2014 Nissan Sentra 2014 Nissan Sentra Rapid Review: The Car Exam Classic On Blogger
Plusses: Nice, Altima-like styling, roomy interior, good interior materials, sturdy build feel, good fuel economy, good prices on the Sentra SV models. The 2014 Nissan Sentra looks really good. It looks like an 8/10 scale Nissan Altima, which is a good thing. It’s one of the most luxuriously-styled compact vehicles on the market today. The interior looks good as well, not toting the low-rent, el cheapo interiors that used to be the norm in smaller economy cars. The Nissan Sentra feels heavy and substantial, and the seats are comfortable. The ride quality is just fine, just as the brakes are. Fuel economy is very good with the Sentra (27 city, 36 highway). The 2014 Sentra is very roomy on the inside—in fact, it’s larger than some 1980’s and 1990’s Nissan mid-sized cars (the new Sentra debuted for the 2013 model year).
Minuses: The Heavy 2014 Sentra is way-underpowered: 1.8 liter four only makes 130 hp, and mated to the CVT, acceleration is lousy, too noisy, and very slow. A car as heavy as the Sentra needs much more horsepower, and at least a six-speed automatic transmission. The powertrain in the 2014 Nissan Sentra doesn’t measure up at all. Other automakers have proven consumers don’t need to sacrifice decent acceleration for decent fuel economy, yet the Sentra does. A hatchback version of the Sentra would be a welcome addition, but it isn’t available; Nissan buyers wanting that will have to look at the Rouge or Juke crossovers to fill that void.
Other minuses for the 2014 Sentra are a lack of Bluetooth availability on the midrange Sentra SV models—it should be a standard feature—not an option or just standard on a more expensive trim level, and reliability has been seriously problematic for the Nissan Sentra, and in turn, owner satisfaction is lower than its main Japanese rivals, the Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic. Trade-in and resale values will be lower as a result of the sketchy reliability.
Final Grade: the shortcomings on the 2014 Sentra mar what could be a terrific compact car. The tepid drivetrain, mediocre reliability and other issues drag down an otherwise promising car. The Car Exam Classic gives the 2014 Nissan Sentra a “C” grade overall.
The Car Exam Returns With New Reviews For 2015...Stage 1! The Car Exam will be joining forces with its sister site, with more changes coming in 2015...See both the sites for more information on Stage 2 of the upcoming changes!
The 2010 Chevrolet Traverse LS: another classic review from The Car Exam
Good Grades: Nice Exterior Styling, comfortable front seats, decent front and rear visibility, good instrumentation on the dash, lots of cargo room, sliding second row seats, fuel economy okay for a large, heavy crossover (17 mpg city, 24 mpg highway), the steering feel is a bit over-boosted but acceptable.
Bad grades: The six-speed automatic transmission seems to hunt at times, body roll, this is a very heavy crossover—its base curb weight is 5066 pounds—Yikes!—and the brakes work hard to stop it. The 281 horsepower, 3.6 liter V6 pulls adequately, but feels taxed pulling 2 ½ tons-plus around. Interior plastics on the dash are satisfactory, but could be better on the doors. I didn’t like the cloth materials on the seat—a bit on the rough side. While the second row seats do slide forward, access to the third-row rear seats still feels awkward. Also, the third-row rear seats are too tight and uncomfortable for adults.
Final Grade: This crossover has its shortcomings, but it still comes off as a likable vehicle. Put it on a diet, give it some more horsepower, get rid of the hapless third-row seats, and give it some better interior materials (the seats, especially), and it will be much improved.
The Car Exam Grade: B/B-
Base MSRP: $29,999 (with $775 Destination Charges included)
Ford Taurus Limited, 2010: another classic review from The Car Exam
Good Grades: Solid build quality, nice interior ergonomics and
quality,supportive and comfy seats, good exterior styling--in short a lot of
the SHO's good attributes.
Bad Grades: The base 3.6 liter, 263 horsepower V6 struggles to pull
the 4,000 pound Taurus. You really miss the twin-turbocharged 365 horsepower
V6 in the SHO--and it shows (pun intended)! My test car missed some
of the goodies found on the SHO (navigation, all-wheel drive, etc.), and it
shares a flaw with the SHO (short windows all around--which means a big blind
spot in the rear.
Final Grade: The Taurus Limited is a good car, but it feels
underpowered--especially after you drive the Taurus SHO. If you can afford to
spend the extra dollars (and driving performance matters), do go for the SHO.
