| 1 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
2012 Nissan JUKE and 2017 GMC Terrain Specifications
| Model Year | 2012 | 2017 | |
| Model | Nissan JUKE | GMC Terrain | |
| Engine | turbocharged 1.6L I4 DOHC-4v 188 hp@5600 177 lb-ft@2000 |
3.6L V6 DOHC-4v 301 hp@6500 272 lb-ft@4800 |
|
| Transmission | 6-speed manual | 6-speed shiftable automatic | |
| Drivetrain | FWD | FWD | |
| Body | 4dr SUV | 4dr SUV | |
| Difference | |||
| Wheelbase | 99.6 in | 112.5 in | -12.9 in |
| Length | 162.4 in | 185.5 in | -23.1 in |
| Width | 69.5 in | 72.8 in | -3.3 in |
| Height | 61.8 in | 66.3 in | -4.5 in |
| Curb Weight | 2780 lb. | 3988 lb. | -1208 lb. |
| Fuel Capacity | 12.1 gal. | 18.8 gal. | -6.7 gal. |
| Headroom, Row 1 | 38.6 in | 39.8 in | -1.2 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 53.6 in | 55.7 in | -2.1 in |
| Hip Room, Row 1 | 0.0 in | 55.1 in | -55.1 in |
| Legroom, Row 1 | 42.1 in | 41.2 in | 0.9 in |
| Headroom, Row 2 | 36.7 in | 39.2 in | -2.5 in |
| Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 51.4 in | 55.3 in | -3.9 in |
| Hip Room, Row 2 | 0.0 in | 51.3 in | -51.3 in |
| Legroom, Row 2 | 32.1 in | 39.9 in | -7.8 in |
| Total Legroom | 74.2 in (over 2 rows) | 81.1 in (over 2 rows) | -6.9 in |
| Cargo Volume, Minimum | 8.9 ft3 | 31.6 ft3 | -22.7 ft3 |
| Cargo Volume, Maximum | 29.3 ft3 | 63.9 ft3 | -34.6 ft3 |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2012 Nissan JUKE
| 2012 Nissan JUKE Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2013 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 188hp 1.6L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT AWD |
Plenty of room in the front. see full Nissan JUKE review |
| 2012 Nissan JUKE Seat Room and Comfort: Cons | ||
| Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
| 2011 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 188hp 1.6L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD |
If there are leggy people in the front the room in the back goes to almost non-existant. The head room is limited for taller people as well. see full Nissan JUKE review |
| 2011 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 188hp 1.6L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD |
The back seat is useless for adults. At 6' tall I couldn't sit in the back because my head would hit the roof. see full Nissan JUKE review |
| 2011 | 4dr SUV turbocharged 188hp 1.6L I4 6-speed shiftable CVT FWD |
The front seats are great for short trips, but found them rather hard and uncomfortable for longer trips. Not usually a problem as you have to stop every two hundred miles to fill it up again. see full Nissan JUKE review |
TrueDelta Reviews the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2017 GMC Terrain
| 2017 GMC Terrain Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
| Year | Comment | |
| 2018 | The first-generation GMC Terrain took advantage of a long, 112.5-inch wheelbase to offer exceptional rear legroom--nearly 40 inches of it. On paper, the 2018 Terrain has only a half-inch less combined legroom despite a wheelbase shrink of 5.2 inches (to better align the vehicle with competitors and open up space for the downsized Acadia). In reality, rear legroom seems ample but no longer outstanding. The rear seats in the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4 are similarly roomy. But the Terrain does pull ahead when evaluating rear seat comfort. Its high-mounted rear seat cushion provides better leg support than others. The Compass's rear seat is lower and firmer. The Terrain's rear seat can even recline a little. Based on their specs, the Jeep is nearly as roomy inside as the GMC. Headroom, shoulder room, and combined legroom specs all differ by less than an inch. In reality, the Jeep's interior feels significantly narrower. And the Jeep Cherokee? All of its interior specs are also within an inch of the Terrain's, though often in the other direction. Why does Jeep offer two crossovers so close in size? This isn't clear. In terms of specs, they differ most in combined legroom and cargo volume. The Cherokee has 1.3 inches more of the former--good to have, but hardly justification for an additional model--and about ten percent LESS of the latter. How can the larger Jeep have less cargo volume? I suspect that the Compass was measured more creatively, and cannot actually hold as much cargo. Based on their specs--and I always take cargo volume specs with more than a little salt--the new Terrain can swallow a few more cubic feet of cargo than the Compass (63.3 vs. 59.8) but falls well short of the RAV4 (70.6 in hybrid form, 73.4 otherwise). A Honda CR-V can fit a couple more cubes than the RAV4. The GMC Terrain and the Jeeps compensate for not having the most spacious cargo areas with front passenger seats that fold forward. If your cargo is long but not wide, one of these is the way to go. Though closely related to the GMC, the Chevrolet Equinox does not offer this feature. see full GMC Terrain review | |
What Our Members Are Saying about the Seat Room and Comfort of the 2017 GMC Terrain
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 GMC Terrain.
See TrueDelta's information for all SUVs
See TrueDelta's information for all Nissan models.
