone worrry about their opinions. As for the rice burners at the light and “take off speed”…what the hell is THAT all about? At the BOTTOM of the barrel of people I don’t care to impress are the mouth breathing morons with honda accords, 2 ton spoilers and dollar store spinners.
As for the Murano, just bought an AWD ’07 last week. I LOVE the smooth transmission…I guess I’m beyond the need to yank my neck and body around when snapping gears…I never speed; learned years ago to just leave the house earlier; and besides, the moron that races away from the light will be waiting for you when you get to the next one.
The Murano has GREAT leg room (I’m fat) GREAT rear room (my 13 year old son is already wearing a size 14 sneaker…) and is WAY more comfortable and easier to enter and exit than my 2000 Chevy Tahoe Z71 which it replaced. The fit and finish are tight (as one would expect from Nissan) and we’ve been VERY happy with Nissan’s quality in the past. My wife has a base line Sentra 1.8 which she bought brand new (05 model) in October of 04; it now has 220,000 miles on it and still drives like new…except she’s on her 3rd set of tires (yes that’s right ONLY 3 sets…Goodyear triple tread, rotated every 6 weeks along with an oil change…which is about 7500 miles…yes she drives a lot).
I am looking foreword to using the AWD in the snow…none yet, but it has ample room, gets MUCH better gas mileage than the Tahoe, and quite frankly is designed better. For the price, the Tahoe was a bit of a disappointment…too many squeeks, cheap brake release lever broke often…ALL window motors replaced more than once…sorry Chevy, it was a letdown.
I have owned a TI-L for 6 months.
Not a single problem to report. Absolute pleasure to drive. Fuel consumption of just under 10L/100km on a long journey mean a range of round 850km on a tank. Jump in drive 850 Km with several brief stops and arrive in near perfect condition. Not bad considering I am past retiring age. Infinitely adjustable electic drivers seat and comfortable ride make for an enjoyable journey not to mention the relative quietness and superior sound system. Sat Nav is handy for travel to unfamiliar towns and a little mild bush bashing. Added reverse park sensors with the rear camera make parking a cinche. Not to mention safety with small grand children about.
I did consider an X5 and a Lexus but at half the price could not justify any other choice.
On 11/10/2007, I bought a 2007 Murano SL with full loaded equipment by $38K. Until now (3/16/2008) it is about 4 months, and for sure it is very confortable for riding and very fun for driving. Based on the price and the quality of this car, all my family members love this bold and stylish beast very much.
One good thing that I want to share is that the fuel is ok; so far in 7156 miles the average is 22.10/gallon. Not so bad; isn’t it.
One recommand is that the doors won’t be locked automatically after you drive or start the engine.
Over all I will give my 2007 Murano SL a score of AA-. It is a good car.