Kia Ev3 vs Nissan Juke

What's the difference?

The GT-Line is relatively expensive, yes. The Air Standard Range isn’t groundbreaking even at under $50,000, no. But the sweet spot in the EV3 line-up is being able to pay $53,315 for the Air Long Range and come away with a roomy small SUV that can realistically cover almost 600km in the real world.

And it does everything properly, no big red flags or dealbreakers.

Its steering weight at speed on winding roads being the biggest complaint isn’t the end of the world for how otherwise comfortable the EV3 feels on-road.

Put it this way - I recently spent a few days in a Mini Aceman, a five-door electric SUV not too far from the EV3 in size. It is about as fast, and costs a little more, but it doesn’t have a lot more to offer in terms of features and it’s nowhere near as good on range with about 400km to its longer-ranged versions.

The EV3 might still have a bit of ‘sensible’ about it compared to some other electric small SUVS, but when it looks this cute and can get you an extra round trip out of the city compared to ‘Euro’ brands at the same price, it’s hard not to be impressed.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with travel, accommodation and meals provided.

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.

Family resemblance is everything for Kia’s electric models, and the baby of the bunch so far definitely has lineage on show.

That’s a very good thing for the EV3, because as good as its specs are on paper, the way it looks is key to showroom (or on-road) appeal when it comes to convincing potential buyers.

At the same time as being seemingly made of sharp, angular elements, the EV3’s overall silhouette is relatively soft. Unfortunately, that means Kia’s ‘design philosophy’ (usually a relatively meaningless marketing line) is actually bang-on: Opposites United.

Inside and out, the EV3 is a direct descendant of the brand’s halo EV9 large SUV, and even in base Air specification looks like a properly premium small SUV.

Its narrow LED headlights and taillights were the stuff of Lamborghini concept cars just a few years ago, and its unique wheel designs and the use of contrasting coloured trim can impose either a modern, techy vibe or a bark-over-bite sporty image.

More marketing terms come out in the EV3’s face: Kia Star Map lighting and Tiger Face, respectively the way its lights seem to link ‘points’ together like a constellation map and the grille somewhat resembling a tiger’s nose.

There’s practicality in the design even from the outside - the gentle roof slope is only very slight to avoid eating into interior space, though it’s not the only way the car shrinks at the rear. The front track between the wheels is actually wider than at the rear, so the car is not only shorter but also narrower at the rear. It’s the first time Kia has ever implemented this ‘teardrop’ effect into a car, with the intention being to improve its aerodynamic efficiency.

Most of the colour schemes are decidedly subtle, the new Matcha Green hue looks better in person than can be captured on camera for example, but a new Teracotta colour is an earthy red that really stands out - I’m not sure it suits the car, personally.

In terms of colours inside, it's fairly muted and greyscale, but the mid-spec Earth comes with optional orange interior contrast trim that we weren’t sure would be available in the Australian market.

To invoke a cliche, the interior layout has the vibe of something you might imagine a spaceship cockpit looks like if you were a kid, but it doesn’t sacrifice any practicality by doing so. There are real buttons and switches visible, but only a few as the big screens dominate the driver’s side of the front row.

The look is helped by a series of recycled and “sustainable materials” including recycled PET and bio-based polyurethane. Kia’s aim is to “phase out the use of leather and continuously increase the use of bio-based materials”, so even the GT-Line doesn’t have real leather in it.

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.

Along with its general design, the EV3 also has the same focus on space efficiency as the much larger EV5 medium SUV and EV9 large SUV.

Kia compared the EV3 to the BYD Atto 3 and Volvo EX30 upon its global launch in Korea, and it’s stuck with the same comparison as it launches here.

In many exterior dimensions, the EV3 is smaller than the Atto 3, a medium SUV by sales category, while it’s larger than the EX30 in almost every way. However, interior dimensions are reported by Kia as being bigger than both cars in most aspects aside from the first row legroom, but even there only by about 10mm.

The EV3 is 4300mm long, 1850mm wide and 1560mm tall, and has a 2680mm wheelbase, but inside does feel like it’s a category upwards in terms of space.

Along with the roomy interior dimensions, there are plenty of handy spots to put things - a big central storage area and a higher one under the armrest, the device charger, door bottle holders - these and all the controls are generally within reach. 

The GT-Line loses a little bit of this storage space by turning the spot under the central armrest into a sliding table, which could be useful sometimes, but doesn’t seem to me as helpful as another place to put a drink, a wallet, keys, an avocado or whatever other trinkets you and your passengers may have.

The huge multimedia and driver display setup consists of two 12.3-inch screens and a 5.0-inch climate control screen in the middle. The centre climate screen is a little hidden by the steering wheel, but there are also physical climate controls also in the centre under the screen, so there’s nothing vital you can’t do in the EV3 easily.

There are also shortcuts to the main functions of the menu like navigation and media, Kia says tactile controls like that are important for keeping the car usable for a broad range of people.

In the second row, the EV3 feels pretty well suited to four adults for a reasonable trip - I’m 178cm and can sit behind my own seating position comfortably, though if I was too much taller my knees might rest on the hard plastic seat-back.

