Nissan Note Owners Forum banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Morning, all you lovely people, <?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" />
Bit the bullet yesterday and went for a test drive.
Arranged 1.6 - not too bothered about spec as just wanted to get general feel, was told would be a n-tec spec.
Arrived at dealers (no name, no pack drill to protect the innocent!) A little ice breaking chat, details taken and the fun commenced.
I was very impressed, the engine seemed very eager, but at the same time quiet. Loved the oversized door mirrors ""“would have to be Mr. Magoo to miss anything in those baby's.
I like the clutch action and also the gear selection-very positive, other cars I have test drove changing gear was a bit like stirring porridge. Brakes also good, not too sharp as again some other cars tried. Seats very comfortable and I could not believe how much room available in the back, even after I had got drivers seat correct (I am 6'2""�)
Got back to showroom for sales debrief, it then turns out the salesman had told a bit of a ""porky pie""� (I know, unheard of!) The car I had just driven was only a 1.4.
All this leads to some new questions for all you knowledgeable Note owners:-
1) Why are there no engine size badges on the Note's?
2) Do all you 1.4 owners find the engine at all underpowered on the motorways or during overtaking manoeuvres (I will mostly be driving with a total of two in the car)
3) Do you 1.4 owners every regret not having a 1.6 engine. If so when.
4) How accurate do you find the published MPG on both the 1.4 and 1.6 engines
Any answers to the above would be most helpful in me for the next stages i.e. if I would be happy with a 1.4- I would save on initial purchase price and ongoing insurance and petrol cost, but I want to be satisfied that I've made the right choice and if choose the smaller engine would not end up thrashing it to make anything like decent progress.
Any replies and thoughts would be welcome
Signing off for now Spartacus1961
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,698 Posts
No experience of the 1.4 but to see real world mpg go to "honestjohns" website.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
As far as badges go, the new N-Tec+ has no indication of size. I think the only ones you can spot at a glance are the 2009-2011 1.4 petrol and 1.5dci diesel, which will have a blue PUREDRIVE badge on the right side of the boot. The 1.6 petrol has no badge. Pre 2009 Notes are badged SE, SVE etc but I'm not sure whether the engine size or type is displayed...I'm sure someone will know on this forum.
Concerning overtaking, my 1.5dci is a little stormer on motorways, in fact I usually find myself doing around 85mph after getting past some slowcoaches and have to slacken off sharpish before I get a tug. But then, I do have a heavy right back foot...



Edited by: SneakyElephant
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,828 Posts
spartacus1961 said:
Loved the oversized door mirrors ""“would have to be Mr. Magoo to miss anything in those baby's.

I find that mine wont adjust enough, I can see too much of the rear drivers wing in mine, would like it to move outwards a little moe

spartacus1961 said:
4) How accurate do you find the published MPG on both the 1.4 and 1.6 engines
I'm getting 31.5 out of a 1.6 auto commuting through town
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,177 Posts
The 1.6 isnt much more to insure than the 1.4, as i said before the 1.6 has that bit extra, tbh its down to you if you think the 1.4 fits you needs than go for it, you can always go for a second test drive - this really upsets the sales people

if your looking at new cars the ntec or ntec+ are the ones to look at, rear parking sensors are useful as at times the rear end can be hard to judge
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
74 Posts
We've had our N-tec+ 1.4 from new in march - wife uses it for commuting down t'motorway and is averaging 350-60 on atankful.Our longest run out it was down to Wales and back and it returned a true 45.6mpg.
Cruises quite happily with 2 up and luggage on m/ways at around 75 -80.an struggle a bit on steepish hills, but then a quick downshift sorts that out!
It c
Must admit I quite like it, but miss the extra ooomph and cargo space I get in my Picasso 1.6
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I've also test driven a 1.4, waspleasantlysurprised with how lively it felt. Was expecting it to feel a little more sluggish. This was with three adults in the car.

Sneaky, you're right, the pre 2009 models just show the trim level, nothing about the engine size.

