no kidding. 10 years ago everyone praised my old car's engine for having 103 hp on a 1.4 liter 4 cylinder, now that's fully and truly obsolete already, (even considering it was naturally aspirated) that figure is still pretty low for today's standards.
As much as everyone would like to see high performance cars with such testing I appreciate the carwow team and matt for doing such real world test on a rather inexpensive cars because these things matter more to us normie people than it does to someone driving an rs5, quadrofolio or x5.
What Toyota did you mean? 80s? Yes, you're right. Nowadays? No, they are very expensive, a lot of issues (millions of recalls), most of the people buy them because of the legend behind, but those days are gone. The only thing, their hybrids still the best fuel economy but honestly, when you pay 50+ k who is interested in 1...1.5l/100 km less?
I don't know how many Romanians stop by to leave comments, but figured I might as well do my part. The Jogger's (and the Logan MCV's) ancestor, the old Dacia 1310 Break was infamous for being used in a far more gruelling manner than what your test entailed. Being based on the Renault 12 platform, it got a carburated 1.3 liter iron-block that maybe cracked 60HP on a good day or when new. The whole car, being from a time before extensive safety features, came in at less than 1 ton (I think it was 950kgs). As getting a car was quite the big deal in Romania prior to the 1989 Revolution, and for quite a bit of time after that until the late 90s, people tended to use their hard-earned vehicle for basically everything. You would see those Dacia Breaks on every road and in every village filled with their own weight in potatoes, cabbages, corn, sacks of flour, cement, anything you can think of. Even then, people would put roof-racks on them and strap crazy things on top as well, like whole sofas, armoires, huge stacks of hay. No one ever gave it a second thought. If you drove behind one, the suspension was so low that the wheel arches would cover the top part of the rear tires, and people sometimes put solid rubber pieces as bump-stops to prevent the springs and shocks coming up through the wheel-wells. And the crazy part wasn't even doing it on a 1.3 carbed engine with a 4 speed that had no over-drive, it was doing it in all manners of weather on brakes the size of a small plate. Since the Dacias only ever came in one wheel size (which was a 13 inch steel rim), the front discs were tiny, and the rears were the same drums that had been engineered for it since 1969. For all the ludicrous lack of safety, people loved them, and still do to this day. Needless to say, I also own one, though it's only the sedan version in which you have to get a bit creative if you're trying to make use of all the available space :P
There was nothing wrong with the Renault 12, on which the Dacia 1310 is heavily based. I used to prepare new R12s for sale in 1971 when I was 17 and I used to drive them regularly. They were quite lightly built, but they were comfortable,nice enough to drive and as you say the break/estate car was extremely roomy. As a car for Romania to build under licence it was a pretty good choice. Few cars had five gears back then, nobody was that bothered. My first car was a Renault 4 with three gears 😆
@@timhancock6626 Awesome! And thanks for sharing that! You're right, no one cared very much about the 4-speed, and a 5th gear was only added towards the 90s, which helped a bit with the fuel economy. And because it was literally added onto the existing gear set, you had to kind of wiggle the gear-stick into it to select 5th :)))
I was in Hungary back in 2008 i think and a "truck" Dacia with home made wooden sides (like in old timey American pick up trucks) was packed at least four cabbages higher than the roof of the cabin, with cabbages. It was riding lower than a pimp's car, but it was still doing highway speeds, gunning it towards Romania. A lot of these tests are... really weird in the sense that IRL... you wouldn't expect to see a BMW upside down in the bed of a Ford transit bed-van either, but it does happen, and they do work.
Wow I'm really surprised and impressed. Basically a 50% weight increase only added 24% to the 0-60 time and no effect on the braking distance! Like the previous comment I would really love to see the same done in a high performance car!
more weight adds more grip. but don't think it's the same, brakes pads got hotter each time he added weight and would be much closer to fading and failing with more weight. it does make a difference, and it's not subtle, just not straightforward. unless you're going downhill, then it'll be very straightforward and easy to notice. as for the acceleration, yeah, it's okay on straights. go test uphill and see what the REAL problem is.
@@purwantiallan5089 nonsense. My granddad drove to italy for vacation every year, and in the beginning they used a beetle with 18hp. And a roof tent. Yeah, you’ll might not be able to drive 90 up the hill with a dacia if it’s full, but 60-70 mph are possible every time and place
Having the same braking distances for different weights is a great sign. It means that the brake themselves are good enough and that the limiting factor is the tires. When you have more weight, there is more inertia and the car wants to go further, but also the force of friction between the tires and the ground is bigger because there is more weight on the tires. So as long as the brakes and ABS work well the tires compensate and you should get the same distance (at least on dry ground)
For a single stop (70 -> 0) there's almost no car out there that will overheat its brakes. The problem comes if you do it all the time, like a racetrack. I bet the Jogger's brakes will not last too long then ... but the good news is there are relatively few people racing 7 seat 1 litre family SUVs.
@@tomsixsix I would be worried driving this car for a family trip on the mountain: tiny engine to go up, and not sure about the brakes going down. No need for racing to stress the brakes
Not just the sheer weight but also where it was. Basically they added more weight to the rear of the car as they got it fuller which shifted some braking to the rear wheels.
This has been one of the most interesting automotive tests I've seen in a while. I'd love to see how other affordable cars stack up, both petrol and diesel, manual and auto, etc. Cheers!
@Christopher Armstrong yes..."most boring" but affordable!!!! Get an Audi R.S 6 IF YOU LIKE TO BEE NOT BORING!! THIS IS THE SOLUTION!!! SPEND 120.000-180.000 EUROS AND YOU GOT THE SOLUTION !!! IT S SIMPLE!!! FOR YOU CRISTOPHER ARMSTRONG!!! 🤥 🤏🧠 OR YOU ARE NOT SO "...STRONG" 🤣🤣😷😷😷
Back in 2010, i was travelling Romania with my basketball team mates in a 7-seater Dacia Logan MCV. Our heights are between 198 cm - 205 cm or approximately 6 foot 6 - 6 foot 8 and we didn't have absolutely any issues, except for looking like circus clowns once we all got of the car.
@@Zombot619 that’s the copy of the old Dacia Lodgy, that model is discontinued as far as I know, Dacia jogger replaces Dacia Logan MCV which is also discontinued
Seriously? The car barely got up the hill at higher weights. This thing is a deathtrap would you take it on holiday in Austria or any other hilly country.
I was crying while you were torturing the car with 1967 kilos trying to climb.. You were really cruel to the clutch. I can smell the burn of the clutch and the tires from here..
@@carbrickscity well not really actually. A/T actually robs a bit more engine power than M/T i've driven 2 identical car with the exact same engine with the only difference being one of them has manual 5 speed and the other is 4 speed auto. And the manual one drives up the hill easier than auto. In the auto sometimes i have to put pedal to the floor just to maintain speed. The type of the auto transmission is also matter. For example Suzuki's AGS might also burn the clutch on that kind of scenario and some cvt transmission can actually overheats when doing a hill climb for an extended time.
Yes i agree, in that kind of situation an auto would probably be better. Provided that the engine is able to output enough power. It all comes down to each cars configuration and personal preferences really. Edit: typo
@@carbrickscity i don't think that it would climb the hill with this ammount of load when the first gear in auto is longer than the first in the manual
Yes, ze german here. Please keep in mind, that the maximum additional weight for the Jogger is specified at 582kg. Your 1967kg is a full 105 kg over the maximum total weight of 1862kg.
Thank you for pointing this out. I'm sure it says the maximum load somewhere on the car (in the US its in the drivers door sill) I'm impressed with the braking performance even being very overloaded.
We honestly need to see this kind of testing more often, especially with MPVs and SUVs. For sure more expensive cars with more powerful engines will be faster, but what I'm curious to know is the performance drop on such powerful cars when loaded with 7 people and 200kgs of sand.