There is an armrest, places in the doors to put water bottles, and two USB-C plugs actually fitted into the seats. There’s also a little slot to put a phone that might be charging, though it could easily (and perhaps more usefully) fit other things instead.

Behind the second row is a generous 460L boot which puts other electric small SUVs to shame - the EX30’s is 318L and even the Atto 3’s is 440L. The EV3’s boot space extends to 1250L with the seats folded down.

The EV3’s boot floor can also drop down to accommodate taller items, plus there’s a 25-litre ‘frunk’ or under-bonnet storage space.

There’s no spare space-saver tyre, however, as is becoming disappointingly common.

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.

All three versions of the EV3 have the same drivetrain, the only difference being the smaller battery in the Air Standard Range.

The EV3 is front-wheel drive only, with a single motor at the front wheels putting out 150kW and 283Nm.

Differing weights between variants result in different 0-100km/h times, the quickest being the entry-grade Air Standard Range at 7.5 seconds, likely thanks to a smaller and lighter battery.

The Air Long Range takes 7.7 seconds, while the Earth and GT-Line both take 7.9 seconds.

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

There are two battery sizes for the EV3, the 58.3kWh unit for the Air Standard Range and the 81.4kWh battery each of the Long Range variants is equipped with.

Of course, the Air Standard Range has the shortest electric driving range - 436km under WLTP testing. Its power consumption is a claimed 14.9kWh/100km.

The Air Long Range is the variant with the furthest electric driving range of the bunch, at 604km, as well as the same power consumption as the Standard Range at 14.9kWh/100km.

The Earth and GT-Line both wear the same set of figures, albeit lower distances and higher consumption than their more affordable counterparts. With 563km of electric range and 16.2kWh/100km consumption figures, they’re still able to cover very usable distances for real-world use.

Charging is the same across the line-up, with the supplied Type 2 AC charger working at a maximum 6.9kW on single phase or 10.5kW on three-phase power, and taking five hours and 20 minutes for Standard Range variants, or seven hours and 15 minutes for a Long Range from 10 per cent to 100 per cent.

On DC fast charging, with a CCS Type 2 charger, the EV3 charges as quickly as 29 minutes from 10 to 80 per cent in Standard Range, or 31 minutes in Long Range, when using a 350kW fast charger.

While we didn’t get a chance to properly run down the battery and test the EV3’s range, the drive route was relatively demanding with power consumption yet the EV3’s range didn’t plummet like you might expect on fast, steep and winding roads.

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 EV3’s arrival on Australian roads is not only important because it means we can test it in right-hand drive, but also because it’s had a localised ride and handling tune. Time for the proper judgement.

Kia Australia's local program lead for this is, as it has been for years, Graeme Gambold, and according to the brand he aimed for neutral balance with confidence-inspiring and responsive handling, and a linear, natural steering feel. And it’s pretty close to nailing all of that.

In town and on backroads, its ability to soak up bumps and handle rough surfaces is impressive. Not a lot of noise comes into the cabin in either case, too, a feat given the road surfaces. In fact, even with the radio off, the EV3 feels pretty well insulated from the outside, including wind noise.

It's cornering and handling is nice and predictable. It feels designed to be safe if you misjudge a corner, only gently understeering when you've come in a bit spicy.

The body doesn't roll or pitch dramatically, so the car feels planted and, as intended, flat through the bends.

But there’s one aspect to the tune in which the EV3 feels like it could do with a little more attention - its steering.

At low speeds, the steering is light enough, but at higher speed it feels a little heavy. I’m not sure if Gambold’s been going to the gym or if it’s that I haven’t really, but it feels like there’s some unnecessary resistance, regardless of drive mode or camber on the road, requiring a bit more input on the wheel than you'd like.

It does let the car down in terms of driving out on country roads, but fortunately it's not a dealbreaker on highways or in its intended city or suburban environments.

Otherwise, the EV3 is extremely pleasant, with its outputs and delivery feel about right for a small electric SUV, never feeling too slow or unruly. It doesn’t spin its wheels with too much torque, even on wet roads and when hustling out of a corner.

The paddles which allow you to adjust the intensity of the regenerative braking also mean you barely need to use the left pedal, which is a plus for increasing the available driving range.

Speaking of the left pedal, a sudden stop thanks to a surprise slow car around a blind corner went smoothly thanks to a decent set of brakes.

In all, the car is ergonomically sound from the drivers seat, with the positioning for the seat and steering wheel feeling comfortable and easy to adjust, though slightly better vision out the rear sides would be good.

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.

Kia’s seven-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty applies to the EV3, and though that was once industry-leading, it’s now being matched or overtaken by many rivals.

Roadside assistance is covered for one year but can be extended to up to eight years if serviced with an authorised Kia dealer.

Kia also backs the high-voltage equipment in the car with a more specific seven-year or 150,000km warranty, whichever comes first.

Australian servicing costs are pretty minimal in the EV3, with Kia offering well-priced pre-paid plans of three ($674), five ($1285) or seven years ($1897). Certainly some points for Kia on that one.

Service intervals are on the shorter side for an EV, at every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever comes first.

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.