Chery Tiggo 4 vs Nissan Juke

What's the difference?

If you’re just looking for an affordable hybrid which will save you money at the pump, the Tiggo 4 will do the trick, but there are so many little things which could be better here, it’s evident you’re getting what you’re paying for.

This makes the Tiggo 4 hybrid a bit of a let down, because the other Cherys I’ve driven recently have been pleasantly surprising given their price-points, not to mention the price-gap between the Tiggo 4 and many of its rivals is nowhere near as large.

The Juke is a fun little car. It looks cool, it packs most of the important features and safety equipment, but while it can be fun to drive, it’s also a little clunky around town.

It’s so frustrating, because there is a great car in there somewhere, and it would take only small tweaks and enhancements to bring it out.

On the outside, I think the Tiggo 4 Hybrid is pretty generic and inoffensive. It shares its 'box-on-wheels' aesthetic with cars like the outgoing Mitsubishi ASX and Hyundai Venue, which, to be fair, have been strong sellers.

It might not be an eye catcher, then, but there’s something to be said for not trying anything controversial, and this is pretty consistent across Chery’s range. In fact, compared to some brands in the market, Chery is doing a solid job of design consistency for its mainline SUVs.

Highlights on the outside include the enormous grille and contemporary LED light strip across the rear.

On the inside things also look pretty swish for this compact SUV category. The seats immediately jump out as a highlight, big and lavishly trimmed in comparatively soft synthetic stuff. The glitzy steering wheel and dual-screen layout continues from other Chery products and the dash design is tidy, if a little generic.

Urban style is clearly what the Juke is about. It’s always been about this, but the original incarnation, while unusual, was a bit bulbous and awkward. The current version is a razor-sharp re-interpretation of the original.

Ugly duckling no more, the Juke blends the elements of Nissan’s current design language with its own unique take, in a clever way.

The roofline and bulbous face of the original car, complete with its ‘eye’ headlights are all maintained, but this time they look more contemporary with a splash of chrome and gunmetal plastic in the face, offset by gloss blacks running down the doorline.

The new light fittings look great and the curviness is also gently off-set with some sharp angles. The massive 19-inch wheels finished in a two-tone gloss black and aluminium brush keep this car looking like a concept come to life. Just don’t crash them into the curb. It would be very easy to.

The cool elements continue inside, with rotary air vents, a blend of textures, including a gloss grey for the vent claddings, with white stitching for the wheel, seat, and into the door cards, too.

There are touches of chrome about the place, and an ambient red LED light surrounding the shifter, which sits on its own little pedestal thing.

It’s quirky and punches above its weight when it comes to soft trims in the doors. Like most higher-grade Nissans the seats are pretty comfy, too, clad in a hard-wearing synthetic leather material.

But it won’t be for everyone, and it’s not without its downsides. The abundance of grey plastic down the centre console is a bit cheap, and the tech offering doesn’t match the youthful style.

The centre screen is adequate, but compared to many rivals it’s a bit small and dull, and the Juke is still missing a digital overhaul for its instrument cluster.

The black headlining, usually reserved for sportier cars, makes the cabin feel smaller than it is.

I can see this car having a lot of wow factor on a dealer forecourt but up close things are less good. The software on the screens is pretty ordinary; hardly the sharpest, fastest or most logically laid-out. There’s a selection of clumsy-looking themes, and while the multimedia portion has a logical smartphone-style main menu, beneath lies an array of confusing and inconsistently-labelled sub-menus.

The digital dash could be smoother and better looking and it’s a bit confusing to use with the poorly labelled buttons on the steering wheel.

The centre console area is finished in a gloss finish, which is easy to scratch or smear with fingerprints. Up front underneath the main screen is an entirely separate dot-matrix style climate control panel with actual physical buttons. It looks a bit clunky compared to some other solutions on the market, but at least it’s clearly labelled and straightforward to use.

Somewhat infuriatingly, though, interacting with this climate panel brings up a menu on the touchscreen which you don’t need and it takes several seconds to go away. Why?

