Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I wouldn't call it a gas hog, although it could be improved. It's better than having to drop down to a 4 cylinder and sacrificing power. I doubt the other SUVs with V6 power actually attain their mileage ratings especially if you want to have fun with it.
I would look and drive the GV first before you delete it from your list just because it gets a couple mpg less than it's competitors. You may be surprised. We're still glad we made the decision to buy the GV. Good luck and let us know what you buy.
Second, best mileage is around 40mph. I think the highway rating is for 50 or 55 mph. So at 75 mph, you shouldn't expect anything like the 30mpg Imperial the GV is rated for.
Third, the GV suffers a mileage penalty due to always being in AWD, and being heavier due to the extra framing. These benefits (such as crash resistance and the stiffer body), have to be balanced against higher gas consumption. Compared to many similar vehicles, the lower purchase price will also pay for the difference in gas used. For instance, I figured it would cost us $250 more per year for gas than a comparable X-Trail, but would cost $6000 less.
Owners reporting on the new Rav4 are getting mileage similar to the GV, although it is rated much higher.
I don't know why the reviews aren't showing up at the top of this page; I'll try to find out more info.
Meanwhile, the 2006 consumer reviews (including yours!) can be found off the New Cars page at this link.
Steve, Host
No, no audible confirmation; the only thing indicating that the alarm is armed is the flashing LED above the valet switch which installs in the blank switch spot next to the fog light switch.
It took me 2+hours to install, where the factory allocated 36 minutes (I triple checked all the wiring and what not, which is why it took so long).
Better than no alarm at all, I guess.
What are your gas prices now? We keep creeping up and about $2.30/gallon.
I agree your fuel philosophy. For the average person driving 15k miles per year, it would cost $230 more if you got only 25mpg versus 30mpg at $2.30/gallon. So if you would have bought that X-Trail for $6000 more just for the fuel mileage, it would have taken 26 years to recoup your cost. I hope I did that right.
Anyway, fuel mileage wasn't a major factor in our purchase. We wanted to get something we liked.
I got a quote from the independent write that is linked on edmunds and was shocked that it'd be much more than a CRV, despite the fact that Suzuki will cover the drivetrain.
I asked the salesperson and she was a little evasive. SHe said
around $3200 and that included oil changes, paint protection/fabric guard and other krap that I don't want.
Thanx!
I'm many years old
I drive the Luxury
I drive it like I stole it
I have 2 girls and been married 24 years
I don't think some of that relates to fuel consumption, maybe beer consumption.
Just having some fun :shades:
When I bought snow chains, there was no size listed for the 17" wheels, so I got the size for the 16" spec. They fit just fine, which I doubt they would if the tires were a much different size. Also, with today's tight clearances, larger tires mean a larger turning radius, something usually mentioned in the spec sheets.
I believe the luxury models get slightly better highway mileage because the automatic's 5th gear is lower than the manual's 5th gear.
I'm also extremely old, just one daughter, and I seldom drive in urban rush hour traffic. When I do, I drive calmly. But yesterday, I drove the GV in urban rush hour traffic. It's so nimble it makes you want to dart around like a teenager. Gotta restrain myself from doing that; damaging it would be a huge bummer, and it wastes gas. Also makes people think I'm some silly old fart driving like a teenager. Whhheeeee ZoomZoom indeed!
The factory is supposed to be making engines this year. Hmmmm... what will Suzuki put those engines into? The XL7 will be getting it, perhaps the GV will be getting it as well.
Suzuki only sold about 70K vehicles last year. They want to sell 100K this year, and by 2008, they want to sell 200K. Suzuki has big plans- they are taking on Hyundai/Kia. They are also planning on coming out with a small sports car for the US market as well. I think a sleeping giant is starting to awaken...
And no, it does not look like an equinox like people think it will, completely different.
I would love to tell more, but for competetive reasons, i'm not allowed to.
Hmm ... so you're just saying that to torture us??
tidester, host
http://www.thecarconnection.com/scrapbook-popup.asp?ScrapbookID=1072&Position=2
tidester, host
Nice fit & finish. . Great amenities. Leather seats seemed to offer more support than the too soft cloth ones.