Honest John suggests better fueleconomy for the 1.4's than the 1.6's. Although I've also read comments suggesting that because you have to rev the 1.4's a fair bit to get anywhere, the fuel economy might be worse than expected. Like I said, that wasn't something I experienced, so maybe it's just down to driving style.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
<DIV align=center>
<TABLE style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #cccccc 1pt solid; BORDER-LEFT: #cccccc 1pt solid; WIDTH: 638px; : white; HEIGHT: 83px; BORDER-TOP: #cccccc 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #cccccc 1pt solid; mso-cellspacing: .7pt; mso-border-alt: solid #CCCCCC .75pt; mso-padding-alt: 2.25pt 2.25pt 2.25pt 2.25pt" =MsonormalTable border=1 cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=0 width=638>
<T>
<TR style="HEIGHT: 11.25pt; mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes">
<TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #cccccc 1pt solid; BORDER-LEFT: #cccccc; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2.25pt; PADDING-LEFT: 2.25pt; PADDING-RIGHT: 2.25pt; : #fbfbfd; HEIGHT: 11.25pt; BORDER-TOP: #cccccc; BORDER-RIGHT: #cccccc; PADDING-TOP: 2.25pt; mso-border-bottom-alt: solid #CCCCCC .75pt" vAlign=top rowSpan=2>
<A name=4185></A>MrNote <?: prefix = v ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" /></v:stroke></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:f></v:ulas></v:path><?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" /><o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"></o:lock></v:shape><a href="http://www.noteownersclub.co.uk/forum/forum_images/drop_down.png"></v:></v:shape>
</TD>
<TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #cccccc; BORDER-LEFT: #cccccc; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2.25pt; PADDING-LEFT: 2.25pt; PADDING-RIGHT: 2.25pt; : #fbfbfd; HEIGHT: 11.25pt; BORDER-TOP: #cccccc; BORDER-RIGHT: #cccccc; PADDING-TOP: 2.25pt" vAlign=top>
</TD></TR>
<TR style="MIN-HEIGHT: 200px; HEIGHT: 150pt; mso-yfti-irow: 1; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes">
<TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #e1e3ec 1pt solid; BORDER-LEFT: #e1e3ec 1pt solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2.25pt; PADDING-LEFT: 2.25pt; PADDING-RIGHT: 2.25pt; : #fbfbfd; HEIGHT: 150pt; BORDER-TOP: #e1e3ec 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #e1e3ec 1pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 2.25pt; mso-border-alt: solid #E1E3EC .25pt; mso-border-top-alt: solid #E1E3EC .75pt" vAlign=top>
I've also test driven a 1.4, waspleasantlysurprised with how lively it felt. Was expecting it to feel a little more sluggish. This was with three adults in the car.
<BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"><BR style="mso-special-character: line-break"></TD></TR></T></TABLE>

Hi Mrnote,
thank you for your reply. Did you choose the 1.4 or are you like me and still looking? If you have a 1.4 are you happy with it?
Thanks again, spartacus1961
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
105 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Flash22<?: prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:eek:ffice:eek:ffice" />
The 1.6 isnt much more to insure than the 1.4


Hi Flash,
thank you for your response, as a experiment I got my current insurers to quote me for an 58 reg 1.4 acenta and also a 58reg 1.6 acenta, the 1.6 worked out at approx. 15% extra per annum-at the end of the day not a deal breaker.
I have noticed though that there do not seem to be many 1.6's for sale compared to the 1.4 on the various used car site?
Regards Spartacus1961
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
I have the 1.4 N-tec + which i bought in March having downgraded from a 1.8 Volvo V40 - so far I haven't regretted my decision, which I might add I thought long and hard about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
109 Posts
i have a pre-facelift 1.6 auto and as autos go i would not think about a 1.4, the 1.6 occasionally does not have the power i would like, 99% of the time its fine, just seems a little sluggish on the odd time when i press the pedal and theres nothing left. so i would assume that the 1.4 would be worse

but thats climbing a steep hill out of work after just starting the engine from cold so it could just be the "choke" that is holding it back
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
spartacus1961 said:
Hi Mrnote,
thank you for your reply. Did you choose the 1.4 or are you like me and still looking? If you have a 1.4 are you happy with it?
Thanks again, spartacus1961

I'm still looking - haven't purchased yet. I'm only looking for 1.4 SE's though, avoiding 1.6's due to higher insurance costs, higher road tax and higher fuel consumption.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,261 Posts
Papo said:
Please information: what is a meaning of 58 reg (or other number) ??
The UK is the only country that has the car's date of registration on the number plate...sometimes it is a number, sometimes one or more letters. It is considered a status symbol among the shallower members of our motoring community to have the latest number on their vehicle, thus indicating that it is NEW.

Edited by: SneakyElephant
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
I have a 1.4 and find it fine for driving around and is powerful enough for 2 adults & 2 kids in it but i think it would be noticeable if it was full of luggage. I am getting 41.5mpg with mostly town driving
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
flash22, SneakyElephant thanks.


My Note is 61 reg.


<div id="proMenu15" ="dropdownmenu"="">






Edited by: Papo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I've found the 1.6 isn't too much worse on the petrol than even our 1.2L Micra was. A lot of that is because it's able to go around town (25-30mph) in 4th, which the Micra certainly wasn't capable of. I don't know if the 1.4 has enough oomph to do that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
I have a 1.4 Ntec+ - bought new in March. Average fuel consumption over 2500miles of mixed conditions is 45.4mpg.I expect it's not as nippy as the 1.6 but, after some research, found that the 1.4 holds its price better and is also easier to sell in these straitened times. If you are going to change it after 3 - 4 years I think the 1.4 would be a better deal from a financial point of view but if you're used to a more powerful engine you might find its lack of power a bit annoying.
I test drove both and personally, couldn't feel a lot between them with the sort of driving I do, so I don't think you'd be making a mistake with whichever you choose.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top