I currently drive a 06 Jeep Commander 4x4 but I am selling it to get an SUV with better gas mileage. (Currently ave 17.5mgp). I found an 07 Murano S AWD for $22,500 with 18,500 miles on it. Should I buy it or wait a few weeks for the Rogue? Do you think the gas mileage will differ much between the two?

The difference is a couple MPG in favor of the Rogue (21/26 or 22/27 versus the Murano's 20/25).

Isn't the 20/25 2WD Murano mileage based on the 2007 model year EPA test? Based on the old EPA test, the Rogue mileage would be between 24/28 and 25/30.

I'd guess the new EPA rating for the Murano will be about 18/23 or 19/24. That would mean a difference more like 3-4 MPG.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm

2007 Murano - new numbers

FWD 18/23 AWD 17/23

Does anyone have any pros or cons that compare the Rouge and the Murano? I have a top of the line 2006 Murano now and they keep sending me letters saying they are desperate for 2006 Muranos. Just curious.It would take a lot for me to give up my Murano.Thanks for any info you guys have for me.

I am sure somebody will respond very soon to your question............but do you need to change your ride? Sounds like a little tactic the dealership uses to get potential customers in their doors. If it ain't broke.......then don't fix it you know?

I traded in my 2005 Murano for a Rogue last week. I consider the Rogue to be a baby Murano. Trim wise the Rogue is spartan compared to the Rogue but with many upgrades that I really like. Little storage area like in the back that pop up and are a nice touch. The Murano has a much more powerful egine being a 6 compared to a 4. But I just drove it on a shakedown trip and have to admit the performance of the 4 cyl engine was impressive. Cruising at 75 and 80 mph was effortless and the CVT transmission in the Rogue is everybit as good as the Muranos. Passing was easy and the engine had very adequate power. The paddle shifters were a blast to drive with and are really fun. If Nissan is smart they will put them on the redesigned 2009 Murano due out shortly. Two more options worth noting that my Murano didn't have were XM radio and Bluetooth phone technology. The Bluetooth lets you talk without any distracting buttons save the one mounted on the steering wheel. The Rogue is smaller which I liked and was still comfortable, I'm 6'2" and didn't have the seat all the way back. All in all I like the Rogue better, I wait to see if it does as well as the Murano in the snow in another couple of months. I think that Nissan really hit a homerun with the Rogue and it will win many Murano owners over.That said if the soon to be released 2009 Murano adds all the features of the Murano like paddle shifters, and engine that runs on regular, and keeps the styling unique then that will be worth a look. Remember when the Murano came out. It's styling was unique and in the coming years everyone was copying that style. So it will be interesting to see what they do with the new Murano. If the styling is killed then the Rogue will definately steal a lot of thunder from the Murano.
Modified by mag318 at 12:12 AM 10/23/2007

Lol@this thread. How do you compare a Rogue to an MO???? Other than the fact they're both SUV's. While I was at the dealer over the weekend I saw a rogue up close and it made me giggle. It's like comparing the altima coupe to a G. You can't.

06M wrote:Lol@this thread. How do you compare a Rogue to an MO???? Other than the fact they're both SUV's. While I was at the dealer over the weekend I saw a rogue up close and it made me giggle. It's like comparing the altima coupe to a G. You can't.

Unless you are looking to save $$$$$ you cannot compare the Rogue & MO. Then you could possibly compare quietness, comfort, handling, interior materials and interior layout but they are two different size vehicles with both containing positive and negative design and economical aspects.

I'm not sure I agree with those who say you can't compare. I could technically afford either one, but I prefer the Rogue, though I haven't bought one yet. I've driven both of them, and I prefer smaller vehicles. While I'm upgrading from a 2 door Accord Coupe, its because I want a little more storage room, which is what the Rogue gives me, but it doesn't come with the monster size of a Murano, which is too big for my tastes. If you watch the sales presentations for the Rogue, it was designed to be a sportier, smaller SUV with a key on being fun to drive, and I think they've hit their target well, because I happen to be right in their target market.

I'm just waiting on my financing to clear, and I'm off to the dealership.

Let me start by saying I really like the Murano, but when I drove the Rogue I was sold. With the Murano, I was going to have to purchase a base model due to $$. I was able to get all the extras on the Rogue and it felt sportier to drive. So far, I love my Rogue!

Put me in the "not comparable" camp. I preordered a Rogue and although it was nice for what it is, it was no comparison for the Murano. I drove both and I got a great deal on the Murano which made the decision a no-brainer.