They don’t offer the 1.2 anymore in the Polo. It’s just the 1.0 TSI now which is a brilliant engine for a 3 cilinder and a very lovely car to drive. Much rather have a VW than a Dacia.
@@gicugigel3790 I’m very careful with my cars, I change oil often and don’t beat them hard when the engine is cold. I highly doubt I’m going to run into reliability issues with my car.
I had a Toyota Hillux 2.5 diesel, 5 people in it and the skiing gear, struggled up on a pretty steep climb on dry tarmac. Honda civic IX tourer: every time I used the clutch on steep climb, I got the smell. So I'm impressed with the Dacia.
@@davidgibson4840 There is no scam. The Hillux was a tank, the Honda was everything, regarding its reliability, what people are talking about it. But I'm also impressed with what Dacia has to offer for a cheap car.
@11:02 The braking distance was not affected by weight because the maximum force that can be transferred between tyre and road is (simplyfied) proportional the the weight that sits on the tyre. So if the car gets heavier also the breakingforce increases. If you would do multiple brake tests in a row of course the breaks would not last that long on the loaded car
So by analogy.... 400kg extra- same stopping.... 800kg extra- same stopping... I don't know about that... The ideal tire/asphalt highest friction coefficient is almost 1...(.9 i believe)... I think that means you can only decelerate/accelerate with up to a max hypothetical 1G. So no matter how much weight you apply, you can't decelerate at a rate higher than 1G(this weight also contributes to your forward momentum/inertia)... That being sad, there's a point where enough weight applied, exceeds the capacity of that tire and would require a larger contact surface(wider tires)... When that is achieved, then the friction coefficient drops and the distance increases... And even when the tires are matched, I believe the only way to exceed 1G deceleration is if you have extra downforce applied separate from system mass(aero, spoiler deployment). This separate downforce would enable higher than 1G rate deceleration.... This is just me, I'm not looking for a debate
agree, it did good. the 2 tone test on the hill test is kind of 0.001% real life situation.. People still won't accept 3cyl engines, as long as they could buy a SH 400k miles 1.9 diesel
Good video I really like the Dacia cars! Ond thing though: The max. Load capazity of a Jogger according to Dacia is 426 Kg! And you exceeded that by almost 400 Kg.
Let’s be totally honest Dacia are the ONLY manufacturer to offer anything approaching value for money, all other manufacturers without exception take us all granted 😡😡😡
Having the consumption that low (gpl variant) I am satisfied for this practical family vehicle. And I love the ground clearance. Truly versatile (specially for my country roads). Very useful tests, great job! Please adopt the metric sistem :D
@@MartinLV.I am confident that it will not exceed the cost of petrol per mile/kilometer. I don't have nostradamus genealogy, so yes it remains to be seen. don't get me wrong, I would go for an EV now if I could afford it... Looking forward to the hibrid motorizari on, I hope that is going to have regenerative breaking (and still hope that it will be a Plug in Hibrid Electric Vehicle...
Thing is, this is the UK and its a UK channel so we used imperial and that's the British way, although we can do both metric wins. So no adopting metric stuff to appease those that only do metric 😉
I have test driven the Jogger and I also wondered what it would be like loaded up. No need to be concerned, yes it was a slower car but it's not as slow loaded up as i had expected. The little engine does need to be reved up but it's 3 cylinder nature loves it. above 2,500 rpm it pulls quite well
This little engine needs to be revved because it simply lacks power at lower rpm. My 4 cylinder makes no power until turbo kicks in at 1600-1800rpm and for normal daily driving I'm constantly in the 2000-3000rpm range simply because it's so slow.
@@CoreMaster111 i drive a turbo diesel, 1.5dci and you also need to be at 2000rpm or more for best torque...so this isn't bad at all for tiny 3 cilinder petrol
@@CoreMaster111 my 1,4l Petrol Turbo with 140Hp loves crusing arround 1500-1700 but for acceleration or hill driving you need to keep the rpm high. and dint get me started with 4 adults as occupants
@@lazarjanjusevic3 Yes, but what I'm trying to say is that these small engines don't like to be revved any more than bigger and more powerful engines. You just have to rev small engines more to get decent usable power out of them.
@@bastik.3011 For cruising 1500rpm is fine obviously but if you need to accelerate even slightly then you need to drop a gear to get into usable power which is at higher rpm. My project car with a V8 just goes no matter what rpm you are at. Even at 1000rpm if you press accelerator, it goes. And technically speaking it also likes to be revved because it's not an old diesel engine with red line at 3000 or something like that. It seems that OP to who I replied originally assumes that small petrol engines like to be revved more than any other size petrol engines, which is obviously not true.
The brake test was interesting but makes sense from a physics perspective. As you add more weight to the car, there is more force pressing the tires against the road, so they are able to provide more acceleration/deceleration force without slipping. The additional weight in the rear of the vehicle also allows the rear brakes to be more useful, since the rear brakes actually provide very little stopping force on an unladen FWD vehicle since the vast majority of the weight transfers onto the front tires during a hard stop.
I really wasn't expecting the brake performance to be identical with all that added weight. Well done Dacia! I remember when they did a similar test with a Fiat Panda on Top Gear the results were a LOT worse than this. This could be a new test / review to add on a regular basis for other cars as well because I am really curious how having more people in the car affects the performance of pretty much every car, not just cheap ones but also high performance cars.
could be the effect of cold brakes at the beginning and getting warmer during the brake tests, also: more downforce on the tires help them to get more friction on the ground and more contact area (they didn't increase tire pressure when they were fully loaded I assume). These two factors can equalize the other effect, weight has during braking. The test from Top Gear with a Fiat Panda was a 0-70-0 test and I think most of the added meters when fully loaded was due to the acceleration phase, not the braking.
@@AndREDrautActually, the brakes of a car are neccessarily dimensioned according to the max weight allowed, such they deliver the same results. As you already mentioned, the effect of more friction adds to the grip on the road.
@@AndREDraut in a first order approximation, tyre friction scales linearly with the normal force of the pavement on the tyre. The normal force is equal to the force of the weight of the car pushing down on the tyre. Thus, in this first order approximation, if the brakes are strong enough, weight does not matter for braking distance. What we see here is that the brakes are indeed strong enough for an emergency stop when fully loaded and that even when braking while fully loaded, tyre grip is the limiting factor, not brake strength. In addition to warmer brakes, the tyres might also be warmer, which can make them grip better. However, in real world driving, the brakes could overheat much faster when loaded so heavily, leading to brake fade and loss of braking performance. I think this is the real danger.
First, the animations are really good, you have great editors. Second, I like that you added the fuel economy in L/100Km, so I don't have to calculate on my own ❤
That pull is quite brutal and I also experienced that due to the total weight of my car + my family (4 people including me) are weighing at 1912 kg, I am having trouble and even stalling when ascending (the steep is quite higher than 25% in the area which we used the car) and my parents are overreacting that I cannot carry them all! I'll show this to them to prove my point that the car will have trouble when it comes to steep hill climbing with the car I have (95 hp and 132 nm).
@@GexxxTV you may need to check if this isn't against the driving rules in your country but I usually use the handbrake to "build-up" torque instead of holding the car with the brake pedal then release it slowly as if it were a clutch, work wonders with small engines on big inclines, but you need to be careful not to let the car "squat" before releasing the handbrake suddenly unless you plan to take off like an 80's car chase movie
In case anybody is wondering why the breaking distance is always the same: Since friction force is the essential, but not entire cause for the breaking, and since its formular is FR=µ*FN (with µ being the friction coefficient which depends on the material of the tire which didn't change throughout all tests, and FN being a constant weight force 9,81 m/s on the earth surface), the weight of the car itself is neglectable.
Great test. Genuinely surprised by the braking test - what was gained in weight was made up for by increased traction. I guess downforce is the key to achieving great braking performance. The impact on handling and acceleration was to be expected. Also, I think AWD would have made a big difference, particularly in the hill climb as weight transfers to the rear wheels.