The winner of my test drive comparison is the new improved & larger RAV4--very smooth, but the steering wheel, heaving steering and ergonomics seemed a ittle strange--no doubt one can adapt--anyway, but more than I was willing to spend--so I went home with an Element EXP--2nd best driver (CRV was 3rd best--didn't like the steering) as the price is great ($20,077) great cargo/volume capacity--which is what I really needed
Which model Rav4 did you test?
The overall volume of the GV is also greater than the CRV.
I actually like the back seats in the GV. You do have to raise the head rests to get comfortable and they recline for more room.
We never looked at the Element. Even if it was the perfect driving vehicle, I have to say it's the ugliest thing on the road today.
The seats on the GV also felt way better, with side supports, and a head rest that supported the head.
I think the biggest problem with the GV was an engine that drinks more than it should while putting out less power than it should. I tried passing speed on the freeway and it needed more power. Give it a 250hp vvt motor and the vehicle would be incredible.
250hp? That would be fun.
I can't find any oil filters (or air filters) for my 06' GV, does this mean I have to go to the dealership to change my oil like some kind'a wierdo!? Wasn't their a Seinfeld episode about doing that??
When I see pictures of unibodies torn apart when they hit poles while sliding sideways, I tend to forgive the mileage penalty for a stronger structure.
I also noticed that the K&N oil filter part number is the same for 2005/2006 GV.
And some people puncture the filter with a screwdriver and let it drain before removing it.
I'd love to see a little shut-off ring built in like my home water filter so you could swap out the filter with little leakage.
Steve, Host
The GV problem is the oil filter is up high and in an awkward spot. It's hard enough getting your hand up there and the oil will get just about everywhere. :mad: Maybe I need to try a different way.
I do not want that "Suzuki Hood Mask" just the black acrylic style hood deflector.
That'll put a few more months between oily messes.
Steve, Host
Still happy with our GV!!!
Award: Further to my post a couple of weeks back, our esteemed Canuck gearhead's tv show, Motoring 2006, just awarded the GV it's best new SUV in class, under $XX,XXX, (whatever the figure was). They went on to say the decision was "a no brainer"! Mighty high praise there from an info source which this writer holds in the highest regard...
First drive [ever' report, (both for yrs. truly, and you all too), as reported on these pages. Though ranting about my wish list for this and that, as stated I had not driven one, til this past weekend. Why?, ok, as a bit of a control freak, (engine rpms, precise application of throttle, etc.), it HAD to be a manual 5 speed, and they seem about as scarce as finding a Ford GT hunkered down admidst some F150 pickups, here in the Norwoods. Bottom line, on a biz trip well out of the woods into a more urbane setting, we found one, and fell in love. Had two outings, mine first with the "product advisor", then solo with the wife day two, just the two of us. Some specifics: As (you) well know, Refinement and Modernity is of course what (your) new vehicle(s) are all about. Only downside seems to remain the XL-7 derivative engine, which I guess just can't be tuned for improved free revving liner performance, vs. taking a serious additional mileage "hit"? Translation, much as the downstream benefit of the Daimler Benz tec sourced driveline system has now obviously benefited Zukeophiles, why not partner with another firm to massage the engines? Porsche, Yamaha, whomever. When and if so, this laudable new maturation of the brand would then be complete.
Oh yes, the 5 speed? Oh so sweet! Still "nice" acceleration, though again not quite as linear and smooth as I would have liked. But perhaps this is to some extent a break in cured issue? What say you auto trannie owners, re: engine "free up" with more mileage on the clock? Ultimate Confession, yes, I've now confirmed I could live with this Sube fighter, with the base gearset, and still probably have the ability to reach most fave wilderness canoeing launch points, etc., I think. Any base 5 speed owners out there with experience on the road? Am stayin' tuned.
