These two red sportsters sitting together at the curb gave me a hearty shout-out: Don’t think you can walk by without stopping to shoot us! They were right, of course. As different as they might seem at first blush (and most of us probably blushed or had some other neuro-vascular response the first time we laid eyes on the Juke), they really are a lot more similar than not. They’re both special versions of rather dull mainstream cars for those looking for extra zip and a bit of flair, of one kind or another.
This 1990 is the very last of this generation Escort, which got off to a rather shaky (literally) start in 1981. The early ones were somewhat knock-kneed and wobbly on their feet, and their engines asthmatic. And they felt a bit on the tinny side, all-round. But like most American cars of the non-classic era, they did get better with age.
The initial Escort’s 1.6 CVH (“Compound Valve Hemispherical”) engine betrayed its hemi-head design with all of 69hp. By 1990, it displaced 1.9 liters, and belted out 90 hp in standard trim, and whopping 110 hp in this GT. Happy days are here again, almost. The new gen2 escort that arrived in 1991 was Mazda 323 based, and a much better car in every respect, especially so in the DOHC 127 hp Mazda-powered GT.
But compared to the early ones, this 1990 GT felt a lot more planted on the ground, and its performance was at least decent, if not genuinely exciting.
Gone was the wretched four-speed overdrive manual, which in essence was a three-speed with overdrive fourth. With 69 hp on tap, it was a perpetual exercise in frustration, most particularly so in the Rocky Mountains where I had one as a rental in 1981. Yes, the overdrive fourth was great on long fast downhills…
But by 1990, that was a distant (bad) memory.
While the North American version of this generation Escort never equaled the rather nice Euro version, this final GT was at least a semi-reasonable facsimile.
We need to squeeze the Juke in here for its 15 seconds of fame at CC. I know folks just love to hate on it, but I’m rather more amused by its design antics. It just screams: don’t take me too seriously! Got it! And it’s apparently a ball to drive, with its 188 hp turbocharged engine and six-speed manual. And it’s actually been reasonably successful here; even more so in Europe.
It’s a bit hard to pin down just what category it fits in. I’m sure it would rather not be put into a box.
In any case, not the box that the Escort came in; it would never fit.
CC 1981-1990 Ford Escort: You Never Get A Second Chance To Make A Good First Impression PN
I don’t mind the Juke either. I don’t think I’d buy one but it’s got personality, and seems like a bit of a shout-out to the “Japanese Weird” designs of the 70’s.
I don’t have a lot of love for the standard Escorts of that generation either, but I always thought the GT looked good–the spoilers/sills/air dam and alloys actually worked well with the lines. There’s a GT that looks almost identical to this one–same faded red, same alloys–parked in “retirement” at the back of my wife’s aunt’s property, which always catches my eye when we go for a visit. That one has an asymmetrical, GT-specific grille though–wonder if that was gone by ’90 or if this one has a refit from a standard Escort.
I think the Juke is funny in a very French kind of way. Even the name implies you can’t take that Juke (joke?) seriously. It’s refreshing in a way that Japanese cars seldom are, it reminds me more of the frivoluous joviality one could see from marques like Simca or Renault. Perhaps it’s that Renault-connection that makes it? Anyway, they couldn’t care less that people think the design is polarizing or downright ugly. It’s its whole raison d’etre, it is made to be be talked about. Here I am, it says. I am fairly cheap and reliable transportation, and I don’t really take myself seriously doing very mundane jobs for you. Have a ride and a smile and enjoy your grocery shopping….
The trouble with a car like the Juke is that if you want to sell it, your potential buyers are limited. Even people who admire such a bizarre car often choose to admire it from a distance.
Hogwash, I say. In Europe, it’s a minor success. I say there are plenty of people that think it’s refreshing enough to actually buy it, even as a used car. Talking about baroque design language there are plenty of cars that are more polarizing. I’d say the Juke actually hits the sweet spot of being different enough for enough people to wanting it in enough numbers.
One place the Juke was taken seriously was over at Mercedes where the S class had a close facsimily of the rounded, flared wheel arches. The massive wheels of today jut out so much and take up so much of a cars side profile. Makes you long for the small wheels and wheelwells of the 80s.
Call me weird (it’s ok, everybody else does) but I like the Juke. Something charming about it.
I’d love a turbo AWD model, although I think that might only be available with the CVT 🙁 .
The Juke has been out long enough it almost blends into the automotive landscape.
I was going to say something similar…at first I was visually offended, much like I was with the Aztek and Element. It’s become neutralized over these past 5 years in that sense, and now my teenage daughter, heading into the driving years, really wants one. Gulp…this may happen if I can find a good used one down the road.
The Juke is a neat idea, but looks too much like a Pikachu for my tastes
I’d like the Juke a lot better as a car. And without the C-pillar door handles. You aren’t fooling anybody Nissan.
