Suzuki Vitara vs Nissan Juke

What's the difference?

The Vitara still looks great, offers impressive real-world fuel economy, possesses a sporty chassis bringing sharp steering and involving handling and roadholding characteristics, and is expertly packaged. No wonder it has remained a consistently strong seller for Suzuki.

But its lack of driver-assist safety equipment, lethargic low-rev performance and stiff, loud ride speak of a small SUV of another era. In too many key areas, it’s rapidly dating and falling behind most rivals nowadays, and can no longer rely on low pricing anymore now that the cheapest base auto is $27K plus ORC.

Still, if you don’t care about the lack of AEB… or a digital speedo, digital radio, rear cupholders or highway quietness, then there’s still a fair bit of fight left in the plucky little Vitara.

Suzuki’s been building them for over 33 years now and such experience shows.

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.

Remember that first Vitara of 1988? The chief designer of today’s LY series, Takehito Arai, told us back in 2015 that its squareness and smaller size were inspirational in shaping the current model.

To that end, he went for a muscular look, with off-roader detailing like the five-slot grille, strong shoulder line, clamshell bonnet, blistered rear mudguards and higher-than-class-average ground clearance (of 185mm), evoking other Suzuki 4x4s like the Jimny and Sierra.

Nearly six years on, the design has stood the test of time surprisingly well, with the Suzuki still looking handsome and contemporary – no doubt helped out by the big standard wheels that fill in those arches nicely, along with the vibrant colour options (like our rich beige test example) and two-tone paint application.

The 2019 facelift, by the way, ushered in changes to the toothy grille, bumper, tail-lights lenses (now LEDs), alloy wheels, interior trim and instrumentation (which went more colourful), along with higher-quality-feel interior trim and materials.

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's still plenty to appreciate the instant you slide yourself on to those lofty cushions.

The Vitara is packaged to transport a smaller family (and include much of their clobber) with ease, from the moment the big doors open. An excellent driving position that inspires confidence, heaps of storage in the doors and centre console, good vision and a light and airy ambience are further drawcards.

And while the seats may seem a bit wide and flat to begin with, they're amply supportive over an extended time in them, with a softness to their shape and texture that makes them quite cosy. No lumbar support for the driver is disappointing, though.

Still, it’s easy to see why the Suzuki remains such a consistent seller after all these years without change.

In 2021, the dash has held up pretty well, mainly due to clear instrument dials and Suzuki’s ever-present 7.0-inch touchscreen multimedia system that is ridiculously easy to operate. Never mind the hard and cheap-looking lower-lying plastics, the cabin is beautifully screwed together as well. And it's likely to stay that way for a very long time.

But there are annoyances, beginning with the lack of digital speedometer, especially now that the cheapest Vitara is a near-$30K proposition; for the same reason we’d have hoped for a DAB+ digital radio, auto lights on, rear-seat cupholders and more than just one USB port (located under the climate control system).

Getting in and out of the rear seat is simple, aided by wide doors and lofty seating, again on flat but ultimately comfortable cushions and backrest, though they neither slide or recline as with some other small SUVs. There's heaps of headroom; the raised rear cushion promotes a natural posture which is good for longer journeys, and enough room for three smaller adults to squeeze in. Larger feet can be tucked underneath the front seats too.

However, besides there being no device-charging facilities, you’ll also notice the lack of reading lights, rear air vents (though the front outlets' outputs do reach back OK) and beverage storage. At least the doors have space for a one-litre bottle and the overhead grab handles include coat hooks. And, like the front, it's all light and airy, with good sight lines for bored back-seat riders to stare out from.

Beyond that, the boot is fairly big and square, with a bi-level floor that’s good for hiding smaller items, while there are hooks, a light and 120V outlet for rear-seat occupants to snake some hapless charger cord to.

Cargo capacity is rated at 375 litres – raising to 710L with the 60/40 rear backrests lowered. It’s nice to see a good old-fashioned luggage board instead of the flimsy mesh items some rivals foist upon us nowadays.

All in all, a big, spacious and inviting interior that’s big on practicality and ease, but also showing its age in a few places.

