Why is Nissan so slow to release new vehicle pricing?

[ex35]

Still waiting on detailed pricing info for the new Armada. Now, Nissan sends out an email saying available in the Fall when their website says summer 2017(obvious typo). Amateur effort, Nissan. Plus, the Armada page has numerous material errors.

What's up, Nissan?

[Bubba1]

Nissan's not allowed to alter dates? I just looked on Nissan's website and it now says "coming late summer". Since the first day of autumn is not until September 22nd. I presume "late summer" means mid September? So it appears you'll have to wait a few more weeks for that pricing. I'm Sorry.

To answer your question about why Nissan is later to release Armada pricing this year, I'm humbly guessing it's a combination of a few things, including that this a redesign year for the Armada which is more complicated (it was essentially unchanged for several years prior to 2017), or perhaps Nissan is checking to see what their competition is doing with their packaging/pricing before publishing theirs. I'm not sure.

[Jesda]

Don't worry. They don't make anything worth buying anyway.

[Bubba1]

I guess we'll soon find out if the redesigned Armada is an improvement over the old one.

[ex35]

I see Nissan must have read my post. They released 2017 pricing. 52k for a middle trim SL 4WD w/ no options. Damn, that's pricey. Worth it?

[Rogue One]

I see Nissan must have read my post. They released 2017 pricing. 52k for a middle trim SL 4WD w/ no options. Damn, that's pricey. Worth it?

Here's What Happens When The 2017 Nissan Titan And Armada Attempt To Off-Road
The Nissan Armada, though, is a big disappointment. Not because it’s bad off-road, but because it’s so close to being excellent. As we mentioned before, the new Armada sits on the same platform as the Patrol, a true off-road hustler sold overseas. But as Autoblog’s Alex Kierstien wrote, we here in the states are stuck with the soft version:

You can’t get locking front and rear differentials, you can’t get the trick sway bar disconnects for extra wheel articulation, and you are stuck with a suspension tune that caters to American on-road preferences. And you can’t get the Hydraulic Body Motion Control (HBMC) suspension system that links the four corners hydraulically, which reduces roll on-road and reduces harshness off. That’s on option on the Patrol, but it’s not in the cards for the Armada.

The result is a truck with very little articulation from the fully independent suspension.

[Bubba1]

I see Nissan must have read my post. They released 2017 pricing. 52k for a middle trim SL 4WD w/ no options. Damn, that's pricey. Worth it?

Good question. If Nissan corrected some of the previous Armada's glaring problem areas, like poor average reliability and bad gas mileage, and then price it aggressively compared to its direct competition, the answer is "perhaps". Reality is Nissan faces an uphill battle here . They have some very strong competitors with far better track records/reputations over many years. ( Toyota Sequoia and Honda Pilot).

Time will tell if Nissan finally got it right with the new Armada. The big question is whether you personally want to risk over $50,000 to find out first hand if they got it right. I can't answer that for you. If it were me, and I felt I had to buy a brand new full sized SUV right now, I'd probably lean toward a safer bet (not the Armada). Ask me again a year from now and my answer might differ.

[ex35]

For my family (I have 2 kids), it's come down to the Armada, Sequoia and Durango R/T (surprising, I know!). The Pilot felt like a slightly lifted Odyssey and didn't feel at all worth what Honda was asking (felt and drove like a sub 30K car, but priced at 45K). The Highlander was OK but nothing special. The Durango felt great, aside from some cheap interior trim. I have not yet driven the Sequoia.

[Bubba1]

A few thoughts. The Highlander is smaller than the other vehicles you mentioned and is essentially an SUV bodied Camry. So I agree, It's bland, but It does get better gas mileage and is probably the most reliable vehicle on your list, well, besides the Sequoia. I understand this newest version of the Durango is probably Chrysler's best ever, but that's not really saying a lot. I think you'll find Dodge/ Chrysler vehicles are thoughtfully designed and nice to drive especially when new. But that is offset by below average build quality and cheap components. It doesn't suck but I think it's a better vehicle to lease rather than buy. And depreciation tends to hit Durangos very hard. Good if you're buying one used, sucks if you're selling one. If the Pilot feels cheap, then perhaps you might consider the Acura MDX. It has a nicer personality yet based on the same platform. I have a good friend with one and have driven his a few times. It's V6 Is nice and torquey and is very comfortable. That MDX had a 6 speed automatic. I understand the newest ones have a 9 speed, I can't vouch for the 9, but that 6 speed was good. If you're planning to keep your next SUV years beyond the warranty, I would humbly suggest the MDX or Sequoia. Those two seem to stand out above the others. You'll find they cost more to buy but they hold their values better than their competition, and are more reliable on average. So if you want potentially less drama over a long period of time, they are compelling choices.

I faced a similar dilemma many years ago when I sought a new family SUV. Back then it came down to the Toyota 4 Runner and Ford Explorer. The Explorer was cheaper and had more luxury features. But I went for the more expensive Toyota. And after 17 yrs and a quarter million reliable miles I think I made the right choice.

Good luck with your choice.