For 7 seated adult people this 1l 3 cylinder engine did extremely well. I remember I couldnt get Opel Astra 1.4l turbo moving up the fking hill from the spot with 2 people seated.
@@tinnitustq dude...There is a 2.0 Astra VXR or Astra OPC depending on where you are... And it's a turbo with 280hp! Driven them on track and it's pretty good. Still, 1.4NA rentals omfg ..No power and not even that efficient
Would be interesting to see the same tests, but what's happening when you change tires pressure, i.e. from 1.8 Bar to 2.8 Bar every 0.2 Bar or something similar and see how that affects 0-60, 60-0, fuel economy, etc.
Finally some effectively smart reviews of normal and usable (buyable ) cars. I mean "smart" because they appeal to a lot more people than niche performance cars, and that's very good for RUclipsrs. Most of people don't have money to buy amazingly brilliant sports cars. Nice family cars that are made as modes of transportation and not as toys for rich grown children to toy with (doesn't matter if im one of them or not). I love big HP and torque cars, mainly ICE cars but you don't drive your family on holidays on a GT3. For a motor vehicle guy, I do apreciate normal cars as much as sports cars (and motorbikes etc), Great review.
I remember being a kid in the 1960s and my dad somehow taking six of us on holiday in his tiny Austin A35 .... all the suitcases on the diddy roof rack. This reminded me of that!
In late 70s and 80s my father had domestic car "Zastava Confort" 1977 which had 1.1 liter 55HP engine and he drived with that my mom ,me, sister ,so many stuff and towed Adria Caravan for 4 people that weight same as car to holidays on seaside . Now that would be suicide
See the video by Bjørn Nyland on exactly this. From a single test there was no statistical difference over a real world driving test for a empty car and the same EV loaded to its max curb weight (400kg of screen wash !?)
The triber here in India is a worst version of this dacia jogger. It's smaller under sub 4m category for a 7 seater. Mileage is pretty much same or worse than this jogger with a naturally aspirated 1L petrol engine. A turbo petrol would soove this issue and renault should bring this into India. It has all the ingredients that the triber lacks. A powerfull turbo petrol engine. It fixes the shortcomings of the triber and a little bit of space makes it more comfortable than the Triber indeed. It has taillamps pretty similar to Suzuki Ertiga. It also looks like that and it sells like a queen.
During the 70mph fuel economy test, maybe you should've pumped up the tires to compensate the increase in weight. That would've reduced rolling resistance to some degree and helped with fuel economy
@@danielpark5575 Yes it would be even more valid. Since thats what youre supposed to do according to owners manual. You always adapt tire pressure to the cars weight. Of course.A car that weights 2000kg will have higher recommended tire pressure than a car weighting 1000kg if they have same tires.
It’s what SHOULD be done on all cars if you follow the manual, but not many people would adjust the tyre pressures when they pick everyone up in the real world
when starting uphill, you need to handbrake-start to make it easy on the clutch + less wheelspin for traction. Mandatory with the car fully loaded. That being said, I agree that engine is way too underpowered for that kind of test. Maybe if it had more torque. Like a diesel. I think a diesel option would have been a good choice for this car..
This is an important test for me to know now, as I'm driving to the West Midlands in a few weeks time with two passengers and some luggage in my 1.1L Honda Jazz. Thanks Mat!
⬆️⬆️⬆️ thanks for watching and showing love Congratulations you have been selected as one of the shortlisted winners.. Send a message to my team above to claim your reward .🎁 🎁🎁🎁🎁
No worries if your rear suspension are okay. I used my 1.2 Jazz to move to another home. Front passenger and rear seats down makes for enough room for loads of stuffs.
The car is very good from a technical point of view. Speaking of which, other much more expensive cars cannot do what Dacia did in this video. I would buy it without hesitation!!
I think the reason the stopping distance wasn't affected is because the tires were the limiting factor. i think the car can do more, but the tires are holding it back. That's pretty good tho weight doesn't seem to effect breaks in this instance
Excellent video, reminds me of the time I drove the wife to go shopping at the next town, I was stuck behind a tractor on the main road and pulled out to overtake and accelerated and it took longer than usual and we just made it passed the tractor by the seat of our pants, the Mrs was not pleased and let me know all the way round the shops, when we got back to the car I opened the boot to put the shopping in and to my surprise it was full of grow bags! the Mrs had bought from the garden centre the day before and had forgotten to get them out. She got both barrels from me.
⬆️⬆️⬆️ thanks for watching and showing love Congratulations you have been selected as one of the shortlisted winners.. Send a message to my team above to claim your reward .🎁 🎁🎁🎁🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁
@@martinsvensson6884 you are wrong. Its torque in this scenario. HP is torque x rpm. Its work done over time. If the engine is weak (low torque) you will not move. Why do you think trucks have a lot of torque but relatively low HP?
@@blackwidow7804 No, physics and reality is always right :) The formula doesnt suddenly change just because you go below a certain mph. Please understand that without me having to explain that to you... Its the same with trucks. Only hp matters. But you might not want a high reving engine for different reasons... You might want the engine to be able to deliver good hp without reving it.
ofcourse the braking distance is going to be the same, the extra weight adds grip, canceling out the effect of extra weight doesnt matter if you added 30 tons of weight aslong as the brakes are sufficient there wont be a change in stopping distance
I think the joger did realy good for only a 1 liter engine with forwed traction . Next year with the 1.6 liter mild hybrid this car is going 2 be perfect for a large famili that is stript on cash . It might be biest from me because i em a dacia fan boy.
i reckon the hybrid will be perfect for it. i have driven the Clio E-tech and was very impressed by how good it was. I was ready to be disappointed but the hybrid system blew me away. Renualt were late to the game with there hybrid system but they've properly developed it and it was works amazingly well.
I'm impressed by how small of an effect the added weight caused; at least to me. I hope that you'll be including mileage(fuel consumption) figures in litres per 100 km in all other videos as you've done on this one. Hope the next video is of the same test for a family SUV like a 7 seater Honda CR-V.
The braking test shows the laws of physics in action: If you increase weight you increase traction, and if you increase traction you increase the max braking force. As both the mass to decelerate and the braking force available both increase proportionally, the braking distance remains the same.
⬆️⬆️⬆️ thanks for watching and showing love Congratulations you have been selected as one of the shortlisted winners.. Send a message to my team above to claim your reward .
I bought a Dacia Jogger top spec because I was looking at other cars around the £40k mark and they were just not worth the price. My Jogger is bloody brilliant for the price. I've had it 4 months now with no issues and I've used it for tip runs, long distance drives an the school runs etc etc. Oddly the car pulls just as well with 7 people in as it does with just myself in the car. It's witchcraft. I am so happy because I got this car brand new for £19500 (I spent about £1000 on almost all of the accessories available in that price) and I have tonnes more money left over each month for saving and spending. It's hands down one of the best purchases I have ever made in my life and I feel like a right fool for being such a badge snob before. 2 things I don't like about the Jogger: The Kumho tyres the car comes with are crap, swap them over ASAP. Secondly the sound system is a bit naff, but it is clear and loud. Bass is virtually none existent. Other than those TWO things it is brilliant on every conceivable way. A nice perk if you have kids that like computer games, I have the rear 2 seats out of the car and in the living room as my boys use them as gaming chairs when they play their racing games. This has saved me about £500 on having to buy gaming chairs! 😂😂😂 Just go ahead and BUY ONE! You'll have no regrets.
Those acceleration figures are roughly the same as the Triumph and Rover 2000 from the 1960s. They were considered to be reasonably fast cars in those days. The Jogger looks like a pretty useful car, which is what you'd expect really.
old 1.0 liter engines cannot drive up hills, but that's not the case with turbo engines nowadays The car on this engine makes 109hp, for some context the old Suzuki Jimny Made 40hp from a 1.0l. 109hp is equivalent to the performance of a naturally aspirated 1.5l
This is the sort of testing that matters for the consumer. If I may, I suggest that instead or in addition you'd test reprise as from 30-70mph and so on, in different gears and different onboard weight as this would provide a more representative real World use than for example 0-60. The rest spot on 👌
3:23 just to give you some perspective: I'm still driving my 2008 Dacia Logan MCV 7 Seater, 1.5DCi, 85hp... and that one go to 60 in 17seconds. So yeah...
