2007 Nissan Quest Review

Specifications

So Much Better I Dont Know Where to Start

To say that Nissans minivan has been poorly received would be an understatement, with so few of them sold that if it werent a minivan it would qualify for exclusive status. When I first tested the 2004 model during its media debut in the summer of 2003 I liked it for the most part, but had a few reservations. The third row required WSM champion Mariusz Pudzianowski levels of strength (or should that be IFSAs top contender Zydrunas Savickas) to pull out of the floor if folded flat, and the DVD changer was inanely positioned under the front passenger seat, which is probably the most inconvenient place possible. Other than digital readouts that were too small and therefore difficult to make out I didnt mind the centrally-mounted instrumentation, although I remember many colleagues grumbling about it. And while the styling was quirky, it was sportier than most minivans and therefore almost respectable.

Nissan hasnt changed the styling much, which is a shame. Not because it looks particularly bad, but because it has been improved so much on the inside that a few more visual cues on the outside might help those who were turned off of the 2004 through 2006 model realize its a much better appliance. I joke about appliance, of course, only because minivans are the most practical of vehicles available. Regular readers will know my strange love affair with vehicles in this segment, with reasons for my adoration including power sliding doors, power rear liftgates, and interior space galore, plus normally, car-like handling and ride quality, just to name a few attributes. The Quest, even in its previous incarnation, delivered all of these benefits and more. The more? Oh yes, it was one of the best handling in the group and delivered sports sedan-like acceleration.

The new 2007 Quest doesnt disappoint when it comes to ride and handling either, and its front tires spin when the right foot gets overzealous, followed by the most sonorous engine note in the class that results in a surprisingly short sprint to highway speeds. Really, youll be amazed at how much fun this thing is to drive.

Of course, it only makes sense that 235 horsepower maximized at 5,800 rpm and 240 lb-ft of torque at 4,400 rpm would make the Quest feel athletic, then again its hardly the most powerful in the class; that honor goes to Hyundais impressive new Entourage and Kias near identical Sedona at 244 horsepower and 253 lb-ft of torque apiece, followed closely by Hondas Odyssey with identical horsepower but 3 fewer pound feet of torque. Despite slightly less power, mind you, the Quest feels more exciting to drive, with the drawback of not offering as much comfort (more on that in a minute). Astute readers will notice that the new Quest actually makes less power than the original, which was rated at 240 horsepower. There hasnt been any modification under the hood, however, but merely an adjustment in the way it is rated in order to conform to SAE standards.

And what about its sport over comfort bias? Dont get me wrong, the Quests big, soft, couch-like seats wont cause any discomfort, unless youre looking for more supportive lower cushions, which unfortunately give way far too easily on their outer edges, and when combined with absolutely no lateral support from the front seatbacks make for a slip-sliding experience during fast corning. This is a shame, because the vans chassis is so capable in the curves and steering response and feedback so unusually good for a minivan that I felt cheated by the seats, which were so incapable of holding me in place that I had to brace myself with the door panel when turning right or armrest when turning left, forcing me to only hold onto the steering wheel with one hand and therefore give up some control of the vehicle.

OK, Im reviewing a minivan here. Why all the emphasis on driving dynamics? While talking up its flat-folding third row and semi-folding and/or removable second row, Nissan initially boasted about the vans sporting pretensions, not only with regards to driving dynamics but also with respect to its unconventional, low-slung styling. Being that it doesnt measure up to the Dodge Grand Caravan or Chrysler Town & Country when it comes to seat functionality (the Stow n Go seats are really the class leaders for convenience) or some of its other competitors that offer split folding rear seats among other things, the vans performance is its most compelling attribute. So Nissan, if youre going to make performance one of its most distinctive selling points, please fix the seats so that sporty soccer moms (and dads) can take advantage of all that wonderful grip.

