Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
!!!TED!!!

Montreal Autoshow: Nissan Cube

30 posts in this topic

Here are some pictures I took of the 2010 Nissan Cube at the Montreal International Autoshow in Quebec, Canada on Tuesday January 20th.

This is one very silly little car. Interior has terrible plastics (and ergonomics) and has very little legroom for front passengers. It looks like a retarded clown car from the outside.

The hinge for the rear door has to have a bubble in the bodywork to fit.

This should appeal only to those hardcore JDM fans.

VIDEO:

IMG_0585.jpg

IMG_0586.jpg

IMG_0587.jpg

IMG_0588.jpg

IMG_0589.jpg

IMG_0590.jpg

IMG_0593.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T. H. E. most repulsive production... thing on 4 wheels. Words fail.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the 1st gen xB is any guide, they'll sell every one.

Glad the above posters aren't involved with Det3 product planning (actually, maybe you are <_< <_< )

This, the Kia Soul & Hinda Insight only serve as painful reminders of the lack of vision or balls at our beloved General.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glad the above posters aren't involved with Det3 product planning

If GM built vehicles like this, I would have never been a GM owner. I'd rather them dead then relegated to build junk like this.

Ford Fiesta, yes. Scion, no.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe they will market it to cubicle dwellers. 'Work in a cube? Now You can Drive a Cube!'. :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the 1st gen xB is any guide, they'll sell every one.

Glad the above posters aren't involved with Det3 product planning (actually, maybe you are <_< <_< )

This, the Kia Soul & Hinda Insight only serve as painful reminders of the lack of vision or balls at our beloved General.

They did have vision. It was called the Aztek. It was just as ugly and it failed. Just like I hope this visionary ugly thing will fail.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the 1st gen xB is any guide, they'll sell every one.

Glad the above posters aren't involved with Det3 product planning (actually, maybe you are <_< <_< )

This, the Kia Soul & Hinda Insight only serve as painful reminders of the lack of vision or balls at our beloved General.

Excuse me?

I actually like the previous Cube. It's design worked and was coherent. This one completely lost it in the details. They attempted to keep the same boxy shape, but round it off. That does not work. It's not attractive. The Kia Soul, original xB, and the previous Cube are fine designs for what they are. This, is simply a poor design. You can not say otherwise.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excuse me?

I actually like the previous Cube. It's design worked and was coherent. This one completely lost it in the details. They attempted to keep the same boxy shape, but round it off. That does not work. It's not attractive. The Kia Soul, original xB, and the previous Cube are fine designs for what they are. This, is simply a poor design. You can not say otherwise.

My sentiments exactly.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excuse me?

I actually like the previous Cube. It's design worked and was coherent. This one completely lost it in the details. They attempted to keep the same boxy shape, but round it off. That does not work. It's not attractive. The Kia Soul, original xB, and the previous Cube are fine designs for what they are. This, is simply a poor design. You can not say otherwise.

I stand by my statement:

They'll sell (at or near MSRP)....whether you like them or approve of the design is immaterial. I personally don't, but the important things are sales and intro'ing consumers to your brand early. They are distinct, each have unique selling points and they are 'statement' cars for under $19k.

You know what guys? More follower crap ain't going to cut it. And, newsflash---nobody's designing cars specifically for you.

GM wouldn't like to be moving Aveos at sticker? Or Cobalts? Or Astras? Maybe a stand-out vehicle in that class might do it, huh?

Stuck in a sorry, futureless past, GM continues its downward spiral with fanboys cheering all the way.

And that's the problem, guys.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They did have vision. It was called the Aztek. It was just as ugly and it failed. Just like I hope this visionary ugly thing will fail.

The Aztek!.....that was good for a belly laugh this morning.

The Aztek was merely EVERYTHING wrong with GM's creative teams at the time of development.

The Cube will do just fine, regardless of your hopes.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This isn't exactly groundbreaking..besides the asymmetrical windows this box on wheels design has already been done.

Also, I'm pretty sure neither BV or myself would consider ourselves "fanboys". We're critics of design...especially BAD design.

As well, you are taking what we have said out of context...read both of our posts. No where did mention how we thought it would sell. We criticized it from a design standpoint and nothing more. I for one, do not appreciate it when people try to make assumptions and twist what I have said into something it is not.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone who is curious, just a refresher for how far backwards this redesign really is...

04_cube_press.jpg

28_cube_press.jpg

nissan-cube.jpg

ag360_cube_interior.jpg

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This isn't exactly groundbreaking..besides the asymmetrical windows this box on wheels design has already been done.

Also, I'm pretty sure neither BV or myself would consider ourselves "fanboys". We're critics of design...especially BAD design.

