Volkswagen T-ROC vs Nissan Juke

What's the difference?

So that’s the T-Roc, a bit of Euro style that’s still priced to take the fight to some small SUVs from Japan or Korea.

Is it the cheapest style-forward small SUV you can get? No, but it’s far from the expensive end of things.

Plus, if you can resist ticking some option boxes, it beats some value-focused rivals and looks good doing it.

If the feeling of a sturdy fit-out and a confidence inspiring drive is important to you, I reckon the T-Roc should be an entry on your shopping list.

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.

The T-Roc subtly stands out without being garish, avoiding becoming part of the highway or suburban camouflage without relying on extreme design decisions.

For example, the LED daytime running lights that wrap around the shapes below the LED 'I.Q' headlights where vents would otherwise be on the R performance variant are quite cute.

In fact, the whole front end of this small SUV has a friendly look, even if there’s nothing specific that’s particularly exciting about it.

This 'Petroleum Blue Metallic' colour is a $700 option, but anything other than white costs extra.

However, the black roof two-tone look is a standard for the Style, as are the black mirror caps and its 18-inch alloys.

There are roof rails up top, tinted privacy windows for rear passengers and for the rear window and a sloping roofline at the rear that adds a touch of ‘sport’ to the silhouette along with a small spoiler at the top.

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.

Inside the T-Roc is a bit of an interesting dichotomy.

Some of what’s in here is ‘old-gen’ Volkswagen stuff, but it still holds up today against even some recently introduced models.

The dichotomy is that while it’s very usable and slick, some of its materials and surfaces let it down a touch.

The good points are that the cabin tech is a perfect level of physical and digital. The buttons and controls are easy to use and feel solid and even though the climate controls could be more physical, they’re still good as far as touch panel style controls go.

The older VW gear is arguably better than a lot of what’s found in newer models where some use of touchscreens and haptic panels has drawn negative feedback from customers.

The multimedia software managed via the 8.0-inch touchscreen is more simple and sensible than the new version, plus the Digital Cockpit Pro display for the driver is clear and, importantly, customisable. It’s a similar cockpit system that used to seem quite impressive in high-end Audis.

But what doesn’t feel very high-end is some of the plastic and the decisions around function in the rest of the space.

The leather on the seats is not a cheap option box to tick at $3450, but it feels a little cheap to the touch. It’s a tad hard and even has a bit of a rough look to it.

That option also makes them heated and electrically adjustable, though, which is welcome in winter. Otherwise, cloth seats without the optional leather or heating would be absolutely fine, and that means you get a storage space under them, too.

This central space between the driver and front passenger, too, is a little awkward with the cupholder placement. It’s behind the shifter meaning a tall bottle will be in the way and it’s got slightly odd sizing for bottles or cups with nothing to stop them wobbling.

I am, however, a fan of the angled-away phone slot under the climate controls to minimise phone screen visibility (and distraction) and the traditional shifter itself is welcome.

Look up, and (in our test car) there’s an optional ($2000) panoramic sunroof there. It’s yours if you want it, and it does have an electric blind, but some Japanese and Korean cars at this price point get that as standard.

An average-sized adult will find the second row is spacious enough and relatively comfortable. There’s an armrest, dual-directional vents and two USB-C ports.

Behind that, boot space is generous at 445L with the seats up thanks to an adjustable floor, which is very useful for tall items and even manages to fit a space saver spare tyre under it.

It’s a total of 1290L with the split-fold seats down, too, though they’re not super flat with the adjustable floor down.

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 engine in the T-Roc - as with most Volkswagens - does what it says on the tin. Essentially, a 110TSI means there’s 110kW of turbocharged VW happening, in this case a 1.4-litre four-cylinder that also makes 250Nm of torque.

It’s paired to an eight-speed torque converter, which will be music to the ears of those who have been scorned by older VW dual-clutches.

It drives the front wheels only, and there’s no hybridisation or 48-volt system.

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

A lack of electrification in a relatively small engine and a traditional drivetrain shouldn't scare you too much, in this case.

Combined cycle fuel consumption is a claimed 6.3L/100km. On test in mostly urban areas or for spirited driving we saw the fuel use rise a little higher than that but not by as much as you might think.

After a mix of primarily urban, some highway and a stint of dynamic test driving, the trip computer admitted to a figure of 8.1L/100km.

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 T-Roc is essentially a previous-generation Golf-turned-small SUV in terms of its platform, and that’s a great thing for anyone who likes driving.

The Golf 7.5 was a benchmark for everyday driving as far as hatchbacks are concerned, and even though the current Mk8 might be a bit more up to date, the T-Roc’s use of the platform it rides on is practical and fun.

It’s not as nimble as a Golf, but the T-Roc in front-drive Style guise, with a responsive turbocharged engine and no all-wheel drive system weighing it down, is not only more dynamically capable than most rivals, it’s also easy to access that capability.

The 1.4-litre engine feels well-tuned for its two modes accessible through the shifter - calm but not lazy in ‘Drive’ and eager but not thrashy in ‘Sport’.

It works well with the transmission on the move, picking right gears fairly accurately, though there are paddles behind the wheel for those who prefer to take charge.

The drive modes are also more customisable than just those on the shifter, with 'Individual' selections for steering and drivetrain able to be used rather than the standard 'Eco', 'Normal' or 'Sport' full-system modes.

While the steering wheel itself is a little thick and the feedback, while adequate, isn’t the most telling, it’s accurate and inspires confidence in cornering.

The T-Roc handles turn-in and exits well, even soaking up bumps and not becoming unsettled when braking.

Its safety systems are relatively subtle, and the active cruise control is well sorted, though the automatic braking at car park speeds can be overzealous. Something I’ve experienced in VW Group models several times over the years.

The main culprit for the T-Roc was a shrub beside my driveway that, while not touching the car, would set off the automatic braking system. Still, better than letting the car roll back if there was a proper obstacle or someone who could be hurt in the way.

Aside from that, the Volkswagen T-Roc is fun and easy to drive, and the work that’s gone into that puts its price into perspective a little more.

There are more expensive cars available that are less impressive, some even disappointing.

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.

Volkswagen’s five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty is pretty standard for a premium-leaning brand, with VW also offering roadside assistance for the warranty period.

In terms of servicing, VW offers care plans of three years or five years, covering servicing for $1515 or $2770 respectively. That's an average of $505 or $554 per workshop visit.

Otherwise, servicing costs at 12-month/15,000km intervals can cost from $470 for some to $1104 to the biggest service if you don’t go with the locked-in package.

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.