Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Most stories have more than one side though, which is why I think the arbitration process might be worth a shot for others, (first), before unleashing the heavy artillery. Let us know how it goes...
My GV only has 16k on it. So far I haven't had any problems,other than lousy gas mileage. I am getting about 17mpg city.
I am concerned about the tire wear problems that everyone seems to be having.
I hope I can get at least another 16K on the tires before I have to change them!!
They tread seems to be wearing evenly. They are Yokohama Geolanders.
Wheel misalignment will cost mileage due to the energy wasted wearing away the tires. Presumably it will also prematurely wear the drivetrain.
The wheels should be rotated regularly. Unfortunately this will mask an abnormal rear tire wear problem. If you have 16K (miles) on the tires and they're half worn, you're doing ok. The even tire wear is a good sign. We have 32K (km) on ours and they have about half the tread depth left.
Only Suzuki knows for sure, but I'd estimate that about 10% of the '06's have the abnormal tire wear problem, plus maybe a very very few '07's.
link title
My neighbor's brother has a GV and I've quizzed him about it. He's been really happy with his.
I'd be a bit concerned that the battery is marginal and that various seals, fluids and bits could be corroded or gummed up just from sitting around so long. And I'd want to know if the full warranty is in effect or not, and how far I'd have to go to get service.
Good luck!
If the dealer went out of business, where is the nearest dealer?
Hopefully the tire issue was fixed for 07 or else you may need to replace tires in less than 20k miles. Some vehicles didn't have the problem. My 06 did.
Is it being sold as new? It would still be considered a 2 year old vehicle.
I did a quick search on Kelley blue book.
Retail, 12,590
Private party, 10,490
trade in value, 8800
I think you're getting an OK deal. Definately not fantastic or a steal. My opinion, when I can buy something at trade in value, it's a steal. That's how stealerships make their money.
I think you'd be happy with this, except those three kids are going to be in fairly close quarters in the back seat. On the other hand, I had two siblings and we lived with sharing a back seat.
Test drive it carefully to see if it feels unstable, or if there seem to be odd driveline noises. These would be tipoffs to having the rear alignment issue. The alignment issue is usually fixable, but not always, it seems.
I think you have to ensure it has a the original warranty coverage, or have the dealer throw in a good aftermarket warranty coverage.
It's a little more trucklike than a CRV or a Rav4, but as long as you're ok with that, you should be fine with it, or even delighted.
Sorry to be so long-winded, but a proper clear coat job by a body shop would cost well over $400, so my guess is that the dealer is merely quoting some type of paint protection package. This is not worth it, and is particularly a waste of money if the color you are looking at already has clear coat on it. Also, beware of the rear tire issue. My frustration with this seeminly non-correctible issue was one of the main reasons that led me to trade the vehicle in after a little over the year. My neighbor still has his 2006 GV and has been replacing tires ever since it had about 12K on it
2024 Ram 1500 Longhorn, 2019 Jeep Wrangler Rubicon, 2019 Ford Mustang GT Premium, 2016 Kia Optima SX, 2000 Pontiac Trans Am WS6
It also states the depreciation is the biggest downfall, exactly what I was irate about with our GV.
I think it all boils over to the entire line.
And what did motormindy decide on with that used GV?
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/866/the-worst-cars-f- or-the-money/;_ylt=ApJRMuwmgeCPMSO.Jq5QfuwazJV4
After a couple heated conversations about the tire wear, our local Suzuki dealership called the factory and then realigned it to new "modified" specifications and rotated the tires front to back. Now with over 18,000 miles the rear tires still look like new and the worn rear tires that were moved to the front have not experienced any more noticable wear. They can fix this problem if your dealership would take the time to do some research.
I was told that the factory knows about the problem and that they beleive it lies in the way that some of the trucks are being strapped down for shipping.
My Dealership is Courtesy Suzuki in North Huntingdon, Pa.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Observations?
With the treadwear rating of the geolanders that's about what can be expected of them especially if you do all of your driving on pavement and don't baby it. The tires were probably good for another 3 or 4 thousnd miles pushing them to limit. My 2008 had the "engine knocking at idle when warm" thing going on. Retensioning of the belts cured that. Had a SLIGHT rattle coming through the dashboard when running over bumps that was driving me nuts. After process of elimination I found the noise is coming from the airflow control actuator when it is set to floor when the fan speed is below 3 bars on the display. I did the investigating for the replacement of the actuator when and if I take the Vit back to the dealer, people that ride with me think I'm crazy when I say "hear that"? Not really a big deal at all. I haven't posted in over a year, sorry I'm winded but my point is I guess is that so far knock on my head these two GV's I've had have been the most dependable vehicles outside of my suzuki bikes that I have had the pleasure of owning. By the way, I do all scheduled maintenence myself. Like a fellow said to me once when I worked in a garage when I was younger "treat it like it's yours". Garage monkeys take note.
