Volkswagen T-Cross vs Nissan Juke

What's the difference?

The Volkswagen T-Cross might be late to the small SUV party, but it’s not so much tardy, as making a fashionable entrance.

It’s a very impressive compact SUV - big on space, style and comfort, well priced, decently specified and a smart option for customers who aspire to a German badge being shown off in their driveway.

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.

It’s not to be confused with the slightly larger T-Roc model, which has just arrived here too. The T-Roc is bigger, based on the Golf. But that model isn’t quite as clever when it comes to its design as this one.

Despite being smaller, the T-Cross is super smart when it comes to overall packaging. It’s based on the Polo city car, and isn’t much bigger in terms of nose-to-tail length (T-Cross: 4108mm; Polo: 4053mm). However the T-Cross is a taller, boxier design, and that means added practicality. It is 1760mm wide and 1583mm tall, whereas the Polo is 1751mm wide and 1446mm tall.

It still has the rugged SUV styling cues you’d expect, albeit in a bit more of an urban-focused design. There are still chunky bumpers and off road inspired bits to separate it from a standard city hatchback, and it has 180mm of ground clearance - ideal for jumping the occasional gutter.

And because it’s a VW sold in Australia, there are option packs to add on if you want them. The test car you see in these images has the R-Line pack optioned up, which adds a number of body design changes and 18-inch wheels on the outside, and some nice bits inside, too. More on that in the next section.

Disappointingly, VW has launched the T-Cross with a base model that still has halogen headlamps, where the mid-spec car you see here has LED lighting all around. I’ll break down the specs for you in the pricing section. 

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.

There are some SUVs in this segment of the market that pack more in than you think is physically possible. The Honda HR-V comes to mind first and foremost, and the T-Cross is very close to that benchmark-setter when it comes to interior practicality.

That’s because the T-Cross has a clever sliding second-row seat that allows you to either prioritise back seat room, or boot capacity. Depending on what you’re doing, you can adjust the space ratio to suit.

The sliding second-row means the boot capacity can either be 385 litres (seat all the way back) or 455L (seat forward), and that increases to 1281L with the seats folded flat, too. Under the boot floor is a space saver spare wheel, and those rear seats fold 60:40 as well.

With that back seat in its most passenger-focused setting, and with the driver’s seat set for myself (182cm), I had easily enough knee room, toe space and headroom to be comfortable for hours in the back. With it slid forward, that wasn’t the case - but it’s arguably only going to be used like that if you have younger children in boosters or baby capsules, anyway. 

Either way, it’s a good compromise, one that many competitors can’t offer. Not even the HR-V (though it has Magic Seats which are amazing in their own right).

The back seat amenities are a mixed bag. There are two USB ports for keeping devices charged up, as well as a pair of map pockets on the seat backs, and a pair of large door pockets. Unlike some more expensive VW models, those pockets aren’t lined, though, and that’s a bit annoying as things will move around in them, as they’re not shaped for bottles. 

There are no cup holders, no fold-down armrest, and no rear ceiling-mount grab handles. So it really depends what you prioritise when it comes to the back seat experience.

The front cabin is very familiar to those who have sat in a VW over, say, the past five years. It’s a well designed and very ergonomically smart space, with everything falling to hand just as you’d expect.

The media screen is excellent - an 8.0-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android auto, but not sat nav as standard (optional). There are knobs and buttons on either side, so it’s easy to find your way around the screen, and the menus are logical, too. 

Storage includes a pair of small cup holders between the front seats, a covered centre bin, a decent glovebox, and a storage tray on the dash top. There’s also a storage caddy in front of the gear selector, which houses a wireless phone charger pad, and also two more USB ports. And just like the rear, the front door pockets are large but unlined, though at least up front you get padded elbow pads on the doors.

The steering wheel is lovely, and the optional pack with the upgraded sound system and digital driver info screen is worth the money, if you ask me. It adds to that technical, Teutonic feeling that you get in VW products, and helps align the interior nicely to the already excellent standard of perceived quality - even if there are plenty of hard plastics used.

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.

Powering the VW T-Cross will be two different engines.

At launch, and in our test car, is the 85TSI petrol engine, a 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo unit with 85kW of power (at 5000rpm) and 200Nm of torque (from 2000-3500rpm). It is teamed exclusively to a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission, and only comes in front-wheel drive. It’s hardly fast, but can manage 0-100km/h in 9.9 seconds.

There’ll be a more powerful 110TSI motor soon. It has a 1.5-litre four-cylinder petrol-turbo with 110kW of power and 250Nm of torque. It also comes with a seven-speed dual-clutch auto and 2WD. It’s hardly a horsepower hero, but VW claims a 0-100km/h time of just 7.8sec for this variant. 

So that means there’s no diesel, no four-wheel drive (4WD or 4Motion), nor all-wheel drive (AWD), and no hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric variant, either. 

The kerb weight for the 85TSI model is just 1240 kilograms, which is very light for a small SUV. The towing capacity is also a bit light, with an unbraked towing capacity of 630kg and a braked towing capacity of 1100kg.

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

Claimed fuel consumption for the T-Cross 85TSI is 5.4 litres per 100 kilometres - the claim is perhaps a little ambitious, as is often the case with Euro three-cylinder petrol engines.

But it does have start-stop technology and brake energy recuperation, and during my time in the T-Cross I’ve seen a return of 6.4L/100km across a mix of urban and country driving, as well as some long highway stints. 

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-Cross drives like a Volkswagen. That might sound like a pretty obvious assertion, but the fact of the matter is that the German brand has a certain feel to the way its cars drive, and this little teeny weeny SUV drives rather similarly to some of the other members of the VW family, including much larger models.

That's one of the things I like most about the T-Cross. It drives bigger than it is. That means it feels substantial and considered on the road, not light (even though it is, at 1240kg) or small (though it is) and it doesn't feel like it'll get pushed around on the open road either.

Truly - I did more than 600 kilometres in the T-Cross, including a lot of highway and open road testing, and it feels substantial, refined and well resolved, which is something you can't necessarily say about a lot of its small SUV competitors. 

It's impressive, but it isn't perfect.

The engine is good and offers a nice whoosh of midrange pulling power, but in stop-start traffic the throttle response - in combination with the dual-clutch auto and start-stop engine tech - can make for some frustratingly slow take-offs. 

As speeds rise, it's a more enjoyable drive. The transmission shifts smoothly and smartly, and the engine response is ample, though up steeper hills you might wish for a touch more grunt, and the good news is the 110TSI model coming soon is bound to appease that desire.

The steering is nicely weighted and offers decent feel to the driver's hands, and you're never left second-guessing what will happen next. 

The suspension is quite well sorted, though my test car's 18-inch alloy wheels and low profile tyres (Hankook Ventus Prime 215/45/18s) were a little sharp over less-than-perfect urban streets. It still rides well and copes with big lumps and bumps decently, but it can be a little jittery - though arguably any small SUV on 18s will have a similar criticism levelled at it. 

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.

VW Australia backs its models with a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty plan, which is equal to the majority of mainstream players in the market.

There’s also a couple of new service plans available, aimed at lowering the cost of ownership.

At the time of writing, the pricing for the brand’s “Care Plans” were pegged at $990 for three years/45,000km, or $1800 for five years/75,000km cover (VW says the first service is free).

If you compare that to the brand’s pay as you go offer (Assured Price Service), you’ll save $256 for three years, or $645 if you get the five-year plan. It’s well worth considering rolling into your finance plan. 

There’s one year of roadside assist cover included for new VW products, but if you maintain your car with the brand, it renews up to nine further times, allowing 10 years of roadside cover.

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.