In the Netherlands this car is registered to have maximum 1862kg, so actually you tested it 100kg or so overweight of what its specced for. Not too bad how it performed then
When the car is light, very little braking force is applied to the rear wheels. The greater the weight, the greater the rear brake power. This ensures optimum stopping and balance.
this is one funny and useful test. it's amazing how this modest car can actually complete almost all tests. even with extra 700 kilos is manages to go up a steep ramp. my diesel 177hp/380Nm DSG Tiguan would be a bit affected by that ramp. so... it's a great car for what it is intended. it has a lot of volume and it can also carry a lot of weight. and the consumption of 4,5-5 litter per 100 km @ ~112 kmh is also great. this one can carry a bunch of people or a bunch of volume and weight. what more can you ask of it? what other car can equal that? i see come worried that this car cannot accelerate while going uphill. i think it does if it's not fully loaded, however slower. if you are a good driver then you addapt to the car and not compare it to some way powerful and way more expensive alternative. this car is what it is and nobody is forcing you to buy one. i would also like to have an Aston Martin but my Tiguan is what i can afford and i actually like it.
Nice review mat , for these are the kinda cars we usually load full or even more than what they're to be loaded, here in South Africa that's our local taxi, so it's a relevant review. Or test 😅
@@purwantiallan5089 , and the truth is ,,, the ones who buy the wagons, seldom use their power, other than their status power..looks and all... People who use their horsepowers are those driving the likes of Land Cruiser, Isuzu, etc.
What Matt missed was "performance" figures. Like 50-70 mph acceleration, which gives an indication of how good or dangerous it is to overtake. Interesting test though. Not nearly as bad as I thought it would be. Incidentally, you can take dashboard mpg figures with a BIG grain of salt. My Logan consistently lies by about 4-5mpg compared to the calculated figure and it's worse than that if you zero the gauge after each refuel. I'm sure the electric car consumption gauge figures are just as inaccurate. Consumption needs to be calculated, not believed from what's on the dashboard
![Twenty One Pilots - “The Line” (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E2Rj2gQAyPA/mqdefault.jpg)
I'd love to see the same test done for a high performance family car like an Audi RS6 or a BMW M3 Touring
Guessing it would have a lower impact the more powerful the car
Same result m8
not many high performance family cars that can hold 7 adults.
@@neovenom9833 Audi SQ7 with 4.0 V8 TDI :-)
Or.... Toyota Land Cruiser
Me too I would like to see that.
To be honest ... I was expecting far worse figures from that tiny engine. Well done Dacia!
Yeah its honestly pretty impressive form a 1L
no kidding. 10 years ago everyone praised my old car's engine for having 103 hp on a 1.4 liter 4 cylinder, now that's fully and truly obsolete already, (even considering it was naturally aspirated) that figure is still pretty low for today's standards.
Renault *
@@PROFESSOR_TV yep. Mini Renault.
@@GraveUypo me also ever tested 1999 Opel Corsa, 109bhp also done this exact same weight vs performance test.
As much as everyone would like to see high performance cars with such testing I appreciate the carwow team and matt for doing such real world test on a rather inexpensive cars because these things matter more to us normie people than it does to someone driving an rs5, quadrofolio or x5.
King comment
It's not that realistic though... people who are going to buy this car are going to have 4-5 CHILDREN not 4-5 6 foot adults that weigh 70kgs+😅
@@Andrei8pa3 what if they are overweight?🤣
@@ioandeaconu5234 this car isn't sold in America right? Yeah so it's fine then😂😂
@@ioandeaconu5234 yep. And about 2000kgs weight?
Just like James May said: Dacia are the essent of the car. Everything is simple basic nothing unnecessary fancy.
Toyotas?
@@burgir9985 maybe, quite close.
But Toyota are still have a bit too much unnecessary electronic in my opinion (recent models)
@@burgir9985 Much, much Euroytas ?
What Toyota did you mean? 80s? Yes, you're right.
Nowadays? No, they are very expensive, a lot of issues (millions of recalls), most of the people buy them because of the legend behind, but those days are gone. The only thing, their hybrids still the best fuel economy but honestly, when you pay 50+ k who is interested in 1...1.5l/100 km less?
fiat used to be like that but not anymore unfortunately
I don't know how many Romanians stop by to leave comments, but figured I might as well do my part. The Jogger's (and the Logan MCV's) ancestor, the old Dacia 1310 Break was infamous for being used in a far more gruelling manner than what your test entailed.
Being based on the Renault 12 platform, it got a carburated 1.3 liter iron-block that maybe cracked 60HP on a good day or when new. The whole car, being from a time before extensive safety features, came in at less than 1 ton (I think it was 950kgs). As getting a car was quite the big deal in Romania prior to the 1989 Revolution, and for quite a bit of time after that until the late 90s, people tended to use their hard-earned vehicle for basically everything.
You would see those Dacia Breaks on every road and in every village filled with their own weight in potatoes, cabbages, corn, sacks of flour, cement, anything you can think of. Even then, people would put roof-racks on them and strap crazy things on top as well, like whole sofas, armoires, huge stacks of hay. No one ever gave it a second thought. If you drove behind one, the suspension was so low that the wheel arches would cover the top part of the rear tires, and people sometimes put solid rubber pieces as bump-stops to prevent the springs and shocks coming up through the wheel-wells.
And the crazy part wasn't even doing it on a 1.3 carbed engine with a 4 speed that had no over-drive, it was doing it in all manners of weather on brakes the size of a small plate. Since the Dacias only ever came in one wheel size (which was a 13 inch steel rim), the front discs were tiny, and the rears were the same drums that had been engineered for it since 1969. For all the ludicrous lack of safety, people loved them, and still do to this day. Needless to say, I also own one, though it's only the sedan version in which you have to get a bit creative if you're trying to make use of all the available space :P
There was nothing wrong with the Renault 12, on which the Dacia 1310 is heavily based. I used to prepare new R12s for sale in 1971 when I was 17 and I used to drive them regularly. They were quite lightly built, but they were comfortable,nice enough to drive and as you say the break/estate car was extremely roomy. As a car for Romania to build under licence it was a pretty good choice. Few cars had five gears back then, nobody was that bothered. My first car was a Renault 4 with three gears 😆
@@timhancock6626 Awesome! And thanks for sharing that! You're right, no one cared very much about the 4-speed, and a 5th gear was only added towards the 90s, which helped a bit with the fuel economy. And because it was literally added onto the existing gear set, you had to kind of wiggle the gear-stick into it to select 5th :)))
I was in Hungary back in 2008 i think and a "truck" Dacia with home made wooden sides (like in old timey American pick up trucks) was packed at least four cabbages higher than the roof of the cabin, with cabbages. It was riding lower than a pimp's car, but it was still doing highway speeds, gunning it towards Romania.
A lot of these tests are... really weird in the sense that IRL... you wouldn't expect to see a BMW upside down in the bed of a Ford transit bed-van either, but it does happen, and they do work.
And who doesn't in the eastern efin block with whichever available.
Some of them had a 1.9 diesel, although I'm not sure how often those could be seen
Wow I'm really surprised and impressed. Basically a 50% weight increase only added 24% to the 0-60 time and no effect on the braking distance!
Like the previous comment I would really love to see the same done in a high performance car!
more weight adds more grip. but don't think it's the same, brakes pads got hotter each time he added weight and would be much closer to fading and failing with more weight. it does make a difference, and it's not subtle, just not straightforward. unless you're going downhill, then it'll be very straightforward and easy to notice.
as for the acceleration, yeah, it's okay on straights. go test uphill and see what the REAL problem is.