Totally agree, I remember when I was a kid there was a guy who brought a customized mid 60s “2 door” Ford to the local cruise night every week, and it was ridiculously clear the owner simply lathered bondo over the rear door seams and door handle holes to create that bodystyle out of a 4 door sedan. I don’t find any of the recent OEM examples of the same attempt to be any better executed than that mess, whether it be the Juke, Veloster, that Acura CUV thing, ect.
C-pillar handles are a Nissan tradition dating back to the first Pathfinder. They know they’re not fooling anyone, and are just doing it to be different.
…and they get dinged in CR every year because children can’t reach them. A rather stupid design cue IMO.
I don’t like those handles, either. Reminds me of 1980s-1990s GM.
One more positive vote for the Juke. I’ve liked it since it came out. The styling sure beats anything Toyota’s been foisting on us over the past several years. In fact, the Juke almost looks like the new Prius’ more shapely stepsister who was raised with better manners, thus wears her rather “untraditional” beauty with just a bit more understated elegance.
Would be more fitting if the Escort was a frogeye EXP, aesthetically speaking.
The thing that bugs me about the Juke is it’s consciously trying to look weird and quirky, directly targeting people trying to look weird and quirky: “oh look how fun I am”. Its not like an old Citroen, which were just as unique under the skin, the Juke is just a consciously goofy aesthetic draped over a totally conventional Nissan platform.
On the other hand, the Nissan is probably more reliable than any Citroen ever was. I think it’s quite honest in what it’s trying to portray, a casual dress over sensible mechanics. This isn’t a Citroen, this is a Nissan. A reliable Nissan with a friendly face. It is exactly what the buyers want, cheap and reliable transportation with a sense of fun. Just because it’s the sensible choice doesn’t mean it have to be boring…
Halloween costume over sensible mechanicals would be more accurate. Casual dresses by nature don’t scream “look at me!!!” like the Juke does, it’s a wild outfit over a wholly conventional car as much as one is over a wholly conventional person in late October. That’s not exactly honest.
Paul hinted that the Juke was based on an existing Nissan platform, but ran out of space to explain. Which platform?
At first, the Juke was kind of hard on the eyes, but I’m getting used to them more as time goes by.
The styling of that Escort GT has held up well. The Juke? Lets just say I hope we’re all here to discuss it 26 years from now. 😉
The Nissan-Renault B Platform. There’s so many cars built off this platform, I’m just going to send you to Wikipedia which has the full (long) list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_B_platform
Cool, thanks!
I see what you mean. That Nissan-Renault B family tree has lots of branches! 🙂
Doorhandle intergrated into the window frame. It’s like the Veloster I rented a few months ago. I loved that extra door and the car!
Somehow I’ve warmed to the 2016 Prius, beak Acuras, and even the Murano CrossCabriolet, but not the Juke. I do appreciate them trying to be different, though.
It is a bit of a bummer that no Jukes even the peppier one come with a stick shift. I have to deal with some Jukes at work and they remind me of a Versa Note on stilts due to parts bin sharing and other similarities. Jukes also have some interesting interior color(s) options and some bright exterior colors so while I am not a big fan at least Jukes add diversity to the roadways.
Oh, the Escort, well having been in Oregon a few years I have once again gotten used to seeing these 1st gens on the road since back in Tompkins County they vanished around April, 2004. The stickers are interesting and of course the red paint is typically faded.
“It is a bit of a bummer that no Jukes even the peppier one come with a stick shift”
Not true; both Nismo models come standard with a 6-speed stick (in the US, anyway).
Hallelujah!!
“ I owned a 88 1/2 GT” “ Not sure why anyone would own one unless they were blind AND stupid”
Fixed that for you.
Interesting to conjecture if the 1990 Escort was better or worse than the 1990 Europe Escort Mk4, which was unarguably well below class par on most objective factors, and very below par for many subjective factors. The Gilf, Rover 214, Astra easily munched it, but it did oeon the door for the new generatiopn of much better Fords, starting with the Mondeo in 1993.
IMHO, the less said about the Juke the better, except please buy one as its built in Britain!
Sorry; the US version is made in Japan.
I know this is a bit off topic, but there is an ’86 Escort wagon nearby with a (supposedly) running diesel engine and manual transmission to boot! And for under a grand! I’m intrigued and do miss my old wagon for hauling my pool chemicals in, BUT…how difficult would this be to find parts for?
http://lakeland.craigslist.org/cto/5589610561.html
Those are powered by a Mazda diesel, so I’d think pretty darn hard…
I drove a Juke for 10 days while my car was in the body shop. The ride was on the stiff side with no great gain in handling, the acceleration was not something to shout about with the turbocharger, and the headroom in the back seat was very tight for average size folks. Also, the inside of the fuel lid “recommended” Premium fuel.
Should my car get hit again by another person texting while driving, the Juke would not be on my rental car list.
My mom drove a pretty basic 1984 Escort with a 4 speed from 1989 until around 1994. I remember her letting me shift the gears from the passenger seat.
Anyway, I and she can confirm the gap between 3rd and 4th. There was a certain hill that always nearly killed that car. Shortly after we sold it was when I finally convinced my dad to buy a VW and I remember my mom being impressed by that 1973 Beetle because it would pull that hill in 4th gear, unlike 2nd in her Escort.