The cabin is reasonably practical from there, though. There are decent bottle holders in each front door and a further two atop the console. There’s a pass-through beneath, good for handbags and the like. There are some strange additions, like an upright holster with rubberised sides which seems to be for a phone, and behind the shifter there’s a key fob-sized cut-out, but it’s gloss finished, so it will scratch if you actually use it.

The wireless phone charger is tucked away underneath, which makes your phone hard to get at in a pinch, and easy to forget when you exit.

Ergonomically, this car is a bit strange. The seat base is very high, so for me (at 182cm tall) even with the driver’s seat set to its lowest position, my head feels close to the roof. Plus, I’m peering down on the instruments, rather than have them at a comfortable height.

However, there are soft-touch surfaces adorning the doors, which can’t be said for every car in this segment and the rear seat hasn’t been forgotten, either.

I fit pretty comfortably behind my own driving position in terms of knee and headroom and the plush seat trim continues.

There’s a nearly flat floor, so while it’s a reasonably narrow vehicle, at least someone in the centre position will have somewhere to put their feet.

On the amenity front for rear passengers, there’s a small bottle holder in each door, pockets on the backs of the front seats, a weird storage tray and USB port on the back of the centre console and a drop-down armrest with two shallow cupholders. There’s just a single adjustable air vent for rear passengers, so they’ll have to fight over who gets the airflow.

The boot surprised me. It looks tiny, but the brand claims it weighs in at 470 litres. On top of this, the floor is a strange shape because the 12-volt battery is under the floor and doesn’t quite fit level.

However, when I went to load the full three-piece CarsGuide test luggage set, I was surprised to find it fit snugly, with the tailgate able to shut without a problem. I was also impressed to find a space-saver spare wheel and not just a repair kit under the floor.

The Juke is a small SUV in the true sense of the word, sitting below the Qashqai which is more like a mid-sizer these days in terms of dimensions.

However, it’s quite cleverly packaged on the inside and is more useful than it first appears.

The front seats, for example, offer heaps of headroom and a surprising amount of width, and while the seats are manual, they’re pretty adjustable. I was able to find a great seating position.

There are big pockets in the doors with an integrated bottle holder suitable for even the largest bottles, although the centre console area is a bit less versatile, choosing its funky design over additional storage.

It features two good bottle holders, but a tiny armrest box and a shallow tray with one 12V socket and a USB-A outlet, as well as an auxiliary audio input under the climate controls.

On the topic of climate controls, I love the fact the Juke maintains a dedicated ventilation panel complete with buttons and dials for all the core functions. No touchscreen nonsense here.

The media screen, as mentioned, is a tad small, and falls victim to glare easily.

The stock Nissan software is a massive upgrade on the brand’s previous-generation products, but while it’s functional it’s far from the prettiest or the fastest on the market.

The back seat offers more space than you might assume, but it’s not as well thought-out as the front of the cabin. At 182cm tall I fit behind my own driving position with just enough space for my knees and just enough headroom.

There are decent bottle holders in the doors, and a further two small ones in the drop-down armrest. The backs of the front seats are clad in that synthetic leather material, which is nice, and have soft pockets, too.

The back of the front centre console offers just a single USB-A outlet and a small cubby. There are no adjustable air vents for rear passengers. It also feels a little claustrophobic back there thanks to the black trim on everything and smaller windows.

Boot capacity for the Juke is impressive for an SUV in this class, with 422 litres on offer, which is close to the volume we’d expect from something a size-bracket up, and 1305L with the second row folded down. There is a space-saver spare under the boot floor.

The Juke range kicks off from just $28,390 which gets you into a base ST and reaches to $36,890 for the top-spec Ti.

We’re driving the $34,440 (before on-road costs) ST-L which is the upper mid-grade car.

It scores concept-style 19-inch alloy wheels, synthetic leather interior trim, an 8.0-inch multimedia touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto connectivity, a 7.0-inch digital screen between the analog dials, a surround camera system, single-zone climate, keyless entry and push-start ignition, and LED headlights. 

The quite attractive ‘Magnetic Blue’ paint our car wears is a $700 option. For an additional $1133 you can also step up to the ST-L+ grade which adds alternate two-tone seat trim, chrome and black highlights and a 10-speaker Bose audio system.