@@GraveUypo the real problem is is that the car cant accelerate when going uphill.
I wonder how you are going to fit 50% more weight in 2 seater ferrari :DD
You need tungsten ingots
@@DuBstep115 well you can just use a urus or a cayenne, or that 1k hp new ram pickup
@@purwantiallan5089 nonsense. My granddad drove to italy for vacation every year, and in the beginning they used a beetle with 18hp. And a roof tent. Yeah, you’ll might not be able to drive 90 up the hill with a dacia if it’s full, but 60-70 mph are possible every time and place
Having the same braking distances for different weights is a great sign. It means that the brake themselves are good enough and that the limiting factor is the tires.
When you have more weight, there is more inertia and the car wants to go further, but also the force of friction between the tires and the ground is bigger because there is more weight on the tires. So as long as the brakes and ABS work well the tires compensate and you should get the same distance (at least on dry ground)
I had the same thought in my head, as the weight increases so does the weight on the tyres and therefore their grip
For a single stop (70 -> 0) there's almost no car out there that will overheat its brakes. The problem comes if you do it all the time, like a racetrack. I bet the Jogger's brakes will not last too long then ... but the good news is there are relatively few people racing 7 seat 1 litre family SUVs.
@@tomsixsix I would be worried driving this car for a family trip on the mountain: tiny engine to go up, and not sure about the brakes going down. No need for racing to stress the brakes
@@pod___ Engine braking. And while going up may be a chore, well, going down, you use engine braking.
Not just the sheer weight but also where it was. Basically they added more weight to the rear of the car as they got it fuller which shifted some braking to the rear wheels.
This has been one of the most interesting automotive tests I've seen in a while. I'd love to see how other affordable cars stack up, both petrol and diesel, manual and auto, etc.
Cheers!
Yes man! Definitely!! :D
Miguel Relvas 👍👍👏👏👏👏🧠🧠🤝
@Christopher Armstrong yes..."most boring" but affordable!!!! Get an Audi R.S 6 IF YOU LIKE TO BEE NOT BORING!!
THIS IS THE SOLUTION!!! SPEND 120.000-180.000 EUROS AND YOU GOT THE SOLUTION !!! IT S SIMPLE!!! FOR YOU CRISTOPHER ARMSTRONG!!! 🤥 🤏🧠 OR YOU ARE NOT SO "...STRONG"
🤣🤣😷😷😷
Back in 2010, i was travelling Romania with my basketball team mates in a 7-seater Dacia Logan MCV.
Our heights are between 198 cm - 205 cm or approximately 6 foot 6 - 6 foot 8 and we didn't have absolutely any issues, except for looking like circus clowns once we all got of the car.
I hope you don`t play like circus clowns?
@@localreviewking134no thats what we italians do. Dont confuse
@@Schcarraffone Act like circus clowns when they drive, yes?
@@Schcarraffoneyoung kobe played in italy when he was there, so i guess he is the exception
2:25 Mat looks so happy with his family 🥰
Now THIS is something that I would like to see more often. Absolutely great job!
Exactly to compare with Peugeot 5008 with 1.2 turbo petrol.
Dacia has really become an important carmaker. Good for them, I'm amazed!
I still have my dad's Dacia 1300 (Renault 12)
@@dardoukLYS ''Classic Dacia'''
This thing is sold in india as Renault Lodgy
@@Zombot619 that’s the copy of the old Dacia Lodgy, that model is discontinued as far as I know, Dacia jogger replaces Dacia Logan MCV which is also discontinued
Dacia
I mean Renault Lodgy
It's amazing how that 1-litre turbocharged 3 cylinder engine in the Jogger can handle that huge weight!
Thanks to high torque at low rpms
vay türk var
@@kadirhanatmaca it has no torque at low rpm. that's why he was holding it at 4000-5000
Seriously? The car barely got up the hill at higher weights. This thing is a deathtrap would you take it on holiday in Austria or any other hilly country.
@@Jeroenneman i think the problem was starting from a stand still. In real life you would have no problems at all.
I was crying while you were torturing the car with 1967 kilos trying to climb.. You were really cruel to the clutch. I can smell the burn of the clutch and the tires from here..
its a dacia bro chill
@@carbrickscity well not really actually. A/T actually robs a bit more engine power than M/T i've driven 2 identical car with the exact same engine with the only difference being one of them has manual 5 speed and the other is 4 speed auto. And the manual one drives up the hill easier than auto. In the auto sometimes i have to put pedal to the floor just to maintain speed. The type of the auto transmission is also matter. For example Suzuki's AGS might also burn the clutch on that kind of scenario and some cvt transmission can actually overheats when doing a hill climb for an extended time.
Yes i agree, in that kind of situation an auto would probably be better. Provided that the engine is able to output enough power. It all comes down to each cars configuration and personal preferences really.
Edit: typo
You were crying? Eat some elk meat.
@@carbrickscity i don't think that it would climb the hill with this ammount of load when the first gear in auto is longer than the first in the manual
Their faces at the fully loaded ramp test was hilarious 😂
Never expected to have a Dacia in one of the best Carwow videos ever! Credits to the editor!
Absolute banger of a concept with mat's touch to it , WEE NEED MORE OF THIS
Agreed!
Other Cars ti,... Mercedes, VW, Citroen, Peugeot, FIAT,
@@TITANICO41 yep. Add also GT by Citroen.
@@termalss add also TVR CERBERA 4.2
Actually our Indonesian reviewers always do this stuff, except brake tests. Yes brake, we don't do that here. That's why
Yes, ze german here. Please keep in mind, that the maximum additional weight for the Jogger is specified at 582kg. Your 1967kg is a full 105 kg over the maximum total weight of 1862kg.
Thank you for pointing this out. I'm sure it says the maximum load somewhere on the car (in the US its in the drivers door sill) I'm impressed with the braking performance even being very overloaded.
German with turkish name? Nice try tho
@@danieldaniel1210 Soll's ja tatsächlich geben ö
@@fatih.tavukcu erdogan jaja
@@danieldaniel1210 wow, du bist ja einer von der ganz intelligenten Sorte!
We honestly need to see this kind of testing more often, especially with MPVs and SUVs. For sure more expensive cars with more powerful engines will be faster, but what I'm curious to know is the performance drop on such powerful cars when loaded with 7 people and 200kgs of sand.
Great content. Even fully loaded it's still quicker to 60 than the base configuration of the VW Polo with the 1.2 3 cyl !
They don’t offer the 1.2 anymore in the Polo. It’s just the 1.0 TSI now which is a brilliant engine for a 3 cilinder and a very lovely car to drive. Much rather have a VW than a Dacia.
@@WarningSign1000 They were offering it until very recently. I have driven a brand new Skoda Fabia with the 1.0 TSI, it is very good.
faster than 1.4 fiat qubo
@@WarningSign1000 Dacia is more reliable than the german one.
@@gicugigel3790 I’m very careful with my cars, I change oil often and don’t beat them hard when the engine is cold. I highly doubt I’m going to run into reliability issues with my car.
I had a Toyota Hillux 2.5 diesel, 5 people in it and the skiing gear, struggled up on a pretty steep climb on dry tarmac. Honda civic IX tourer: every time I used the clutch on steep climb, I got the smell. So I'm impressed with the Dacia.
Scam alert...
@@davidgibson4840 There is no scam. The Hillux was a tank, the Honda was everything, regarding its reliability, what people are talking about it. But I'm also impressed with what Dacia has to offer for a cheap car.
@@labogdi7250 he was talking about the "you are the winner" scam above his comment
Thank you for the warning.
@11:02 The braking distance was not affected by weight because the maximum force that can be transferred between tyre and road is (simplyfied) proportional the the weight that sits on the tyre. So if the car gets heavier also the breakingforce increases. If you would do multiple brake tests in a row of course the breaks would not last that long on the loaded car
So by analogy.... 400kg extra- same stopping.... 800kg extra- same stopping... I don't know about that...
