jwblue Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) At first, I didn't care for it, but it is growing on me. I like the sleek look. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpTE_Hwa5Xs&feature=relmfu In the video, the show Pathfinder designs from the past, but not the WD21. They probably didn't want to show the contrast. Edited January 10, 2012 by jwblue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devonianwalk Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Shoot it. Shoot it now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erathge Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 Suddenly, the 2005-2012 models don't look so bad... and, nice door handles. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchizophrenicMC Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 He says something about wanting to go back to the first generation, in terms of sales. But the only way to do this is to do what the first generation Pathfinder did. It filled a role no other Nissan could lay claim to, and it did it more cheaply than the competition for that role. This new Pathfinder doesn't do either of those. First off, it shares roles with the Quest and Murano, and is even on the same platform as the Altima, Maxima, and Murano. Second, it's the flagship SUV model, so it's expensive. There are a number of better cars for what this does, for less money. It will not sell well, I can almost guarantee this. What I want to know is why they even call it Pathfinder? It shares no similarities to the Pathfinder that it doesn't also share with, say, the old Stanza Wagon. In fact, it has more in common with a Stanza Wagon than a Pathfinder. Maybe I could understand if it had some styling cues that threw back to the Pathfinder. The door handles, for blatantly-obvious example. I kind of see how they tried to keep the fender flares and the flow into the door panels from that, but that's the only cue I recognize from the Pathfinder, and even that is sort of a generic SUV feature anyway. I have no problem with Nissan creating a new crossover/station wagon, but I take offense at it being called a Pathfinder. All I can say is, it will not sell as well as the original Pathfinder, because it doesn't offer any benefit over alternatives, like the Pathfinder did originally. Nissan, you make me sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jadm4x4 Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 IN MY OPINION THE PATHFINDER HAS DIED WITH THIS RELEASE. long live the wd21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devonianwalk Posted January 10, 2012 Share Posted January 10, 2012 I have no problem with Nissan creating a new crossover/station wagon, but I take offense at it being called a Pathfinder. Very well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kittamaru Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I dunno guys... I actually was kind of thinking of making this my families first "new" car purchase... we're looking to settle down and have kids, and this would fill the need for a "family hauler" well... looks like it'd be decent enough for the all-weather we get around here, plus has plenty of room/seating for kids+gear... it seems more aimed at the family role - an SUV that can hold a minivan load, yet not BE a minivan...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shift_love Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 It looks like another dang crossover. Nissan is trying to be innovative. That's all I hear in our online training we gotta do every six months. They love what apple has done and they want to be as "innovative" as them. Again with that word, moving forward "shift_the way you move" totally lame. When I first made my Internet handle was back when the shift campaign first started and it was different for every vehicle/expierience. The slogan for the new pf should be shift_down the tubes. This thing has no resemblance to what Nissan built their suv reputation on. They're trying to hang on to the coat tails of the murano/fx35 success that they recently killed with the murano cross cabriolet. I sit and stare at a white murano vert that sits in front of my parts window everyday. It's ugly. People walk by and comment on how they think it's so cool, but they'd never buy one. It just doesn't offer the rugged looks an suv should offer. In 2004 Nissan brought in the armada with a pathfinder nameplate on it to carry the success over. We also have the xterra. IMO the x has stolen the small suv limelight, the armada has the big platform, and then there's the pathfinder. It has no place to go. With nissans complete concentration on crossovers or funky hatchbacks it seems as if the path (literally) has been lost. They want an in between but it will never be the same. Pathfinder guys, welcome to the world of pain us 240sx guys suffer when Nissan officially dropped s-chassis cars, no more entry level sports coupe. No more mid grade nostalgic 4x4 bad ass suv. Only the big, the little, and the ugly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kittamaru Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Well, lets be honest - until we know how it performs, we can't totally discount it. Granted, I wouldn't take it into any hardcore offroading... but again, for a mid size family that needs a vehicle to get around in, with decent space and the ability to handle most weather conditions, this looks about perfect. Bonus that it can handle some light duty offroad