I have been reading many of the comments left about excessive tire wear and alignment problems on the GV from different years. Since buying my 2008 GV new, I myself have experience excessive tire wear and alignment problems. After purchasing my 2008 GV new, within 3 months and only 3,000 miles, began to notice excessive tire wear on my rear tires, a constant skidding of tires whenever I turned a corner and a loss of control in the rear end while driving the GV in wet weather. I took my Suzuki into a Suzuki dealership because of the tire wear and handling problem. Upon inspection, was told by the service technician that the tires had been over inflated and was the reason for the excessive wear and instability. As soon as I was told that, I asked for a tire gauge from the technician, checked the tire pressure in all 4 tires while the technician was standing there just to prove to him that the tires were not over or under inflated. I told him that it might benefit him to do the proper diagnostic tests needed to see if my GV was out of alignment. Keep in mind that this is the dealership that I purchased my GV from that was suppose to put my Suzuki through PDI when it was taken off the truck and before allowing me to drive it off the lot. When we walked back into the office, the technician tried to located my records from when my Suzuki went through PDI to see if the alignment was checked at that time. Come to find out, the records could not be located because my Suzuki never went through PDI which, was a shock to all.
Once the technician put my GV on the machine to check the alignment and specs, he quickly found out that it was out of alignment and spec. So, he did an alignment on it and I was assured that that the tire wear would stop. I continued to drive my Suzuki only to notice that within 1 month, the tire wear had gotten worse. I took my Suzuki to NTB to have the alignment checked and come to find out it was out alignment and spec. I took it back to a Suzuki dealership along with the spec sheet from NTB to show them that the alignment did not hold, the tire wear was worse and the my Suzuki was out of spec again. They aligned it again and told me that they were able to get it aligned properly and into spec. So, I had the tires replaced. My tires have been on my Suzuki for 2 months as of date and are completely worn bald, handling of my GV is very difficult because it does what mechanics call "walking" which is dangerous because the driver has no control at the steering wheel when this happens. Stability is very difficult in dry and wet weather.
I took my GV back to NTB just yesterday to have the alignment checked again. Come to find out my Suzuki is so badly out of alignment and spec, worse than before, that the service technician was not able to bring it into spec for a proper alignment. The eccentrics had been adjusted as much as possible and could not be adjusted any more. Upon further inspection by the service manager of parts, bushings, rear suspension,cradle, frame, etc., everything seemed to be ok. So, the news that I got from the service manager and service technician about my GV not being able to be aligned properly was not good at all.
Needless to say, I started doing research and came across this site among others. I was really amazed at how many stories were posted about the same problems I am having with my GV. So, I decided to hired an attorney to get to the bottom of the ongoing tire wear and alignment problem I among other GV owners, are experiencing.
If anyone else has had to hire an attorney, I would be interested in knowing how your cases have turned out. It seems that Suzuki has been aware of the problem for years but as of date, but still has not done anything to correct it. :lemon: :sick: :mad:
I didn't hire an attorney. Should have. I had my GV in for at least 3 alignments. They said i wasn't rotating my tires enough. Geez, what was i supposed to do, bring my floor jack with me and rotate tires every week? Who replaces tires at 16,000 miles in the first year and for 17" wheels it was almost $600. Suzuki flat out denied my claim. Said it was normal. :mad:
You're better off buying real estate in Vegas and taking the loss. At least you'll have a place to stay. :shades:
Sounds like dlcorbin may have an incompetent dealer on his hands, or at least a suspect alignment machine at the dealership. Getting a second opinion was smart. I'm one of the fortunate ones ... even after being rear ended big time 2 years ago, alignment issues haven't plagued my GV, nor any other satisfied owners of GV's I know locally.
Then... there's that "characteristic" (as my dealer says) hummmm at about 110 km/h under slight load. No vibration on the steering wheel, but you can hear it and sense it in your seat. Transmission, transfer case? I don't commute, and I rarely go that fast anyway ! If I did a lot of freeway driving, I think this would start to get annoying. I was able to purchase a 3 year extension on the manufacturer's original 3 year warranty just in case it gets worse, or something snaps !!
From what I have been told, if you put a 50,000, 25,000, etc., mile tire on a vehicle, the tires under normal driving conditions specified for that tire by the manufacture, should last up to the 50,000, 25,000, etc. limit. Rotating my tires was not an option for me because the wear had begun way before my tires were do for rotating. So, I had to have new ones put on.
It has been only 2 months since the new ones were put on and now they are completely bald. Still way before recommended rotation. I don't even get a chance to rotate. Now, it is really scary to find out that my GV can not be brought back into spec or properly alignment at all. NTB tried however, after they tried to align my GV, did another spec report and showed me were they were not able to bring it back into spec. So, my tires will always wear at a very fast rate, I will always have stability and handling problems.