The ideal tire/asphalt highest friction coefficient is almost 1...(.9 i believe)... I think that means you can only decelerate/accelerate with up to a max hypothetical 1G. So no matter how much weight you apply, you can't decelerate at a rate higher than 1G(this weight also contributes to your forward momentum/inertia)... That being sad, there's a point where enough weight applied, exceeds the capacity of that tire and would require a larger contact surface(wider tires)... When that is achieved, then the friction coefficient drops and the distance increases...
And even when the tires are matched, I believe the only way to exceed 1G deceleration is if you have extra downforce applied separate from system mass(aero, spoiler deployment). This separate downforce would enable higher than 1G rate deceleration....
This is just me, I'm not looking for a debate
Mee too
This test proves how good this car is
agree, it did good. the 2 tone test on the hill test is kind of 0.001% real life situation..
People still won't accept 3cyl engines, as long as they could buy a SH 400k miles 1.9 diesel
deserves more attention!
Expecially the handling and the braking, that are the two most important tests for safety.
Dacia really surprises me each year
if they added the Duster's awd to this, this would be a cheap and a great family car.
Good video I really like the Dacia cars!
Ond thing though: The max. Load capazity of a Jogger according to Dacia is 426 Kg! And you exceeded that by almost 400 Kg.
Good thing that the engine didnt blew. 😂
Weird, maybe we don't get the same specs in France, but I see 637kg as the load capacity for a jogger... Which ain't lot for a 7 seats car !!
@ChristopherH You must be fun at parties.
@ChristopherH You need to take into account engine load and a lot of science 😉
Let’s be totally honest Dacia are the ONLY manufacturer to offer anything approaching value for money, all other manufacturers without exception take us all granted 😡😡😡
Having the consumption that low (gpl variant) I am satisfied for this practical family vehicle.
And I love the ground clearance. Truly versatile (specially for my country roads).
Very useful tests, great job!
Please adopt the metric sistem :D
Are You sure lpg price will be as cheap compared to petrol?
@@MartinLV.I am confident that it will not exceed the cost of petrol per mile/kilometer. I don't have nostradamus genealogy, so yes it remains to be seen.
don't get me wrong, I would go for an EV now if I could afford it...
Looking forward to the hibrid motorizari on, I hope that is going to have regenerative breaking (and still hope that it will be a Plug in Hibrid Electric Vehicle...
@@MartinLV. its not as cheap as mini petrol tho.
@@LucianAiftimie Lucian, what if Carwow doing this science with Impreza WRX Version 3 1996?
Thing is, this is the UK and its a UK channel so we used imperial and that's the British way, although we can do both metric wins. So no adopting metric stuff to appease those that only do metric 😉
I have test driven the Jogger and I also wondered what it would be like loaded up.
No need to be concerned, yes it was a slower car but it's not as slow loaded up as i had expected.
The little engine does need to be reved up but it's 3 cylinder nature loves it.
above 2,500 rpm it pulls quite well
This little engine needs to be revved because it simply lacks power at lower rpm. My 4 cylinder makes no power until turbo kicks in at 1600-1800rpm and for normal daily driving I'm constantly in the 2000-3000rpm range simply because it's so slow.
@@CoreMaster111 i drive a turbo diesel, 1.5dci and you also need to be at 2000rpm or more for best torque...so this isn't bad at all for tiny 3 cilinder petrol
@@CoreMaster111 my 1,4l Petrol Turbo with 140Hp loves crusing arround 1500-1700 but for acceleration or hill driving you need to keep the rpm high. and dint get me started with 4 adults as occupants
@@lazarjanjusevic3 Yes, but what I'm trying to say is that these small engines don't like to be revved any more than bigger and more powerful engines. You just have to rev small engines more to get decent usable power out of them.
@@bastik.3011 For cruising 1500rpm is fine obviously but if you need to accelerate even slightly then you need to drop a gear to get into usable power which is at higher rpm.
My project car with a V8 just goes no matter what rpm you are at. Even at 1000rpm if you press accelerator, it goes. And technically speaking it also likes to be revved because it's not an old diesel engine with red line at 3000 or something like that. It seems that OP to who I replied originally assumes that small petrol engines like to be revved more than any other size petrol engines, which is obviously not true.
The brake test was interesting but makes sense from a physics perspective. As you add more weight to the car, there is more force pressing the tires against the road, so they are able to provide more acceleration/deceleration force without slipping. The additional weight in the rear of the vehicle also allows the rear brakes to be more useful, since the rear brakes actually provide very little stopping force on an unladen FWD vehicle since the vast majority of the weight transfers onto the front tires during a hard stop.
I've driven this car 240kmh down the highway outside of Linköping, it's a beast that little cylinder!!
I really wasn't expecting the brake performance to be identical with all that added weight. Well done Dacia!
I remember when they did a similar test with a Fiat Panda on Top Gear the results were a LOT worse than this.
This could be a new test / review to add on a regular basis for other cars as well because I am really curious how having more people in the car affects the performance of pretty much every car, not just cheap ones but also high performance cars.
could be the effect of cold brakes at the beginning and getting warmer during the brake tests, also: more downforce on the tires help them to get more friction on the ground and more contact area (they didn't increase tire pressure when they were fully loaded I assume). These two factors can equalize the other effect, weight has during braking. The test from Top Gear with a Fiat Panda was a 0-70-0 test and I think most of the added meters when fully loaded was due to the acceleration phase, not the braking.
Well the Panda is a lot smaller and top gear tested acceleration and braking at the same test.
@@AndREDrautActually, the brakes of a car are neccessarily dimensioned according to the max weight allowed, such they deliver the same results. As you already mentioned, the effect of more friction adds to the grip on the road.
@@AndREDraut in a first order approximation, tyre friction scales linearly with the normal force of the pavement on the tyre. The normal force is equal to the force of the weight of the car pushing down on the tyre. Thus, in this first order approximation, if the brakes are strong enough, weight does not matter for braking distance. What we see here is that the brakes are indeed strong enough for an emergency stop when fully loaded and that even when braking while fully loaded, tyre grip is the limiting factor, not brake strength.
In addition to warmer brakes, the tyres might also be warmer, which can make them grip better.
However, in real world driving, the brakes could overheat much faster when loaded so heavily, leading to brake fade and loss of braking performance. I think this is the real danger.
First, the animations are really good, you have great editors.
Second, I like that you added the fuel economy in L/100Km, so I don't have to calculate on my own ❤
ye it's nice that they added that so i can know exactly their fuel economy
Love the conversion from mpg to lkm
edit: the 25% pull was brutal ))
yeap the clutch was fighting with demons in there , i wonder what would happen with cvt or dct transmission .
That pull is quite brutal and I also experienced that due to the total weight of my car + my family (4 people including me) are weighing at 1912 kg, I am having trouble and even stalling when ascending (the steep is quite higher than 25% in the area which we used the car) and my parents are overreacting that I cannot carry them all! I'll show this to them to prove my point that the car will have trouble when it comes to steep hill climbing with the car I have (95 hp and 132 nm).
@@kadirhanatmaca CVT gearbox may done the trick better.
@@GexxxTV yep. The weight is absolute brutal.
@@GexxxTV you may need to check if this isn't against the driving rules in your country but I usually use the handbrake to "build-up" torque instead of holding the car with the brake pedal then release it slowly as if it were a clutch, work wonders with small engines on big inclines, but you need to be careful not to let the car "squat" before releasing the handbrake suddenly unless you plan to take off like an 80's car chase movie
In case anybody is wondering why the breaking distance is always the same:
Since friction force is the essential, but not entire cause for the breaking, and since its formular is FR=µ*FN (with µ being the friction coefficient which depends on the material of the tire which didn't change throughout all tests, and FN being a constant weight force 9,81 m/s on the earth surface), the weight of the car itself is neglectable.
