Moderator: volvite
Regardless of what Nissan is calling it (4wd, 2wd) it's certainly closer to a Murano than the current PF. Given the fact that the Murano is smaller yet more expensive than the PF....and it outsells the PF by more than 2-1....do the math. There's just not enough of us that want a real 4x4 in this size vehicle.RacerZX wrote:Some press I saw said it's not 2wd, it's FWD, and it's not 4x4, it's AWD, and it has a CVT transmission. Can you say Murano with a 3rd row?
300 to 500 pounds lighter than the 2012
base model will be priced just over $28,000
able to tow 5,000 pounds
continuously variable transmission... 3.5L... 6-cyl engine...260hp
sourceFord Explorer is the US outsells Pathfinder by 5-to-1.
The new Pathfinder will certainly help the few remaining mfrs of true 4x4 SUVs. Even more so if they end up dumping the X.RacerZX wrote:The pendulum will swing back again some day, when off-road abilities are again more cool from a marketing standpoint (even though most people won't use it still) than MPG. Until then we have our R51s, we just need to try our best to help our new (R52?) brothers and sisters enjoy and modify their rides without snickering too much...
Thanks for the link. I hate it even more now thanks to those photos, which I didn't think was possible. If I wanted a large car, I'd personally look elsewhere. Not a fan of the cookie cutter shape of the new Pathfinder & all the other clones.skinny2 wrote:I think I know why Nissan has only shown the PF from a couple angles.... The pics from C&D are not very flattering.
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/2013-n ... -info-news