As well, you are taking what we have said out of context...read both of our posts. No where did mention how we thought it would sell. We criticized it from a design standpoint and nothing more. I for one, do not appreciate it when people try to make assumptions and twist what I have said into something it is not.

Sorry.

I stand corrected. Both of your critiques are just misinformed, then.

This is an anti-design type of design, not a Ferrari.

Here's a vehicle that shows its maker is trying---it's not looking for elevation into the Louvre.

(and, BTW, there are other people on this thread, so not every part of my post was directed at you or BV...perhaps a little less sensitivity is in order, huh? This site has become almost as humorless as it is dull.)

Edited by enzl
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

with an aztek in my garage, let me be the first to say i would never come close to driving and owning this nissan cube piece of &#036;h&#33;.

if the cube does well as enzl purports, it about a rampart part of society being idiots rather than it being a good transportation choice.

if the cube had a chevy badge on it, the press would be lambasting it. at least the kia soul looks halfways decent, only in comparison.

i would hope that people would be wise enough not to buy this cube piece of crap and at least check out the transit connect or even the honda element as a much wiser way to spend money. you can even buy a nice short wheelbase kia sorento for the price of this these days.

Edited by regfootball
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if nissan intends to build its future on &#036;h&#33; products like the versa and the cube, then they have it coming to them. the versa is terrible. if the cube is the same, they might as well change their name to 'geely'

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This new Cube is the result of a combination of meeting new crash standards and how to make the "iconic" shape new yet familiar...while running out of ideas beyond "lets round everything off, then finish it off with the latest Japanese trend of bulging headlights."

It may sell well, it may not...this market is very tough since the "trendy" crowd (and old people) decided what is cool and what is not.

All I'm saying is purely from a design standpoint this is a step backwards from the last gen...and I for one would rather have the Soul.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone on this thread except for Dodgefan and enzl seem to have a closed-minded approach to this vehicle. True dodgefan, i would perfer a soul. Anyways, ted and i were the only ones out of all of you to see this up close and personal. it is a different vehicle. nissan is moving in a good direction by introducing this to north america, because it is the right car for the times. it is fuel-efficient, inexpensive, and very space efficnient. as for you reg with your ignorant comments, nissan is moving in the right direction with the versa and the cube. the versa came out with a 1.6 value model starting at 12k canadian. trust me, and they are selling, and the cube will too. and guys, dont compare the aztek to vehicles like this. the aztek was a huge family wagon, these are econo-boxes from asia. just admit it fanboys, GM just never got around to making anything like this, and they should.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see how a polarized opinion on a subjective matter such as styling can legitimately be derided as 'close-mindedness', an over-used term. I cannot recall anyone here ever being similarly labeled for drooling over -say- a ferrari's styling. Blanket admiration is no virtue, as far as I can see.

>>"GM just never got around to making anything like this"<<

2008chevyHHR-SSblogAmeeReehal2008-1.jpg

What- the cube is 19 inches shorter, at a miniscule 157" ?? Who NEEDS a 157" vehicle maximum ? IMO- that's immaterial.

In the realm of a low-cost, economic, stylistically-unique, cargo-centric lil' hauler, GM does indeed 'make something like the cube'. Only there, it's not accompanied by dry heaving sounds.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I fail to see how a polarized opinion on a subjective matter such as styling can legitimately be derided as 'close-mindedness', an over-used term. I cannot recall anyone here ever being similarly labeled for drooling over -say- a ferrari's styling. Blanket admiration is no virtue, as far as I can see.

>>"GM just never got around to making anything like this"<<

2008chevyHHR-SSblogAmeeReehal2008-1.jpg

What- the cube is 19 inches shorter, at a miniscule 157" ?? Who NEEDS a 157" vehicle maximum ? IMO- that's immaterial.

In the realm of a low-cost, economic, stylistically-unique, cargo-centric lil' hauler, GM does indeed 'make something like the cube'. Only there, it's not accompanied by dry heaving sounds.

Only problem with the HHR really is that it's not in the same size class...so in that respect GM doesn't offer something like the Cube (unless you count the terrible Aveo). That said I would go bigger and have the HHR. That photo you posted is very nice...looks great in SS form.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, it's just not square enough for my taste. Sorry, it needs to have corners so sharp you can impale yourself. Kinda like the shape of a car made from Legos. Yeah, that's my style.

