1999 Nissan Serena Reviews

1999 Nissan Serena SLX from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission Manual
Performance marks 2 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 0 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
2.0 / 10
Distance when acquired3 miles
Most recent distance7420 miles

Summary:

I would have to be paid to drive one

General Comments:

I didn't own this vehicle, it was a new pool vehicle. If I had bought it I would have sent it back immediately.

Driving the Serena was like driving a tank, heavy and noisy.

The engine was really noisy and made normal conversation impossible in the vehicle.

I got severe backache on journeys of anything over 20 minutes. It didn't matter how I adjusted the seat. I also got cramp when driving in town and having to use the clutch a lot.

Rear seat passengers complained that on longer journeys the seating position was uncomfortable for their legs.

I don't know who thought up the daft idea whereby you have to fill up the oil under the drivers seat, it is just not practical at all.

The fuel consumption was terrible, averaged 29 mpg.

On the good side though, the visibility was better than in other vehicles of a similar size and type. No obvious blind spots.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 7th June, 2006

1999 Nissan Serena slx 2.3 diesel from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 2.3 diesel Manual
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.3 / 10
Distance when acquired77000 miles
Most recent distance93000 miles
Previous carVolvo 240

Summary:

The worst I have ever driven

Faults:

Head gasket blew at 93000 told they invariably crack had to have new head

Water pump at 93000

Replacement pipes to clutch fluid at 86000

Replacement leaf spring driver side at 78000.

General Comments:

Incredibly uncomfortable

Pathetic fuel consumption (28mpg for a diesel)

Can't handle hills.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 12th May, 2006

12th Mar 2011, 18:59

I think you would have been better off with a 2.0L engine. Basic, but not nearly as many problems, and fuel economy of about 30-35 mpg, which is good for a vehicle that size.

Average review marks: 2.6 / 10, based on 2 reviews