Another in a series of my reviews that appeared in the online version of African Americans On Wheels, a now defunct automotive magazine that was included as an insert in the Sunday newspapers of major cities.
Reading the below review, I must have really liked the Sentra SE. Unfortunately, this is another car I really cannot remember anything about. At the time, my daily driver was a 1994 Nissan Sentra LE and had kind-of-owned a 1983 Coupe XE. I should have been absolutely blown away by the SE since what you have here is the powertrain of the legendary ur-SE-R in a four-door package that, according to a quick Google search, is no heavier. Yet, it didn’t leave a lasting impression. It’s like that that movie that you really enjoyed but couldn’t even remember the title or who it starred a week later.
The below review ran on August 3, 1998.
Okay, so you’re a frustrated realist. You don’t want to be stuck with some behemoth SUV when the next gas crunch hits, but you don’t want a slow, boring econobox either. Nissan thinks you should take a look at its Sentra SE Sedan.
The SE model is new for ‘98. As a last go-round for the current model (a redesign is due for 1999), Nissan wedged in the 2.0 liter, 140-horsepower four-cylinder engine from the 200SX SE-R. It turns the Sentra from an adequate performer to a WHOA BOY performer, making it a solid competitor to the Dodge/Plymouth Neon R/T, its only four-door compact competition. When the current Sentra was introduced for 1995, its bland, forgettable styling paled in comparison to the chic Neon. To add pizzazz, the SE gets ground effects, a deep front spoiler with fog lamps, rear wing, and five-spoke alloy wheels on low-profile tires. Incredibly, they transform the bland little car into a real looker.
Combined with a sport-tuned suspension, the SE handles as well as many sports cars. It doesn’t stick to the road as well as the Neon R/T, but its ride isn’t as harsh. While the five-speed manual transmission shifts smoothly, I found it difficult to successfully execute a smooth shift into second with the air conditioning on. With practice, most owners should be able to master this. A four-speed automatic is optional.
Inside, the sport theme continues with cloth sport seats and white-faced gauges, which look real cool in the day, but are difficult to read at dusk. Power windows, mirrors, and locks (with remote control), cruise control and 100-watt cassette/CD stereo also help you to “enjoy the ride.”
While you’re having all of this fun, you might forget about the practical side of the Sentra: four doors, 97.9 cu. ft. of interior volume, and a 10.7 cu. ft. trunk with the split-folding rear seat up. De-powered “second generation” front airbags are standard, while anti-lock brakes are optional (and should be standard).
The Nissan Sentra SE allows the practical realist in you to be satisfied without having to sacrifice one iota of fun and “coolness.”
For more information contact 1-800-NISSAN-3
SPECIFICATIONS
Type: 4-Door Sedan
Engine: 140-horsepower, 2.0 liter inline 4
Transmission: 5-Speed Manual
EPA Mileage: 23 city/31 highway
Tested Price: $18,716
So, by 1998, Nissan still hadn’t made a decent front-wheel-drive shifter. In addition, up until this generation, Nissan had released a redesigned Sentra every four years, so I felt comfortable stating a new version was due in 1999. That car didn’t arrive for an additional year, and with Nissan’s financial troubles and ultimate takeover by Renault, it hung around for seven model years. Six to seven model years has been the standard for the Sentra ever since.
Dad used to have the Euro version, a 1997 Almera.
It was rather unremarkable, so the only things I remember are the crazy 90s upholstery pattern, the detachable radio front panel, the quick rusting and the car once failing to start and us hitching a ride from a Peugeot 206 owner.
Nice review, if if it didn’t leave a deep impression. Funny how 140hp was a big deal not all that long ago.
I recently had a 97 Sentra and it was easy to shift gears in actually not a bad car to drive it went ok for only a 1500cc mill five speed manual with over 340,000kms clocked up it ran beautifully, possibly the best cars Nissan made during the 90s only rust takes them out at inspection time mechanically they seem near bullet proof, thats the second one Ive bought that was on its return trip from the moon and both were good runners the other had more extras being ex JDM and consequently numerous electrical issues with them and terminal rust but ran and drove just fine, both left my place with new owners very easily who never returned to complain.
It’s also the engine from the Infiniti G20, and as such one of Nissan’s best engines ever (IMO). I never knew that it was ever available in a regular Sentra (non SE-R) and am not surprised at all that you liked it, especially with a stick shift. It was less impressive when saddled with an automatic.
I have that engine with a second generation Infiniti G20 wrapped around it. It may be be a bit more lively in the Sentra which I assume is noticeably lighter than the G20. But in the G20 it’s not particular quick or responsive, though it gets the job done. I do have an automatic though – I have driven the manual version and that makes a huge difference, though if you really want something faster than it looks I’d recommend the contemporary Maxima.
I will say in terms of reliability that the SR20DE is absolutely bulletproof.
Stay tuned for a review of your G20, automatic and all!
Excellent, I can re-read my COAL of my stickshift one and compare/contrast.
These were rare by me compared to the follow-up model. I kind of miss this era of Nissans. I thought they had a better reputation for reliability then, but that’s just my impression and not based on any real data. I like the plain vanilla styling of this and that gen’s Maxima as well. 140 h.p. seemed more impressive back then somehow.
Great write-up, Adam. If I had the money back then this would have been the car for me. Back then Nissans were still on par with Toyota and carried a price premium as well.
The new Versa has a 2.0 liter, 149-horsepower engine. Only 9 more than 22 years ago.
The devolution of Nissan continues.
I think you meant Sentra in regard to the engine, the Versa has a 1.6. The Sentra has the 2.0 at 149hp. It also gets 39mpg highway while lugging a larger car with more weight though which the SR20DE engine never achieved.
Before rhe Renault takeover nissan reliability was as legendary as toyota and honda. Since then theyve gone down the tubes reliability wise. Self destructing 2.5 I4s self destructing CVTs, no reason to buy a time bomb.
I lusted after this car when it came out. At the time I was driving a ’96 Sentra GXE, with the standard 1.6 and 5-speed. That car turned out to be the best vehicle purchase I ever made, lasting 5 years and 200,000+ hard NY Metro commuter miles as well as a lot of highway business travel miles, with nothing but routine maintenance. It was noisy, unrefined, and not the most comfortable car for my 6’3″, 190lb frame, but it did its job without complaint every friggin’ day. If my Sentra had just had the fun factor and the little extra bit of pizzazz that the SE had going for it I might never have let it go on Ebay for $800, still running strong but with a non-working mechanical odometer stopped at 187,000 miles a year earlier. The new immigrant couple who bought it surely got good service out of it despite its tired state. Hell, if it hadn’t been developing rocker rust at the time I might even think they might still be driving it, but rust was an issue for these in the Northeast.
The comparison to a Neon R/T on the era is an interesting one. The cars are probably similar in weight, the hp spread isn’t that big, but as far as handling goes I’m willing to bet the Neon wins by a mile. This Sentra regressed to a rear torsion beam axle.