Great test. Genuinely surprised by the braking test - what was gained in weight was made up for by increased traction. I guess downforce is the key to achieving great braking performance. The impact on handling and acceleration was to be expected. Also, I think AWD would have made a big difference, particularly in the hill climb as weight transfers to the rear wheels.
Yeah def awd would have helped a good amount. But it still has little displacement for awd and alright torque anyway.
Pretty darned good little car. Slow, cheap, good mileage, and it beats walking.
Yep. By countrymile also.
i better walk rather than drive that litterbox
nothing beats walking, but death... 🤷🏻♂️😉
@@raulbila46 kinda rude
@@GUMBIIYT walking is good for environment, I always encourage people to walk if they don't like a certain car. 😃
5:49 the way everybody's head goes side to side 🤣
For 7 seated adult people this 1l 3 cylinder engine did extremely well. I remember I couldnt get Opel Astra 1.4l turbo moving up the fking hill from the spot with 2 people seated.
Your car was broken then
That is probably not a turbo. They have a 1.4 NA Astra and it's horrendous. Had them as rental cars before....
Astra J btw.
There was a turbo version of the Astra? Reminds me of the underpowered Skoda Fabia too.
The 1.4L turbo on the Astra J has 140hp and is quite pokey. It’s not a 70hp fiesta
@@tinnitustq dude...There is a 2.0 Astra VXR or Astra OPC depending on where you are... And it's a turbo with 280hp! Driven them on track and it's pretty good.
Still, 1.4NA rentals omfg ..No power and not even that efficient
Would be interesting to see the same tests, but what's happening when you change tires pressure, i.e. from 1.8 Bar to 2.8 Bar every 0.2 Bar or something similar and see how that affects 0-60, 60-0, fuel economy, etc.
Exactly. Every maker recommend higher tyre pressure for full load driving.
Finally some effectively smart reviews of normal and usable (buyable ) cars. I mean "smart" because they appeal to a lot more people than niche performance cars, and that's very good for RUclipsrs. Most of people don't have money to buy amazingly brilliant sports cars. Nice family cars that are made as modes of transportation and not as toys for rich grown children to toy with (doesn't matter if im one of them or not). I love big HP and torque cars, mainly ICE cars but you don't drive your family on holidays on a GT3. For a motor vehicle guy, I do apreciate normal cars as much as sports cars (and motorbikes etc), Great review.
I remember being a kid in the 1960s and my dad somehow taking six of us on holiday in his tiny Austin A35 .... all the suitcases on the diddy roof rack. This reminded me of that!
In late 70s and 80s my father had domestic car "Zastava Confort" 1977 which had 1.1 liter 55HP engine and he drived with that my mom ,me, sister ,so many stuff and towed Adria Caravan for 4 people that weight same as car to holidays on seaside .
Now that would be suicide
Really surprised on the car's performance overall, thought it would be much worse. Absolutely best price for what you get.
Would've been ever greater of a video if you made a tesla model X or G63 go through same challenges to see how big of a difference does it make
See the video by Bjørn Nyland on exactly this. From a single test there was no statistical difference over a real world driving test for a empty car and the same EV loaded to its max curb weight (400kg of screen wash !?)
@@tomooo2637 Bjorn?
@@purwantiallan5089 If you wondering about the modified o, he is from Norway. You did know that a lot of the world does not speak English ?
Who gives a shat about overpriced useless EV?
do the Tesla model X (!)
Kind of started to feel sorry for not buying a Dacia earlier this year, but something else...
The triber here in India is a worst version of this dacia jogger. It's smaller under sub 4m category for a 7 seater. Mileage is pretty much same or worse than this jogger with a naturally aspirated 1L petrol engine. A turbo petrol would soove this issue and renault should bring this into India. It has all the ingredients that the triber lacks. A powerfull turbo petrol engine. It fixes the shortcomings of the triber and a little bit of space makes it more comfortable than the Triber indeed. It has taillamps pretty similar to Suzuki Ertiga. It also looks like that and it sells like a queen.
During the 70mph fuel economy test, maybe you should've pumped up the tires to compensate the increase in weight. That would've reduced rolling resistance to some degree and helped with fuel economy
@The Johano yep. In real life its not too noticeable.
@The Johano Well thats what you should do according to cars instruction manual.
Then it wouldn’t be a valid test
@@danielpark5575 Yes it would be even more valid. Since thats what youre supposed to do according to owners manual. You always adapt tire pressure to the cars weight. Of course.A car that weights 2000kg will have higher recommended tire pressure than a car weighting 1000kg if they have same tires.
It’s what SHOULD be done on all cars if you follow the manual, but not many people would adjust the tyre pressures when they pick everyone up in the real world
Never in the history of car reviews have there been more useful performance tests.
Wow, i never realized that car only weighs 1.2t when empty. That's really light.
Now that's a good car. For it's volume the fuel consumption is quite decent. And the 0-100Kmh quite good.
still faster with 200kg and 7 people than my 60bhp corsa 1L with 1 person in it (me)
when starting uphill, you need to handbrake-start to make it easy on the clutch + less wheelspin for traction. Mandatory with the car fully loaded.
That being said, I agree that engine is way too underpowered for that kind of test. Maybe if it had more torque. Like a diesel. I think a diesel option would have been a good choice for this car..
that trim level of Jogger has an electric handbrake with hill hold
This is an important test for me to know now, as I'm driving to the West Midlands in a few weeks time with two passengers and some luggage in my 1.1L Honda Jazz. Thanks Mat!
Daryl, imagine if they done the test with Miata.
⬆️⬆️⬆️ thanks for watching and showing love Congratulations you have been selected as one of the shortlisted winners.. Send a message to my team above to claim your reward .🎁 🎁🎁🎁🎁
@Fifteen15 stronger than ur two cell brain head
But....you can't get a 1.1 Jazz. Is it 1.2, 1.3 or 1.4?
No worries if your rear suspension are okay. I used my 1.2 Jazz to move to another home. Front passenger and rear seats down makes for enough room for loads of stuffs.
The car is very good from a technical point of view. Speaking of which, other much more expensive cars cannot do what Dacia did in this video. I would buy it without hesitation!!
I think the reason the stopping distance wasn't affected is because the tires were the limiting factor. i think the car can do more, but the tires are holding it back. That's pretty good tho weight doesn't seem to effect breaks in this instance
Jogger is crying out for the 1.5dci. The favourite Eastern European taxi engine.
Excellent video, reminds me of the time I drove the wife to go shopping at the next town, I was stuck behind a tractor on the main road and pulled out to overtake and accelerated and it took longer than usual and we just made it passed the tractor by the seat of our pants, the Mrs was not pleased and let me know all the way round the shops, when we got back to the car I opened the boot to put the shopping in and to my surprise it was full of grow bags! the Mrs had bought from the garden centre the day before and had forgotten to get them out. She got both barrels from me.
Yep. Also got its wheels on it.
⬆️⬆️⬆️ thanks for watching and showing love Congratulations you have been selected as one of the shortlisted winners.. Send a message to my team above to claim your reward .🎁 🎁🎁🎁🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁 🎁
Tough car,great advert for Dacia.
Love to see more similar testing with "better " cars Mat.☺
Super nice Power. It was able to take 2 tons on a steep slope with only 999cc and 100 hp. Just imagine if this car had the 1.3 with 150 hp...
@@goombek1861 1.6 also.
@@goombek1861 No its always hp. Although not at 5000 rpm but from idle.
Yeah, displacement plays a major role, 3 cylinder engines below 2k rpm are crap
@@martinsvensson6884 you are wrong. Its torque in this scenario. HP is torque x rpm. Its work done over time. If the engine is weak (low torque) you will not move. Why do you think trucks have a lot of torque but relatively low HP?
@@blackwidow7804 No, physics and reality is always right :) The formula doesnt suddenly change just because you go below a certain mph. Please understand that without me having to explain that to you...
Its the same with trucks. Only hp matters. But you might not want a high reving engine for different reasons... You might want the engine to be able to deliver good hp without reving it.