But here I go complaining again. Instead of griping about what could be better, lets not forget about everything that Nissan has done to make this van better than its predecessor. First of all, the controversial cylindrical center stack has been integrated more fully into the dash, completely reworked so that only the normal center stack controls are included, such as the radio, HVAC and transmission lever, plus more importantly repositioned the instrument cluster to the more conventional position in front of the driver. How do I like it? Much, much more! I never complained about this previously, at least not specifically about the gauge package position, but it makes all the difference when it comes to reading the smaller dials and digital readouts.

What else did they do? That ultimately ridiculous under-seat DVD changer has been removed and added to the center stack, about halfway down and in its own lidded bin. Thats more like it, a family friendly DVD player that mom and dad wont be cursing every time Jr. wants to watch Over the Hedge.

Oh, and that horribly heavy third row seat is now much more manageable. Its full-length bench doesnt make it as easy to operate as some of its rivals 50:50 split third rows, but its now possible for a smallish mom to lift it from within its well, and push it into its upright position.

My tester wasnt a full-load model, but rather the kind of minivan most of us would buy. I suppose most people would opt for aluminum wheels, but just the same this models 16-inch steel wheels and sporty looking plastic wheel covers wont offend those on tighter budgets. Interestingly, even though the seats were covered with cloth and this model didnt even include automatic climate control, my Quest had a passenger-side power sliding door (the one on the drivers side was manually operable), a power liftgate, power rear quarter windows and a rear sonar system to aid in parking, among other things. I like this, being that these are the types of options that most minivan buyers cant live without, and therefore should be available as standalone items or in a small bundled package, as was the case with the Quest 3.5S. Strangley, however, when configuring the vehicle on the automakers website, www.nissanusa.com, it showed the price starting at $25,650, but then automatically added in a $350 charge for the fold-away seat package, pushing the total to $26,000. Possibly theres a delete for this feature, although I couldnt find one, but still why not include it in the S trim line as standard equipment rather than force an option on people. This one remains a mystery.

Nevertheless, I appreciated the higher quality interior plastics, better panel fit and nicer switchgear, standard with all trim levels in the Quest lineup. While I wouldnt go so far to say its the best van in its class for perceived quality, it certainly is up to par with most and no longer embarrassing. Nissan owners never need to be embarrassed about the brands laudable and, might I say, more important reliability record, mind you, with J.D. Power and Associates 2006 Initial Quality Study (IQS) rating the Japanese automaker above average, in 6th place amongst entry-level brands and 12th place overall - behind its own luxury division, Infiniti. The outgoing Quest didnt rank in the top three minivans, but it only makes sense it should prove reliable considering most of its components are shared with the Altima and Maxima, the latter car rated 3rd in the large car category.

While the IQS is a better indicator of what Nissan is doing now, the VDS, or Vehicle Dependability Study, which rates car ownership after three years, is helpful in gaining some insight on longer term reliability. Here, Nissan doesnt fair quite as well at 12th amongst entry-level brands (one of which, Oldsmobile, is now defunct) and 20th overall for a below average ranking. Once again, the Quest doesnt make the top-three in the van segment (or in this case top-four being that two models tied for third), but… oh, sorry Nissan, none of your cars made it into the top three of any category. Better luck next year. Nissan will no doubt want you to focus on where its going (IQS), not where its been (VDS), and also point out that these studies dont represent every aspect of customer satisfaction. Still, many consumers (and auto journalists) use them as a guide post, being that there are very few reliable, unbiased sources of information available. Alas, the annual Car Owner Satisfaction Survey of Consumer Reports subscribers didnt pick the Quest either, with the only Nissan on the list being the Sentra, and that was on the list of least satisfying cars… ugh.

Well, that was then and this is now. A much-improved new Sentra, which I have yet to have the opportunity to drive but sat in at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, is finally available and the all-new Quest is much more satisfying in every way. Id even go so far as to recommend it to minivan buyers that enjoy driving as much as they need convenience… all but those darned seats, that is. Maybe one of those fancy elastic-backed seat inserts would do the trick? I think Ill head off to Walmart and pick one of those up for my next Quest test drive. You can do the same with all the money youll save from the Quests lower base price, about $400 less than it was when it debuted three years ago. Its still not the least expensive in the segment, but you get what you pay for.