use (something most minivans balk at) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 For what it is, a 4WD minivan, it could be very nice. The confusing bit is why it's called a Pathfinder. The other confusing bit is that I'll bet it still gets something like 18 MPG. Actually, looking on Motor Trend, the 2010's are worse (13/18?!?) than the earlier models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kittamaru Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 They estimate 18mpg highway - do recall, though, that the EPA changed how MPG is calculated (they made it a LOT more stringent). Previously, numbers were greatly inflated due to testing methods - it's, supposedly, a bit more accurate now *shrugs* Dunno what exactly they changed... maybe they actually force them to run the vehicle under a supposed load instead of on a giant treadmill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchizophrenicMC Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 They estimate 18mpg highway - do recall, though, that the EPA changed how MPG is calculated (they made it a LOT more stringent). Previously, numbers were greatly inflated due to testing methods - it's, supposedly, a bit more accurate now *shrugs* Dunno what exactly they changed... maybe they actually force them to run the vehicle under a supposed load instead of on a giant treadmill? Except every time I've ever tested my fuel economy it's right on, if not above the EPA estimate for mixed driving, and I don't get on the highway a lot. If it gets 20mpg highway, then it's getting about what my 22-year-old Pathfinder is getting, by my calculation. Given I have a 3mpg boost from the manual transmission (no losses to the fluid coupling) and my truck weighs less than this car, but come now. 20 years, and they can "innovate" a couple MPG by turning a truck into a car? Seems pretty lame to me. Regardless, I still go back to the point of saying, if they want a crossover, fine. But why call it a Pathfinder? A Pathfinder isn't a crossover, it's a Sport Utility Vehicle. I really think people have lost hold of what SUV means. It's a vehicle for Utility and performance. It's not a family wagon, it's a hauler. You put stuff in it and make it move places, over a number of terrain features, because its high performance allows you to. SUV and MPV are not synonymous terms, despite what contemporary America may think. Anyway, Kittamaru, save your money. If you want a new car to put the family in, get a Volvo XC70 or XC90. Same price range, but the XC has proven itself as a very capable family vehicle. Fuel efficient, stable, spacious, and most of all safe. If I had kids, I'd put them in an XC, because it's not only capable of handling its way out of the way of an accident, but if it gets into one, it will do everything you can engineer into a vehicle to protect its occupants. In any case, it's stylish and brings a sense of class, which I just don't see in the new Pathfinder. That looks sleek and stylish, but it lacks that extra something. Shift_love, unfortunately, the Xterra has been selling poorly, because it's not as well-designed as competitors, for the same, or even more money than some of the competition. Nissan needs to fix the Xterra and give its image of offroad performance back in full force. I'm thinking, add more Jeep styling to make people draw the connection between the Xterra and performance. I see people with Wranglers driving around all the time, who never take them offroad, and I've asked a few of them why they got it, and they typically all say something about the iconic adventurous spirit. Nissan needs to bring that back in full force for their performance line and their small SUV. That's what people buy. That's why we still have sports cars and 4x4s in this era of beige efficiency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adamzan Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 (edited) My dad has a brand new xterra and honestly I think it sucks. He even isn't very impressed with it. Things feel cheap, its loud, seats are very uncomfortable especially the back they don't even recline like the pathy ones do, and it rides worse than my 6" lifted wd21 yet it sags with anything more than groceries in the cargo area. I can see why they are selling poorly. I also can't stand the traction control that you can't turn off unless you're in 4 low. Edited January 14, 2012 by adamzan 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precise1 Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 I dunno guys... I actually was kind of thinking of making this my families first "new" car purchase... we're looking to settle down and have kids, and this would fill the need for a "family hauler" well... looks like it'd be decent enough for the all-weather we get around here, plus has plenty of room/seating for kids+gear... it seems more aimed at the family role - an SUV that can hold a minivan load, yet not BE a minivan...? Dude, it is a minivan now... B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kittamaru Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Dude, it is a minivan now... B Just better looking... and with some off road ability Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devonianwalk Posted January 14, 2012 Share Posted January 14, 2012 Just better looking... and with some off road ability About as much as an early '90's model Chevrolet Astro van ... "all wheel drive" of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now