Of course, this is somewhat arbitrary. It didn't include the new Rav4, and the Explorer is hardly going to appeal to the same people as the GV. In addition, the GV's available low range puts it in a different category from the other small suv's. (The latest Santa Fe drops the low range, and is much larger.) The latest Explorer actually has a low range. Friends of ours have an new Explorer and a '03 GV.
The over $40,000 suv class was topped by the new Mercedes M-class, and the Range Rover. The Range Rover won the overall suv category, but it's impressive the GV was even compared to them, at less than half the price.
Gee, I sure wish the new GV could be had with a 5-speed and the low range. Or at least an manumatic auto. I've found I can't make it stay in 2nd gear for engine braking on descents, in either high or low ranges. Sometimes, that's exactly the speed you need to be going. 3-rd is too fast and requires using the brakes, and 1st, being very low gearing, is just too slow sometimes.
Given the electronics used to engage the low range, I wonder what would be involved fitting the JLX-L's transfer case to one with a 5-speed.
Are you asking why Suzuki doesn't partner with another company? If so, well, they ARE partnered- with GM! They will be making the xl7 replacement in a jointly owned factory that makes the eek/torrent. However, they are also opening up a factory in Japan that will make GM designed 3.2/3.6 motors. If you are curious about the 3.6, cadillac uses it- it makes about 255hp and 250 lbs of tq. The '07 GV could be be cadillac powered!
So I've taken the liberty of adding to the discussion(s) again after a bit of a personal "epiphany" following driving a base manual 5 speed GV this past weekend. My thought process has now evolved to suggested why not just look at a base non low range equipped 5 speed manual GV, as "a Sube fighter", or, translation: (again for Budman), a surrogate Subaru? Viewed in that light, since it's equipped with the reinforced frame, though mindful one would just have to give up some of those old cliff hanger outings, hey, seems even sans the low range it oughta still perform most average "missions" [out there] for the wife and myself? So after driving the 5 speed manual and being generally impressed, hey, whomever out there, you might want to take this info and file it in your own memory banks... Even if like me, you might be waiting first to have a look see at the all new 2007 CRV. Why consider such treason to the brand?, a few reasons. We've owned three new Hondas in past years, and though no spring chicken anymore either, I find I still have retained adequate visual acquity in order to be able to read, for instance, the JD Power statistics data. Still, with that reinforced frame and as of this writing,two Suzukis in daily use here in the family stable, I tend to give our brand loyaly the edge at the moment.
To dclark2, thanks also. Re: the XL-7 replacement and the new engines, I'd need to know first how and or if Suzuki chooses to address fuel economy issues. Sure sounds encouraging though. Certainly the new diesel GV just released abroad has addressed the fuel economy question in spades. But hey, it's just available over there, and probably never will be here, or would it? Still my preference would be say an all new maximally fuel efficent 3.2 in the GV to replace the aged XL-7 chugger. All that's why, Budman, along with having to drive something over a hundred miles to reach a dealership with a service department that I have full confidence in, (despite there being one two miles from my doorstep), remain reasons why despite basically lovin' the rig we drove on the weekend, watchful waiting seems to be the way we'll continue to go for the moment.
Still and all, anyone in the market to purchase right now, would obviously be getting a VASTLY improved all new Suzuki SUV, if all your particular "if's" seem to line up for you right at the moment. Go fer it!
Stayin' tuned here in deep Norwoods....
Fuel economy is good with the 3.6 in the caddy (25 mpg on the highway). The hp/tq/ mpg spec are similar to the 3.5 Honda motor in the vue. This motor,like the Honda, also has variable valves.
I also drove almost 300 miles to buy from a friend even though the dealer was just down the road. I not only saved over $300 in DOC fees, but got a better deal and visited with family and friends for the weekend. Don't forget to have fun and enjoy the new vehicle buying experience. No, I'm not in sales and never thought i would be buying new cars, but a Honda and Suzuki in one year was the best thing i did in a long time. Thanks for all the input. maybe I'll be trading up next year. Gitrdun, Budman
I think the GV needs more power and mpg.The motor is the weak link here. That's what I thought. If I bought an '06 and a few months later, the '07's came out with a whopping 75 more hp and two more mpg, I'd be kicking myself, big time.
