and man did it change my negative opinion of the styling. This thing is way more fugly than I thought based on pictures.
and man did it change my negative opinion of the styling. This thing is way more fugly than I thought based on pictures.
Hard to imagine.
I still like the photochopped one i did without the main headlights, using the fogs as the headlights.
I'm really curious on the rear end in the AWD version
My understanding is there's no differential (it's a spool), and there are electonically-controlled clutches somewhere between the "diff" and the hubs.
Sounds like an awesome thing to hack... you could have any behavior of any LSD, spool, or open that you could program.
I still like em. They're wierd, they're AWD, and they're turbo.
I could forgive the ugliness since it's fun to drive, but my wallet is at zero risk from the Juke.
Although when I saw my first MINI Countryman commercial, I realized what the Juke will be competing with. If you held a gun to my head, I'd probably pick the MINI.
I saw one at night sitting across from me at a light. The first thing that came to mind was that thing looks like a gay hippopotamus at a rave.
MA$$hole wrote: that thing looks like a gay hippopotamus at a rave
You say that like it's a bad thing, lol.
From CultoftheSmallCar.com
Looks pretty rad on coilovers with 17's or so...even if it is a photoshop.
PHeller wrote: From CultoftheSmallCar.com Looks pretty rad on coilovers with 17's or so...even if it is a photoshop.
There's way too much fugly there to correct with a simple headlight delete. This thing makes an Aztek look, well, unoffending. I mean, look at this thing!
PHeller wrote:
Look 2 posts above you. It looks even cooler with those hideous headlights removed. 
Really? Seriously? You think this thing looks cool? Really? 
yOU HAve to understand him... he's not right. And yes, the Juke in person makes the photo's look good.
bravenrace wrote: Really? Seriously? You think this thing looks cool? Really?
Cool? Kinda.
Would i buy one? Hell no.
Otherwise, what Bob said. There's a good chance that i'm more "not right" than the vast majority of this board, and it's a good thing i don't have more money/space, otherwise you guys would be seeing some just....... WRONG stuff.
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:
Oh boy, you sure do sound different here versus when you are talking audio.
I'm not sure what to think now. 
I mean, are those Polk monitor 70's the Juke of audio?
Bobzilla wrote: ..., the Juke in person makes the photo's look good.
Yeah, that was really my only point. No need to start another thread about it's attractiveness. I was just shocked when I saw it in 3D.
bravenrace wrote: and man did it change my negative opinion of the styling. This thing is way more fugly than I thought based on pictures.
Yes, you are correct.
Good God, these things are hideous. I saw a white one last week on the highway on the way home from work. It looked like a nugget of white feces with lights and wheels on it rolling down the road. I drive Subarus, so I know what ugly is. This is beyond that! 
I got a laugh out of it when it showed up in my rear view. I had the night mode on, and it looked like a big monster with light-up orange eyebrows was chasing me in the dark, like a Scooby-Doo cartoon or something!!!
bravenrace wrote: In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac: Oh boy, you sure do sound different here versus when you are talking audio. I'm not sure what to think now.
Well, Bob thinks i'm stupid in audio as well....
But no, i'd be more likely to take my own advice in audio than i would my car advice. 
I'll freely admit, I LIKE the Juke. I liked the Isuzu VehiCROSS too, and that severly reminds me of the Juke. Plus, like I said before, it's turbo and AWD!
92CelicaHalfTrac wrote:
Separated at birth!
When you're in it, those headlights look like blisters protruding from the hood.
I read a review recently that was trying to say that the Juke is nissan's attempt at a hot hatch. It tries to hide its rear doors, has a turbo and a six speed - but to get it to the sales floor it also became a CUV. That is what the public buys.
Look at it this way:
We wouldn't blame you for thinking we're one stud short of a lug pattern on this one, but point your peepers to a few specs and you'll see what we mean. The Juke weighs in at less than 3,000 pounds in front-wheel-drive guise and packs a turbocharged, direct-injection 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine that's good for 188 horsepower. For reference, the company's own Sentra SE-R hits the scales with an extra 88 pounds on its waist and 11 fewer ponies at its command. Opt for the manual gearbox in the Juke, and things get even lighter. Intrigued? We were too.
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/24/2011-nissan-juke-review-road-test/
I'd rock one in a few years after someone else has taken the depreciation hit for me. MotoIQ seemed to like the engine too.
ReverendDexter wrote: I'm really curious on the rear end in the AWD version My understanding is there's no differential (it's a spool), and there are electonically-controlled clutches somewhere between the "diff" and the hubs. Sounds like an awesome thing to hack... you could have any behavior of any LSD, spool, or open that you could program.
You are correct, that's exactly how it works. Problem is, the AWD is only available with the CVT.....
I checked one out in person a few months ago. The only part I didn't like was rear seat head room. Otherwise it is on my maybe list when depreciation hits.
You'll need to log in to post.