Value/ money = very good value.
ofcourse the braking distance is going to be the same, the extra weight adds grip, canceling out the effect of extra weight
doesnt matter if you added 30 tons of weight aslong as the brakes are sufficient there wont be a change in stopping distance
I think the joger did realy good for only a 1 liter engine with forwed traction . Next year with the 1.6 liter mild hybrid this car is going 2 be perfect for a large famili that is stript on cash . It might be biest from me because i em a dacia fan boy.
i reckon the hybrid will be perfect for it. i have driven the Clio E-tech and was very impressed by how good it was. I was ready to be disappointed but the hybrid system blew me away. Renualt were late to the game with there hybrid system but they've properly developed it and it was works amazingly well.
This shows us that the Dacia Jogger is one of the cheapest 7-seater which can handle a lot of weight!
This is going to be a legend in next 5 years in Morocco, taxis love dacia a lot
Knowing that in Morocco the 1,5 DCI is still alive .. it would be even better
Instant hit for the undecided buyer! Well done Dacia!
5:58 Funniest sh.. i've seen all day😂 Well done
I'm impressed by how small of an effect the added weight caused; at least to me.
I hope that you'll be including mileage(fuel consumption) figures in litres per 100 km in all other videos as you've done on this one.
Hope the next video is of the same test for a family SUV like a 7 seater Honda CR-V.
The braking test shows the laws of physics in action:
If you increase weight you increase traction, and if you increase traction you increase the max braking force. As both the mass to decelerate and the braking force available both increase proportionally, the braking distance remains the same.
⬆️⬆️⬆️ thanks for watching and showing love Congratulations you have been selected as one of the shortlisted winners.. Send a message to my team above to claim your reward .
I bought a Dacia Jogger top spec because I was looking at other cars around the £40k mark and they were just not worth the price.
My Jogger is bloody brilliant for the price. I've had it 4 months now with no issues and I've used it for tip runs, long distance drives an the school runs etc etc. Oddly the car pulls just as well with 7 people in as it does with just myself in the car. It's witchcraft. I am so happy because I got this car brand new for £19500 (I spent about £1000 on almost all of the accessories available in that price) and I have tonnes more money left over each month for saving and spending. It's hands down one of the best purchases I have ever made in my life and I feel like a right fool for being such a badge snob before.
2 things I don't like about the Jogger:
The Kumho tyres the car comes with are crap, swap them over ASAP.
Secondly the sound system is a bit naff, but it is clear and loud. Bass is virtually none existent.
Other than those TWO things it is brilliant on every conceivable way.
A nice perk if you have kids that like computer games, I have the rear 2 seats out of the car and in the living room as my boys use them as gaming chairs when they play their racing games. This has saved me about £500 on having to buy gaming chairs! 😂😂😂
Just go ahead and BUY ONE! You'll have no regrets.
When the mpg dropped, i was like "ARE YOU KIDDING ME!"
Those acceleration figures are roughly the same as the Triumph and Rover 2000 from the 1960s. They were considered to be reasonably fast cars in those days. The Jogger looks like a pretty useful car, which is what you'd expect really.
Mat you MUST make this test a series mate. I would love to see the same tests with different cars!
The suspensions of that Jogger are absolutely amazing! See the way how the suspensions are bearing that huge weight!
What about Miata doing this test?
Imagine someone buying this exact car one day to eventually find this video and find out what it was used for 🤣🤣
That same braking distance thing is almost unbelievable. The only explanation is bigger contact area of the tyres because of the weight.
Damn this video was really opened up some new knowledge for me. My dad always used to say that 1 liter engines pretty much can’t drive up hill.
old 1.0 liter engines cannot drive up hills, but that's not the case with turbo engines nowadays
The car on this engine makes 109hp, for some context the old Suzuki Jimny Made 40hp from a 1.0l.
109hp is equivalent to the performance of a naturally aspirated 1.5l
Mat's son's reaction at 2:17 😂
After the test Matt’s gonna list the car on CarWow w/ the caption-“Lightly driven, garage kept, perfect condition, no issues. Hahaha
Please test down size engine, drag Dacia duster 1.3t, Suzuki Vitara 1.4t Mitsubishi eclipse Cross 1.5t , WV Tiguan 1.4t +++
Someone went back to the driving school on the steep . You just had to release the clutch slowly.
You are doing a huge service to Dacia!! Great review!
That clutch is def. screaming for help at that last test
Yeah I could almost smell it through the screen, lol
You should do this to every car. Dacia, for its price, performed great!
Handbrake start for the 2 ton test would've been easier.
As an American, I’m jealous that car companies still offer manual transmissions over there in Europe.
You have no idea how much a Dacia can be loaded in Romania ! 🤣
7:00 but did you increase the tire pressure to compensate for the added weight? I recon with correct pressure the MPG will be the same.
This is the sort of testing that matters for the consumer. If I may, I suggest that instead or in addition you'd test reprise as from 30-70mph and so on, in different gears and different onboard weight as this would provide a more representative real World use than for example 0-60. The rest spot on 👌
2:54!bombastic side eye criminal offensive
Nice car - 7 passenger seating in a 1,205 kg car, wow! I like the "lowered SUV" styling paired with small car efficiency
3:23 just to give you some perspective: I'm still driving my 2008 Dacia Logan MCV 7 Seater, 1.5DCi, 85hp... and that one go to 60 in 17seconds. So yeah...
In the Netherlands this car is registered to have maximum 1862kg, so actually you tested it 100kg or so overweight of what its specced for. Not too bad how it performed then
0:08 I like how the captions say white instead of weight lol
I instead prefer reviews like these instead of drag races of cars that 99.99 cannot buy.
When the car is light, very little braking force is applied to the rear wheels. The greater the weight, the greater the rear brake power. This ensures optimum stopping and balance.
Very well done Dacia. I'm impressed :)
this is one funny and useful test.
it's amazing how this modest car can actually complete almost all tests. even with extra 700 kilos is manages to go up a steep ramp. my diesel 177hp/380Nm DSG Tiguan would be a bit affected by that ramp. so...
it's a great car for what it is intended. it has a lot of volume and it can also carry a lot of weight.
and the consumption of 4,5-5 litter per 100 km @ ~112 kmh is also great.
this one can carry a bunch of people or a bunch of volume and weight. what more can you ask of it? what other car can equal that?
i see come worried that this car cannot accelerate while going uphill. i think it does if it's not fully loaded, however slower. if you are a good driver then you addapt to the car and not compare it to some way powerful and way more expensive alternative. this car is what it is and nobody is forcing you to buy one. i would also like to have an Aston Martin but my Tiguan is what i can afford and i actually like it.
Nice review mat , for these are the kinda cars we usually load full or even more than what they're to be loaded, here in South Africa that's our local taxi, so it's a relevant review. Or test 😅
😂Pulling a trailer with a cow in it
@@pony7462 exactly @Pony, lol, 🤣
@@pony7462 or what about pulling a tanker oil truck?
@@vincentmosehla6272 what about pulling a big rig with speedboats on it
@@purwantiallan5089 , and the truth is ,,, the ones who buy the wagons, seldom use their power, other than their status power..looks and all...
People who use their horsepowers are those driving the likes of Land Cruiser, Isuzu, etc.
What Matt missed was "performance" figures.
Like 50-70 mph acceleration, which gives an indication of how good or dangerous it is to overtake.
Interesting test though. Not nearly as bad as I thought it would be.
Incidentally, you can take dashboard mpg figures with a BIG grain of salt. My Logan consistently lies by about 4-5mpg compared to the calculated figure and it's worse than that if you zero the gauge after each refuel.
I'm sure the electric car consumption gauge figures are just as inaccurate.
Consumption needs to be calculated, not believed from what's on the dashboard
i dont think this car is safe to overtake lorries at all
i genuinely prefer to watch content about everyday cars and their quirks.
What an impressive car that Dacia is. Burning its clutch at the end seemed like a cruel and unnecessary thing to do though.