1996 Nissan Serena FX 2.0 petrol

Summary:

Consummate all-rounder

Faults:

Nil mechanical breakdowns so far.

General Comments:

Great all round transportation, if a bit high on the fuel consumption.

Suspension and A/T work in all sorts of terrain, I've cruised down the motorway at 140Km/H, tackled windy rough rural roads and corners comfortably at 100, and roared down gravel potholed forestry tracks at 80.

Load space is massive with the centre seat rotated around to face to the rear and the rear seats hooked up at the sides.

My main dislike is the lack of power moving off. It'll keep the speed up once rolling, but it accelerates pretty sluggish.

With all the rear seats folded flat a double bed mattress can be fitted in, turning it into a real shag-waggon, or comfortable overnight camper for long trips.

Overall a great all-rounder small van/large people mover.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 1st January, 2006

18th Feb 2006, 03:54

It's me again, after another 10,000+Km and a tune up a few more comments on my Serena. Fuel consumption has come down a bit to a more reasonable level, 10.1L per 100Km on fairly hilly terrain, and the acceleration is better. I'm much happier with it now :)

I've had over half a ton in the back and it carry's it without problems, but it did need the AT in power mode.

View 3 more comments

1994 Nissan Serena 1.7

Summary:

Good workhorse

Faults:

Poor design for carrying out a service as you have to undo the center consuole to be able to get to the engine bay.

General Comments:

We find it very comfortable for a van.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 25th June, 2005

1994 Nissan Serena 2L petrol Fulltime 4WD

Summary:

Fuel thirsty - people mover

Faults:

The van keeps conking out, especially at low revs, i.e. when stopping at lights.

Very bad fuel economy. 6.5k / litre city driving.

Having allowed for the fact that it is full-time 4WD, I still feel that this is extremely thirsty.

8k / litre on a long haul drive.

Have had the van put onto a computer analyser, which indicated that the Crank Angle Sensor was faulty. Had to replace this - was quoted NZ$1250 plus installation for this part (by Nissan), ended up putting a second hand distributor in, as the crank angle sensor is enclosed in this unit. Second hand unit cost NZ$250 installed.

The van has not conked out since (has only been two weeks).

Was told that this would improve the fuel economy - which it hasn't.

The passenger window fails to open with the drivers controls. Apparently the connector unit has failed. Cost of repair will be approximately NZ$250.

General Comments:

The Dickie seat is very uncomfortable.

Wouldn't want to travel more than 10km sitting on it.

Really is a 7 seater.

Sliding door very hard to close on a slight hill.

Feels very spacious, comfortable driving, although not very powerful.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 19th March, 2003

21st Mar 2010, 04:13

The reason this vehicle is so thirsty is due to a poor power/weight ratio ie large weight and small motor. Combine this with a van drag coefficient (box shape) and it is underpowered. These type of vehicles were built with a small motor and narrow dimensions to avoid car owners in Japan paying a higher tax.

In reply to 21st Mar 2010, 04:13

8th Jun 2015, 22:55

Just to correct a previous contributor.... the 'van' shape of the Serena is in fact extremely aerodynamic. You need to read up a bit on vehicle dynamics to understand why. The curved rear styling is in fact more likely to create turbulence and drag than any other design feature (a Kamm tail would be a better solution).

The engine choices were poor for the usage, and the combustion chamber design was very old-hat as well, resulting in their dreadful economy and general performance.

As a vehicle, though much ridiculed by motoring pundits at the time, it has much to commend it, including reasonable comfort, ease of use, utility and general dynamics. Allied to Japanese engineering excellence, reliability was never a feature of concern. Many owners have completed starship mileages with very little going wrong and only normal maintenance being required.

1993 Nissan Serena FX 2.0 turbo diesel

Summary:

Great family wagon

Faults:

Nothing as yet.

General Comments:

Excellent value as a large family wagon.

Excellent economy for the size, 35mpg touring.

Great equipment with twin climate-control air-con and electric everything else.

Surprisingly powerful for a small diesel. Can comfortably cruise and overtake at 100 km/h.

With the engine set well back in the chassis, it is a great deal more sure-footed than the height and narrow track would suggest. Not a sports car but just fine for general use.

Down-sides: Eight seat belts are a bit optimistic; it is a comfortable 6 seater. The dickey seat is only good for short trips. The front seats aren't that supportive on a longer trip The engine is noisy with an annoying boom around 90km/h.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd July, 2001

16th Dec 2001, 17:02

It had to be too good to be true. The cam belt broke ahead of schedule completely wrecking the head and valve gear. Ignoring the 6 week battle I had with MTF insurance to get this paid for; I learned that this model does have a nasty little design feature.

The engine bay (under the seats) is so cramped that Nissan fitted the engine with a secondary belt off the back of the camshaft to drive the injector pump. In their wisdom they also printed the timing marks on the belt. These wear off in time. So, if your mechanic lost the timing when he removed the head, there is no option but to replace the belt with a new one. Of course, this is twice as expensive as an ordinary one and it wasn't covered under the above policy.

All in all this repair cost nearly $3000!

View 32 more comments