That being said, it was a good car for her. The only time it left us stranded was when some electronic module crapped out on Christmas day in I think 1990.
The Juke is a chic car. I rarely see a guy driving one. It might be fun to drive but there are better looking cars that are fun to drive. As for the Escort GT, nice try Ford. We had a used Mazda based Escort with the DOHC engine. Fun car to drive but my son and oldest daughter also drove it. So after three collisions involving those two the car, now 3/4 rebuilt by the same body shop, was rear-ended when I was driving on a Saturday afternoon.
Really a shame that was an Escort worth owning.
We really liked our Juke but it got rear-ended by a teen-age moron texting on her cell at 65 mph while we were stopped in traffic. Despite the car being totaled we were able to drive it the last couple miles to our destination. Would buy another… BTW the image at night of the car in my rear-view looked an awful lot like an air-cooled VW Beetle.
The Kings New Clothes!
People thought the 50’s tailfins were ugly. I consider the Nissan Juke to be truly hideous! A pair of fins might actually improve the looks.
I prefer my vehicles to have some degree of function and practicality in their styling. They don’t have to look like a packing-crate. But something that perhaps combines the chassis and drive-train of the Juke, with the body of that Escort, might interest me.
In a desperate attempt to not be boring, most of today’s car designers are falling over each other to see who can create the most grotesque vehicles. Cars like the Juke, Veloster, Smart, Fit, Murano, etc… leave me cold. I’d rather see something boring in my driveway, than these gnome-like, reptilian concoctions. Plus, the squashed roof-lines, massive pillars, and bizzarre windows also compromise interior space and block driver vision. It’s no wonder the government is now going to mandate rear view cameras in new cars.
Happy Motoring, Mark
In 1989 I went looking for a new car and stopped at a Ford dealer that had 2 GTs, both red. Yes, that red is/was an eye catcher. The 1st GT I looked at was on the showroom floor and when I got to the driver’s door and looked inside I was turned off. A LOT of folks had crawled in and out of that car. But the salesman brought the other GT around for me to look at/test drive. That one looked “factory fresh”, but when I got behind the steering wheel I realized the Escort was too small for a 6 foot 4 driver. (My knee all but got impaled on the steering column tilt stalk.)
The Juke is…..interesting, but finding one with a manual transmission in my area is next to impossible. I don’t mind the…..flamboyant (?) paint/color schemes.
Juke…bold statement, or just ugly duck? From almost any angle it seems to hurt ones eyes. As a Nissan fan in general , it hasn’t grown on me looks wise. Seems to me I’ve read it’s a good seller in many other countries , just not in the USA?
My wife’s cousin and his wife have a Juke as their second vehicle and they like it. The styling certainly stands out – even when the vehicle is white, as their Juke is.
I liked those Escorts when they were new, and the styling has held up well over the years, particularly the GT versions. The Escort lagged behind a contemporary Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla in refinement, but at least Ford made regular upgrades to the car throughout the decade. By the mid-1980s the Escort had evolved into a decent, reasonably reliable small car. There were several Escorts from the mid- and late-1980s in our family, and they all gave good, reliable service.
I owned the duplicate to the featured Escort GT. It was an 88 1/2, red with gray interior. I loved that car, but unfortunately it was ridden with problems, the worst being a water leak into the interior/rugs that could not be found and/or fixed. Eventually it was a buyback from Ford and I got a white ’89 to replace it. Loved that one too. Kept it for 2 years until the Mazda-based Escort GT came out in ’91. I special ordered an Ultra Blue one with a power moonroof and every option you could put in that car (except an automatic tranny). In many ways that car was superior to the Ford-based Escorts I had. But the sheet metal was horribly thin. If you leaned on that car it would dent. Seriously. And even though the ’91 had a zippier, lighter feel to it, the older Escorts felt more substantial. I kept the ’91 for about 2 years/50k miles and traded it for an Accord.
OK, the Juke appeals to me. Of course it does, it’s small, it’s odd, it has a reputation of being a half-decent driver’s car (in FWD/6-speed livery), it’s a far away from a brougham as you can get and still have four wheels. What’s not to like?
It’s on my possible list for this fall’s car hunting to replace the Mouse Car (’05 Scion xB). And it’s the only vehicle classified as an SUV/CUV that is. As long as I can find one with a manual.
As to the Escort, that brings back memories. I had an ’84 GT (or whatever they called the GT equivalent at the time). Four speed, sunroof, the Michelin TRX tyre option. Have fond memories of the car.
I hung around a Ford dealer for a few hours in the summer of ’86 (30 years ago! Seems like just a few months ago). Anyway, I drove the Escort GT as well as the 5.0 Mustang LX … the last year pre-fuel injection and “HO” for the latter. Both were fun to drive; the Escort not particularly refined but to me, sportier feeling in an American way than a Civic Si or VW GTI which I had driven. But my real purpose there was to buy a 4wd Ranger, and I did drive home in one.