Model Year | 2011 | 2017 | |
Model | Nissan cube | GMC Terrain | |
Engine | |||
Transmission | |||
Drivetrain | |||
Body | 4dr Hatch | 4dr SUV | |
Difference | |||
Wheelbase | 2,530 mm | 2,858 mm | 0 mm |
Length | 3,975 mm | 4,712 mm | -1 mm |
Width | 1,694 mm | 1,849 mm | 0 mm |
Height | 1,651 mm | 1,684 mm | 0 mm |
Curb Weight | 1,253 kg | 1,720 kg | 0 kg |
Fuel Capacity | 50 L | 71 L | -21 L |
Headroom, Row 1 | 1,082 mm | 1,011 mm | 0 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 1 | 1,326 mm | 1,415 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 1 | 1,240 mm | 1,400 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 1 | 1,077 mm | 1,046 mm | 0 mm |
Headroom, Row 2 | 1,021 mm | 996 mm | -995 mm |
Shoulder Room, Row 2 | 1,331 mm | 1,405 mm | 0 mm |
Hip Room, Row 2 | 1,209 mm | 1,303 mm | 0 mm |
Legroom, Row 2 | 902 mm | 1,013 mm | 901 mm |
Total Legroom | 1,979 mm (over 2 rows) | 2,060 mm (over 2 rows) | -1 mm |
Cargo Volume, Minimum | 323 L | 895 L | -572 L |
Cargo Volume, Maximum | 1,645 L | 1,809 L | 0 L |
2011 Nissan cube Seat Room and Comfort: Pros | ||
Year | Body/Powertrain | Comment |
2010 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 CVT FWD |
Adults can sit there in comfort. see full Nissan cube review |
2010 | 4dr Hatch 122-horsepower 1.8L I4 CVT FWD |
Unparalleled rear seat room and comfort in this car for passengers. Should be among the easier cars of this size to put a baby seat into the back, if we have children. Our (longer and lower) 2004 Sentra paled in comparison of back seat usability. see full Nissan cube review |
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 |
None of our members have yet commented on the seat room and comfort of the 2017 GMC Terrain.