While this ST-L grade gets the lion’s share of Juke equipment without the price-hike to the Ti (and is therefore the pick of the range) there are some notable items missing at this price.

For example, there’s no wireless phone charging, no head-up display, no fully digital instrument cluster, and no electrical adjustment for the seats. The 8.0-inch multimedia screen is starting to look a bit dated, too.

Still, it looks trendy and those massive wheels are well above the standard for a car at this size or price. So, if you’re going for style over equipment there is a choice to be made here.

Nissan also hasn’t cheaped out on safety equipment, with most active stuff coming standard, even on the base ST. More on this later.

Pricing is about line-ball with its most direct competitors. It’s a tad cheaper than some like the outgoing similarly-styled Toyota C-HR (Koba 2WD - $35,695), or slightly more expensive than others like the current equivalent Ford Puma (ST-Line - $33,190) or Mazda CX-3 (Touring SP - $34,300) although it is also ever so slightly larger than those last two by width, height, and wheelbase.

The Tiggo 4 hybrid variants pair a 1.5-litre four-cylinder petrol engine with a relatively large electric motor housed in a transaxle-style unit driving the front wheels. In effect, it's continuously variable without being a much-derided CVT auto.

Weirdly, Chery doesn’t state combined power figures, just separate ones for each power source, with the engine producing 72kW/120Nm and the electric motor producing 150kW/310Nm.

You’ll note the electric motor is much more powerful than the engine, which has an effect on the way this car drives.

In the Juke’s messy engine bay lies a 1.0-litre, three-cylinder, turbo-petrol engine which sends 84kW/180Nm to the front wheels.

Nissan has its own 'HR10DET' engine code for this unit but it’s actually a Renault 'H5Dt' engine as evidenced by Renault logos all over the place.

Power is communicated by a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic which has been a source of strife for this car since it arrived. This very European engine and transmission combination is one which the Juke shares with its Renault Captur cousin.

I can’t believe I’m actually saying this, but I would prefer a continuously variable transmission (CVT) which Nissan uses elsewhere in its range. It would solve maybe the main issue with this car, which we’ll explore up next in the driving section of this review

The whole point of this plugless hybrid set-up is fuel efficiency and on paper it’s not as good as some rivals.

The official combined cycle (urban/extra-urban) economy number is 5.4L/100km, but we easily beat that claim on test with a figure of 4.5L/100km. Worth noting that average came primarily from urban and expressway driving. It seems the hybrid transmission might require significantly more combustion input in freeway scenarios, hence the higher official claim.

A 51-litre fuel tank translates to a 944km range using the official economy figure and around 1100km based on our on-test average.

One of the reasons this car comes equipped with a dual-clutch automatic is to chase fuel efficiency as well as emissions output. On paper DCT autos don’t suffer the inherent losses of a traditional torque converter transmission.

The official combined cycle fuel consumption figure is 5.8L/100km. My week of driving, weighted slightly more towards freeway conditions, produced a marginally higher average of 6.8L/100km. It’s not the claim, but it’s pretty good.

This little engine requires mid-shelf 95RON unleaded fuel, and the Juke has a 46-litre fuel tank, suggesting a driving range of 793km using the official fuel consumption number.

The Tiggo 4 is a strange one. This hybrid one in particular has me in two minds.

My initial impression was not a good one. The high seating position makes you feel as though you’re sitting on the car rather than in it, and the overly electrically-assisted steering removes you from feeling what’s going on at the front wheels.

Even the pedal feel is wooden, with the car having to modulate the electric and combustion drive components and blended regenerative braking at arms length, leaving the driver with little in the way of feedback.

The ride isn’t one of the worst I’ve had in recent years, with an overall soft enough edge to it, but it also doesn’t feel very sophisticated, and harsher over the rear than it is in the front, giving it an unbalanced character. On top of this, our test car had a couple of intermittent rattling noises in the B-pillar (around where the belt retainer is) as well as somewhere in the rear.