The performance, ride and styling inside and out put it on a different level. Again, the Rogue is nice, but I find it like comparing a Sentra to a Maxima. They all have their place, they're just not in the same categories.

bosryan wrote:Does anyone have any pros or cons that compare the Rouge and the Murano? I have a top of the line 2006 Murano now and they keep sending me letters saying they are desperate for 2006 Muranos. Just curious.It would take a lot for me to give up my Murano.Thanks for any info you guys have for me.

Whenever I walked into my dealer, they would always ask, want to sell your car/bike yet?

The salesmen are always looking for business, and they come out win/win on a new car purchase/trade-in.

You don't owe your dealer a thing, and they aren't acting in your best interests.

The Murano is a real SUV, which you should know. Big, spacious, and a heavy truck chassis/fuel appetite to go with it.

The Rogue is one of the few real crossovers on the market.It's smaller, based on a car platform and the fuel appetite that is much less than an SUV. It's not that much more expensive than your average car, yet offers decent interior space.

Mazda's CX-7 offers a LOT for similar money to the Rogue, and daresay it's just as nice or nicer than the rogue. Unfortunately Mazda bills the CX-7 (and CX-9) as crossovers when they are really SUV's. They're still big, heavy, and have poor mileage. They'd be good competition for the Murano

Not only that, but I think with the CV7 and the Murano, your looking at premium gas as being required, although some people say you only lose horsepower by using the lower octane.

Still with gas prices the way they are....

KL wrote:Not only that, but I think with the CV7 and the Murano, your looking at premium gas as being required, although some people say you only lose horsepower by using the lower octane.

Still with gas prices the way they are....

The Mazda CX7 does look nice IMO, but fuel economy and the premium fuel recomendation prevented me from even considering taking a test drive. Not to mention some negative posts for what they are worth at edmonds.com

I did seriously consider the Murano. I have liked it for years. The real deciding factors were MPG and cost. I could have afforded a Murano, but why stretch my walet when I really liked the Rogue. And I wasn't thrilled that an all new redesign with be out next year.

I do agree that it is hard to compare the Murano and the Rogue. There are some similarities and a lot of differences. I don't think Nissan was trying to target the same consumer with both vehicles. If you think you might like one better than the other, why not test drive them both.

I will say, now that I own the Rogue, I am really glad I didn't get a larger SUV. The size is perfect for me and my needs.

Murano = Maxima platform, front- or all-wheel drive (part-time)Rogue = Sentra platform, front or all-wheel drive (part-time)*for comparison - FX35/45 = G35 Sedan platform, rear or all-wheel drive (I do believe full-time, but don't quote me.)

The Rogue and Murano have very similar trim setups and very similar styling, but are totally different.

Seems more like a RDX vs MDX without the whole k series turbo thing.

The Murano just never did it for me as far as looks, but it really comes down to how many people are riding in your car.

for starters i cant stand the dash in the murano.

jsellberg wrote:for starters i cant stand the dash in the murano.

You, either? I've kept trying to figure out how an aftermarket stereo is going to fit in there. As many radios as I've had to replace under warranty, it'll be damn near impossible.

websfear wrote:http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm

2007 Murano - new numbers

FWD 18/23 AWD 17/23

....I'm pretty anxious to see what this new Mo will tip the scales at.

I'd read on the autoblog that a lot of the materials were lighter weight....factor this with a stronger engine (which already uses less gas in the Altima then the older model) and the CVT - I'm thinking there is a pretty decent fuel ecomoy story here......

One more consideration of Murano v. Rogue: Nissan will introduce a brand new, restyled Murano in a few months. If you buy a Murano now, it will look outdated shortly and you're buying technology based in 2003. If you buy a Rogue now, you get a brand new style and new technology...

My 2 cents.

-Jimmy

I should have been clearer ... I was referring to the '09 MO ... http://www.edmunds.com/insidel....html

Ah so... Isn't it amazing how the 09 MO looks like the Rogue, esp from the rear??

yeah.... too bad the rogue's front end doesn't look like the 09 Mo. I for one love that look much more. *sigh*

I did buy a Rogue and after a month in it, prefer it to my 2005 Murano. There is nothing wrong with the Murano but I wanted something a little smaller and more fuel efficient. Nissan could have easily detuned their 6 cyl engine to run on regular gas, look at Honda and Toyota. At first I was concerned about going from a 6 to a 4 cyl engine, but after a 1500 road trip I have to say I am more than happy with the Rogues performance. cruising is effortless and passing at highway speeds is more then adequate. The Rogue has a great feel to it and I enjoy the paddle shifters when driving on hilly terrain. The Rogue isn't really broken in yet and I'm already getting 29mpg highway and 24 city. I just did my first oil change putting in Mobil 1 and I'm sure the mileage will steadily improve. I think a lot of previous Murano owners will really like the Rogue as I do.