The Renault Kadjar is a stylish crossover that's based on the same platform as the Nissan Qashqai. But, while the Qashqai took undisputed class honours when it arrived in early 2014, the game has moved on, and the Renault equivalent betters it in almost every area. However, the Renault just falls short of the all round appeal of the SEAT Ateca. There's a single body style for the Kadjar, and it slots into the Renault range above the Captur. Both of these models will be joined by the larger Koleos SUV later in 2017. There are four trim levels to choose from: the entry-level, air con-equipped Expression+, the mid-spec Dynamique and Dynamique S, while at the top of the range is Signature trim. Cars in top-spec trim are expensive, but they do boast a generous amount of kit, including a Bose stereo, 19-inch alloy wheels, and touchscreen nav is included on Dynamique models and above. The Kadjar earned a five-star rating when it was tested by Euro NCAP, just like the Nissan Qashqai. All but the entry-level model has lane departure warning and traffic sign recognition as standard. Autonomous emergency braking, which will automatically apply the brakes if a collision is imminent, is an option on all trim levels.
The Renault Kadjar is a family crossover that not only rivals the Honda CR-V, Mazda CX-5 and Volkswagen Tiguan, but is also a worthy alternative to best-selling hatchbacks such as the Ford Focus and Volkswagen Golf. The Kadjar shares many parts with the Nissan Qashqai, but its body is a bit bigger. This means you get slightly more passenger space and a larger boot. The Renault’s interior also packs a high-tech infotainment system and an eye-pleasing dashboard.
Pros Competitive price Practical cabin Excellent fuel economy
Cons Just one petrol engine High-end models are expensive Sunroof reduces rear headroom
As a small SUV, the Kadjar is also a rival to the Kia Sportage, Seat Ateca and Skoda Yeti, but it's the aforementioned Nissan that it has most in common with, because it uses the same platform and engines. This means Kadjar buyers can choose from turbocharged 1.2-litre petrol and 1.5- and 1.6-litre diesels, although the 1.6 is the only option if you want four-wheel drive. In terms of interior space, the Kadjar and Qashqai are closely matched, and both offer a high-riding driving postion that gives you a good view down the road. However, the Kadjar's styling is closer to that of its smaller SUV sibling, the Renault Captur.
Pros • Cabin, load space • Fuel economy • Dash presentation
Cons • Noisy suspension • Flat seats • CVT characteristics The Koleos did what it was intended to do. It gave Renault a foothold in a hitherto unrepresented segment and, more importantly in Australia, it quickly became Renault’s biggest-selling model.If there was a major shortcoming with the second generation Koleos it was the lack of a diesel engine. The newcomer was exclusively powered by a hard-working 2.5-litre naturally-aspirated four-cylinder petrol engine producing a reasonable 126kW/226Nm and returning, in AWD form, a combined fuel consumption average of 8.3L/100km.But that’s all changed now. The long-awaited turbo-diesel option arrived in August 2017 to immediately bring more power and (a lot more) torque. At 130kW/380Nm it’s a true grunter which, at 6.1L/100km, also offers better fuel consumption, plus lower exhaust emissions (150g/km against the petrol version’s 192g/km).
Pros Noticeably more torque and better fuel economy from the diesel engine Big size equals excellent second-row space inside Competitively priced Good ownership credentials
Cons Powertrain not as seamless and effortless as the numbers suggest No quicker than cheaper front-drive petrol Koleos variants Wieldy SUV to manoeuvre and park Ho-hum infotainment system Lower braked towing rating than petrol versions The diesel clatter is also quite noticeable, though nothing like a deal-breaker, but it does harness the on-demand all-wheel-drive system's tractive talents better and more noticeably than the petrol engine does. And by maintaining fuel economy within a ballpark of its maker’s 6.1 combined cycle claim, it’s markedly more efficient by a couple of litres per hundred, particularly around town.
Pros Great exterior looks Nice enough to drive Good level of equipment
Cons Doesn't come with a seven-seat option Prices are a bit high Manual gearbox isn't the smoothest