As it is, spring is coming and by the time I'd have bought my GV, Suzuki would be only two months away from making the '07s. So, hey, I might as well wait. Mind you, after March 30, I no longer qualify for the grad rebate either.I'd still rather wait.Also, in just a little over a month from now, Suzuki will be showing the '07 xl7 replacement. At that time, more details about the '07 might be leaked. Give the GV a 255hp vvt motor and it'll eat a lot of cars up for dinner.
The mainstream Thetas have an advantage at highway speed because their longer bodies allow the air to flow around the vehicles more smoothly.
Waiting for improvements may make sense on the first model year of a new design, as often a lot of changes are made after the first year of production. Boy, if they fixed my list of 50 things I don't like about it, I'd be green with envy for the people who waited a year.
This is rather frustrating. Having a low range, but having a gap in available speeds for engine braking downhill. I wouldn't mind if this gap was in a higher speed range, but it's exactly where you'd most want to have a variety of speeds available.
When the new GV was introduced at Whistler BC last fall, a whole bunch of automotive writers produced articles from their outing. Probably everyone reading this forum has read one or many of those accounts. Most or all of them described needing the low range to get up some rough track. Not one of those writers thought to test, or comment on, the GV's characteristics for descending. How did they get down the hill? (Or did Suzuki route them down a gentler road where this flaw would not show up?) And they call themselves experts. And Suzuki brags about this thing's off-road prowess.
This has to be the sillyiest thing about a vehicle that's otherwise mostly outstanding. The traction is exceptional. The clearance and underbody protection is marginal at best. The transmission characteristics are ridiculous. I can, however, live with it by resigning myself to more brake jobs. We sometimes do 1000m descents, or even more, while engine braking. So this isn't some trivial thing where you need to creep downhill for a few seconds or minutes.
Say, I know of a website where there's a Suzuki-only discussion forum, with much more '06 GV content, but this site's rule prohibit posting a link. Those of you I think would be interested, have pm denied so I can't email it to you. I could post how to do an Internet search to find the site, but I don't want to risk having my id cancelled here. Can anyone suggest a solution to this that does not violate this site's rules?
There is more, much more to it than that. More efficient ignition, combustion chambers, design, etc can all give more power and better mpg.
My '96 Impala SS with a 350v8, still gives better highway mpg than a Dodge K car I drove with a 2.6 four banger!
The new 3.6 is a superior engine to what the GV has now. The variable valves keep the torque up as well.
Here's one description of the motor in a caddy review:
"handling the 3.6-liter V6's 255 horsepower and 252 lb.-ft. of torque, and in fact, the drivetrain and chassis are very well-matched. The new V6 is a contemporary design, with heads and block of aluminum alloy, dual overhead cams per bank controlling 24 valves, and variable valve timing. As the chassis seems to get happier when pushed, so does the engine. It's plenty adequate down low, if not excessive, and builds power in a healthy manner from 3000 rpm up until just before the redline, power characteristics that are best taken advantage of with a manual transmission."
Now, of course, the engine used in future suzukis won't be identical (it''l have minor tuning differences). But the design will be the same. In the Cadillac, this motor is rated at 18/27 mpg. That sounds pretty good to me. Put it in a GV and the mileage should be as good, if not better than what '06 gets now, plus you'll have an extra 75 hp. That sounds like a deal to me. Of course, this would really help kill resale of '06 GV's though. I don't use power to drive faster (besides an impala ss, my other car is an '06 GTO m6), but I do like to have power to pass. And, where I live, the speed limits can be 70-75mph and you need power up there.
I can do better than that! We have just amended the member agreement and the relevant part is:
"Including a link in a Posting to another Web site is permissible when appropriate in the context of answering a question posed by another Member, but not for the purpose of promoting other automotive communities or third-party services or products. The Hosts will remove any link they believe does not provide value to visitors."
I'm sure many of you will find that very helpful and it will lighten the Hosts' load too!
Be sure to look at the membership agreement (link is to the left on any forums page) to find other changes.
tidester, host