I know we often have the privilege of driving some really rad cars, but sometimes, it's refreshing to drive a car-shaped, car-flavored car.
As I write this on the final day of March 2026, the average new car purchase price in the U.S. is just about to roll over the $50,000 mark. Sure, that average is moved up by a lot of $80,000 trucks and SUVs, but the reality is there’s very little on the lower end to keep that number from ballooning even further away from a realistically affordable level.
But, dang it, the Nissan Kicks is trying.
At $35,515 for our AWD SR-trim test vehicle, that still seems like a lot of money, considering what that figure could have bought less than a decade ago, but 2026 gonna 2026, and among what’s sitting on lots these days with a warranty and aggressive financing available, it’s downright reasonable.
Fortunately, the Kicks gives you some ROI on that spend, at least in the features department. As a car, the Kicks does feel a bit rudimentary–a competitor like the Mazda CX-5 feels better dynamically and structurally–but at this price point in the market it’s got little direct competition.
The aforementioned Mazda, or something from Toyota like a RAV4 or a Honda CR-V, is going to add at least a few thousand bucks to that MSRP feature for feature, and while the Nissan may not feel like the most advanced platform among its peers, the amenities list is nonetheless impressive.
Our test car–as are most cars in media fleets–was loaded to the gills with stuff like a huge moonroof, Bose audio, heated seats and steering wheel, adaptive cruise, as well as the fanciest mats and cargo covers padding the sticker that could easily be skipped at a dealership to knock a substantial amount from the bottom line. Loading a Honda or Toyota with all those features will take you near the $40k mark, so if it’s functions you’re after, Nissan is delivering.
The base Kicks starts at $22,430. It doesn’t feature all-wheel drive like our test car but gets the same engine.
As I mentioned, though, the dynamic product does lag behind its competitors a bit. On the freeway, the Kicks feels a bit floaty and imprecise, particularly over grooved concrete, which we have more than a bit of on Florida Interstates to promote drainage during summer storms.
That floatiness triggers a lot of intervention from the lane centering system, which means you’re better off actively maintaining your heading, which kind of defeats the purpose of that particular assist.
Power-wise, 141 horsepower from a 2.0-liter connected to a CVT driving all four wheels isn’t a recipe for sportiness–even if the CVT has fake gear steps to make you think it’s actually switching ratios. But it is a fine recipe for efficiency, even with AWD.
Clearing 30 mpg in mixed driving is a piece of cake, and it’s nice knowing those savings on the front end also come with savings on the day-to-day operation.
So, look, the Kicks isn’t going to knock anyone’s socks off in the dynamics or panache department, but at least you’ll still be able to afford socks. It’s nice knowing that even at what is considered the bargain end of the spectrum you can still find heavily featured vehicles, which, if we’re being honest, is what most new car buyers are looking for these days.
I know we often have the privilege of driving some really rad cars, but sometimes, it's refreshing to drive a car-shaped, car-flavored car.
Last year when I spent some time in the Kicks I enjoyed how just okay it was at everything. Just the basics of SUV that works, nothing fancy.
In reply to Colin Wood :
But it is not a car.
BTW, how does it look lowered? 
Yeah, the Nissan Kicks is basic, but is that so bad?
No but 2 stars out of 5 is, and it's not car shaped
The aforementioned Mazda, or something from Toyota like a RAV4 or a Honda CR-V, is going to add at least a few thousand bucks to that MSRP feature for feature
Wouldn’t the CorollaCross and the HRV be the more appropriate cross-shopping offerings from Toyota and Honda?
In reply to sleepyhead the buffalo :
I would agree, an AWD HRV LX is $3565 more MSRP to MSRP to a Kicks S AWD. The Corolla Cross L AWD is $5375 more. That’s $70 and $104 a month on a 60 month loan. Thats a big difference for someone looking for a cheap(ish) car.
CVT?
I had a Kicks as a rental for a week and a half in Costa Rica two years ago. Yes, it is a car that does car things, but there are better choices, especially if you live in a hilly area (which is what Costa Rica is). The ratio spread on the CVT is terrible, starting at very tall at the low end and too short on the high end. Going up steep hills, the car struggled mightily because it was like starting out in third gear. Going down those hills things weren't any better, because there was no way to gear down and get some compression braking. That meant that you were constantly riding the brakes down steep hills. I never had the brakes fade, but CR has enough very steep grades that I was often pretty worried about it.
Also, for me the seat was very uncomfortable, with no lower back or bottom support.
I was glad to get out of it when our trip ended.
In reply to RacerBoy75 :
This generation or the last generation? Redesign for 2025 is a completely different car vs the 2024 and older.
sleepyhead the buffalo said:The aforementioned Mazda, or something from Toyota like a RAV4 or a Honda CR-V, is going to add at least a few thousand bucks to that MSRP feature for feature
Wouldn’t the CorollaCross and the HRV be the more appropriate cross-shopping offerings from Toyota and Honda?
I struggled with this for a while, and eventually decided that with its size and list of features it's trying harder to play in the compact SUV space than the subcompact crossover space. But maybe that's more an indication that the entire genre is crowded with vehicles that could go in multiple categories.
Displaying 1-10 of 14 commentsView all comments on the GRM forums
You'll need to log in to post.