Cupholder on the left? I don't think the majority of drivers out there will be able to figure out such a dramatic shift in their ability to do anything when the cup is in another hand.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see size class as being terribly pertinent. Sure- if we were talking about a 210" sedan that could be unyieldy in a garage or thru narrow streets/tight parking; that's one thing. But at this diminuative size level, separating every 13" in overall length into yet another 'class' is merely marketing to limit competitors. In other words, unlike the 210" sedan, are there actually true 'livability' size constraints on 176" vs. 157" ?? Who looks at something as small as an HHR and says 'that won't work for me- too large.' I just can't fathom it. So to blindly trudge along with manufacturer and/or governmental-dictated 'classes' and not look beyond those, only limits the consumer's choice. Call it 'close-minded' and not be far off. Or hopefully, does no one shop for a vehicle this way ?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I really don't see size class as being terribly pertinent. Sure- if we were talking about a 210" sedan that could be unyieldy in a garage or thru narrow streets/tight parking; that's one thing. But at this diminuative size level, separating every 13" in overall length into yet another 'class' is merely marketing to limit competitors. In other words, unlike the 210" sedan, are there actually true 'livability' size constraints on 176" vs. 157" ?? Who looks at something as small as an HHR and says 'that won't work for me- too large.' I just can't fathom it. So to blindly trudge along with manufacturer and/or governmental-dictated 'classes' and not look beyond those, only limits the consumer's choice. Call it 'close-minded' and not be far off. Or hopefully, does no one shop for a vehicle this way ?

Apparently, size doesn't even matter when it should! As an example, when my friend and his wife were shopping for a new car (mostly for her because he already had a Grand Cherokee), she just 'had to have' the new PT Cruiser (introductory year), as it was the flavour of the month/year for consumers. She wasn't taking in what made it work, the ergonomics, or even if the seats were comfortable enough to support her bad back and hips (previously broken pelvis leads her to near-constant pains). Anyway, anything that a car buyer should look at, she could change every negative into a positive to go along with just how much she loved the strongest reason she wanted one, how it looked on the outside. She put everything in her life to form-fit the car, which is odd for those needing a car to fit the majority of their needs when it comes to car seats, pets, groceries, traveling, etc. Nope, it had to be the PT or nothing else.

Now they have two kids and the main mode of transportation for the family is their Montana SV6. Who drives the PT? He does, to commute to work, and he is trying to sell it.

So no, sadly, not everyone looks at what would seem to be important for the best car buying decision. For vehicles like this Nissan, it's general transportation with style. The fact that it might have some extra cargo space or additional passenger room would really only be looked at by those stuck on what they can afford and need all the space they can get for the money. Even then, IMHO, for a vehicle like this, styling would be a determining factor.

Edited by ShadowDog
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those of you who think GM couldn't possibly come up with something so cool:

0612mt_01_z%201990_chevrolet_astro_van%2

The GM vans are some of the most popular American vehicles in Japan. The original Cube and Scion toaster car are obviously attempts at adapting GM genius to Japanese needs. Now they have come full circle.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I stand by my statement:

They'll sell (at or near MSRP)....whether you like them or approve of the design is immaterial. I personally don't, but the important things are sales and intro'ing consumers to your brand early. They are distinct, each have unique selling points and they are 'statement' cars for under $19k.

You know what guys? More follower crap ain't going to cut it. And, newsflash---nobody's designing cars specifically for you.

GM wouldn't like to be moving Aveos at sticker? Or Cobalts? Or Astras? Maybe a stand-out vehicle in that class might do it, huh?

Stuck in a sorry, futureless past, GM continues its downward spiral with fanboys cheering all the way.

And that's the problem, guys.

All I spoke of were my thoughts on the design. I said nothing about how it would sell or whether or not Nissan made a good move by introducing it. You put me into a group saying "the above posters" and commented how you were glad we weren't a part of the domestic automaker's product planning. Myself, for simply suggesting I wasn't a fan of the the styling. I don't enjoy being spoken to as if my opinion does not matter, especially when you're clearly putting me into a group of which I do not belong in.

(and, BTW, there are other people on this thread, so not every part of my post was directed at you or BV...perhaps a little less sensitivity is in order, huh? This site has become almost as humorless as it is dull.)

I simply didn't appreciate your comments and assumptions. Regardless of your banter not being specifically directed towards myself, it was directed at a group of people that you placed myself into. I certainly am not the problem here, nor am I overly sensitive. Instead of throwing people into your group of misconceived assumptions, make your point and be done with it. If you feel the need to make this place not as humorless, go ahead and use humor. It's quite simple and doesn't require too much thought. :P

Personally, I actually sort of like the vehicles that occupy this certain sort of size class that you would describe being a 'statement' car. As I mentioned, I like the original Scion xB, as well as the the JDM Cube that precedes this one. My only qualms were the design and my distaste for it.

How that leads into me being placed into a group solely based on your quizzical assumptions, I haven't the slightest clue. I suppose I need to be less of a general Design Critic, and more of GM-Specific Design Critic. :lol:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0