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.

In some markets, the Vitara is offered with Suzuki’s punchy little 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo petrol engine, as well as the Turbo’s 1.4-litre four-pot turbo option as seen here, but the bulk of Australian sales are powered by a 1586cc 1.6-litre twin-cam 16-valve four-cylinder naturally aspirated petrol engine, known as the M16A.

A peaky unit, it produces maximum power of 86kW at 6000rpm and 156Nm of torque at 4400rpm. Despite modest outputs, a pleasingly low kerb weight of just 1120kg ensures that the Vitara has a favourable power-to-weight ratio, of 76.8kW/tonne.

Drive is transmitted to the front wheels via a six-speed torque converter automatic transmission, complete with a big pair of paddle shifters for some manual manipulation. Or you can just buy the superior six-speed manual and enjoy a substantially more involving drive.

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

That flyweight mass also pays dividends with fuel economy.

Tuned to run on either 91 RON standard unleaded petrol or a 94 RON E10 ethanol-petrol combo, the Vitara returned an efficient 7.6 litres per 100km over our 521km drive in both inner-city traffic and on a highway jaunt.

While that’s still some way off the official combined average of 6.2L/100km (urban: 7.9 and extra urban: 5.2), it still shows Suzuki’s expertise at such economy engines. We regularly visited the Vitara tachometer’s red line – it’s in the nature of this engine to be revved hard and fast – and never really attempted any economy driving out of it.

The published average figure, by the way, translates to a carbon-dioxide emissions rating of 142 grams per kilometre.

Fitted with a 47-litre tank, nearly 760km between refills is possible.

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.

For its role shifting a small and light SUV around town, the 86kW/156Nm 1.6-litre twin-cam 16-valve four-cylinder petrol engine provides sufficient if unexciting performance, and a big part of that is the fast-acting and responsive six-speed torque-converter automatic gearbox.

While the Vitara will never be victorious in the traffic lights grand prix, there’s a substantial amount of flexibility within the engine’s rev range, with maximum power coming in at just 200rpm shy of the 6200rpm red line. So, you need to really prod that pedal down if extra muscle is required, and with that there’s quite a lot of mechanical noise coming through, but it isn’t coarse.

Using the big and well-placed paddle shifters helps to draw out a few extra morsels of oomph, but the fact is, compared to the CX-3’s 2.0-litre or HR-V’s 1.8-litre engines, the Suzuki’s has to work hard – and for longer – to cover the same ground at anywhere near approaching the same time. The aforementioned rivals' effortless, torquey response just isn't available to be enjoyed. For that, you'll need the terrifically muscular Turbo.

That’s a pity really, because the Vitara’s chassis is one of the more involving and fun ones in the small SUV class.

Thanks to a light helm, tight turning circle, rear camera, large exterior mirrors and an appreciable amount of all-round vision afforded by the large glass areas, nipping in and out of small traffic gaps or slotting into tight parking spots just isn't an issue in the Suzuki. It feels bred for the urban jungle.

Equally, the Vitara's fast and eager steering provides quick and crisp handling out on the open road as well, with the front end feeling light and agile yet nicely balanced as well. Even through ragged turns, the Suzuki remains on track. Over gravel surfaces it can be driven with reassurance that the traction and stability controls are always there to reel any slides in. It’s very easy and rewarding to punt the Vitara along at speed and with lots of confidence.

But the ride is a little firm in some places, there’s far too much road and tyre noise intrusion and – after a while – the engine’s constant revvy nature becomes a little tiresome.

Note that the fact that Suzuki did not bother engineering this powertrain to take AEB is reason to believe that there probably isn’t much life left for the M16A engine beyond this generation of Vitara.

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.

Suzuki has switched to an industry-average five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty and roadside assistance.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 15,000km, while published basic capped-price servicing is available. Prices start at $239 (years one and five) and reach as high as $429 (year three). Total cost is $1565, averaging out to $313 annually at the time of publishing.

Vehicles under five-years old but with higher mileages up to 90,000km can expect to be charged up to $559, according to Suzuki’s website.

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.