Acceleration is pretty impressive at speeds under 80km/h, however, with plenty of power instantly available from the electric motor, although this has the side-effect of being able to easily overwhelm the Sailun tyres this top-spec Tiggo 4 ships on.

One thing I quite like about the Tiggo 4, however, is how smooth it is. The seemingly primarily electric drive is excellent, particularly at lower speeds where this car is at its best, surging forward largely in silence with no annoyances from a fiddly transmission.

Even the way it blends the combustion power in is seamless, even compared to a Toyota, for example, with the engine distantly buzzing away only when required.

It's impressive that unlike the MG3 and MG ZS which have similarly powerful electric motors but run out of juice and lose a bit of punch when the hybrid battery is low, the Tiggo 4 does a better job of managing its battery reserve level, making sure the strong electric power is always available. This might mean the engine idles higher and longer, but with decent sound deadening, it’s not something you notice much.

Overall the Tiggo 4 is okay to drive. The hybrid components impressed me enough, but these are tarnished by sub-par driver feedback and inputs, handling, tyres and some ergonomic issues.

The Juke can be fun to drive, and I wanted to like it more, but the transmission its peppy little engine is paired with is frustrating.

Outputs of 84kW/180Nm doesn’t sound like a lot, but power isn’t the problem. The little engine has a fun turbo-surge which pairs with the Juke's light frame to make for a car which is quite athletic when you push it.

The issue is a mountain of turbo-lag conspires with the clunky dual-clutch automatic to make it far too sluggish off the line.

There’s a full second (or two, at times) to wait for any power to arrive, which simply isn’t good enough at T-junctions and roundabouts, the kind of situations a little urban SUV like this will constantly be encountering.

Nissan says the transmission software was even updated after the Juke’s launch, but it’s still not where it should be.

It has good traits, too. When you’re out on the open road, it has quick, snappy and well-defined shifts, and the engine is much better when it’s being properly pushed, too.

It has a gruff, entertaining tone, and the Juke’s light frame, firm ride, and comparatively heavy steering make it a joy to throw into some corners.

The long wheelbase for such a small SUV, paired with a decent set of tyres, also keeps it confident when its predecessor was a little clumsy.

Again, though, the reasonably hard ride, not helped by the very large wheels, isn't its best trait in an urban environment. The Juke is by no means uncomfortable, it just seems like the priorities for this little SUV aren’t in the right place.

I’ve said this before but there’s a great car in here somewhere. The Juke is fun to drive in the right environment, it’s just this environment is not where most prospective buyers will primarily be looking to use it.

What could fix this issue? A different transmission perhaps. Better yet, an e-Power hybrid powertrain.

The Juke's standard active safety features include freeway-speed auto emergency braking, lane departure warning with lane keep assist, blind-spot monitoring with rear cross-traffic alert, adaptive cruise control and traffic sign recognition.

Last time I reviewed this car I complained about the way it vibrates the steering wheel when the lane keep function decides you’re going out of your lane. But having since experienced so many more invasive lane keep systems, this one seems comparatively low-key.

Elsewhere, the Juke gets the standard array of six airbags (dual front, side, and curtain) and wears a maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating to the 2019 standards.

The Tiggo 4 Hybrid is offered with a seven-year/unlimited km warranty, seven years of roadside assist and seven years of capped price servicing with an eight year and unlimited kilometre warranty for the high-voltage battery.

The servicing is required once a year or 15,000km, with each service costing $299 for the first five years. It jumps from there, with a particularly expensive service at $736.62, dragging the yearly average for the warranty period up to $360 a year.

It’s a little pricier than Toyota, for example, but very reasonably priced compared to most.

Nissan offers the Juke with a five-year, unlimited km warranty, with five-years of roadside assist included.

It requires servicing every 12 months or 20,000km and the cost is subject to a capped price servicing program for the first six years.

This averages $651.33 annually, which is not cheap for a small SUV in this class.

However, there is also the option of a pre-paid five-year service plan which brings the annual cost over five years down to a more reasonable $429.60.

But, notably, it does not include the pricy $1521 sixth-year interval. It’s worth asking yourself how long you’ll own the car for before splurging on it.