After speaking with my attorney, it was indicated to me that there are more cases like mine that have been filed against Suzuki. Gosh, one would think that Suzuki would recall the SUV. :confuse:
Anyway, this is not just a costly hassle and a ripoff. It's a serious safety hazard. GV's with fast treadwear means they are always in a bit of a skid. It means you will cross the threshold into loss of control very easily. Cases of this should therefore be reported to the NHTSA/carsafe website. And I would drive the thing only very cautiously until it's sorted out. Or not at all if you can afford it.
You might try sending a registered letter to Suzuki America about it as a last resort before calling in the lawyers.
Our '06GV has 40,000km on it. The original Geolander tires have 35,000km on them, and are less than half worn out. Tracking and stability are perfect. Only Suzuki knows for sure how common this problem was, but it's ridiculous that so many people who ran into it had bad customer treatment added to the harm they already suffered. I'd estimate that half the people with the defect could not get Suzuki to fix it. And obviously they were never compensated for the effort they put into it.
Enough reports on the NHTSA site should eventually trigger a recall. Good luck with it.
Looking to import a 2008 Grand Vitara in to Canada from the USA. Does anyone know if the 2008 Grand Vitara is fitted standard with an immobilizer in the USA?
We have about 35,000km on our original tires, and they have about half the original tread depth.
It seems most of the GV's didn't have this tire wear/alignment problem. Of the ones that did, some were fixed on the first try, some took many efforts, and some were never fixed no matter how hard the owners tried.
canwest, I had the same issues on my 2006. Multiple visits to the dealer and at least 3 alingements and Suzuki wouldn't pay for more than 1 during the warranty. Constant tire rotation (3000 miles). Didn't help. Geolanders were rated for 22,000 miles but mine needed replacing at 16,000. Try and find a good deal on 17" tires. $600+ and Suzuki didn't help a bit. They didn't care, said it was normal. I don't know about you, but replacing tires yearly doesn't seem normal to me.
I also had a hard time keeping the GV in a straight line. it was always an effort. Almost like driving on ice all the time.
I won't even go into all the other visits to the dealer. Not surprised the dealer is now out of business in our town.
Hope norwoodsman is having good luck with his Honda. I just took a quick look at my maintenance chart for our Honda's/Acura, 94,500 miles accumulated and not one visit to the dealer and only the Accord with 52,000 miles is ready for new tires.
Suzuki, are you listening?
As I noted on the '09 GV site recently, Honda is delaying the launch of their next Civic as they work [again] to get it all just right. So what, for a future Suzuki SUV owner? Honda actually wants to make the next one (Civic), a bit smaller and of course ever more fuel efficient, etc, etc. So? So as the Honda CR-V and Element are [somewhat] based on the Civic chassis, expect the next gen of those two to be equally: a bit smaller, and more fuel efficient. Add in all the other goodies/goodness that comes with owning a vehicle produced to such a state of the art level of manufacturing quality, and IMO, when then next CR-V hits the pavement, I think Suzuki will probably face its greatest challenge since the NGV launch, in order to retain market share.
IF ONLY, (almost VW-Bug-like), had they continued to evolve the Sidekick, (for instance), year by year since its demise in '98, well, one can only speculate how refined it might have become. Yes, there was the underwhelming Vitara, but its ratings clearly told the tale there...
But here's hoping [for Suzuki fans] that the Co. is looking MUCH farther down the road NOW in their SUV division. Ya, please give the next "new" one an all new name too... In the meantime Bud, have to agree, its Honda and Co. for me.
Nwdsmn.
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/autos_content_landing_pages/1361/the-worst-small- -suv-money-pits/
However, here is a "good" review for the 2006 Grand Vitara, at least for the one I was privileged to purchase.
It rocks. It's a big reason my family walked away from a serious rear-ender 2.5 years ago - the read door took a beating, and the rest of the vehicle stayed true.
It gets me around in any season, and it saves me from shoveling my steep long driveway in the winter (our friends with sedans and min vans park at the bottom and walk up). The ESP keeps it straight on slippery, slushy roads, while other vehicles (including some SUV's) end up in the ditch.
And although beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it's a big reason we opted for the GV over the Hyundai, Honda CRV or RAV4. It just plain looks better, inside and out. But that's my opinion only, and it's not even up for debate, even if you took a survey and found 98% of respondents thought otherwise. I still remember sitting in it for the first time, after trying out all the rest, and smiling - from that moment on, I owned it.
Sure, there are better options if you want more power, better fuel economy, diesel or hybrid... but I'll be keeping my GV for a bit longer (and if my 15 year old has her way, she'll be asking for the keys !).
Oh, and by the way, Suzuki GV has the best commercial.... ever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NM9SCiTjwD8
Cheers !
An externally rear mounted spare tire may be very costly to fix in a minor accident, but it may provide substantially more protection in a really bad one.
Had 3 alignments done and I even had to pay for the 3rd one in less than 16,000 miles!!! The front tires would get a "featheredge" on the outside of the tires so we had to rotate the tires every couple thousand miles. :mad: Our GV was also not very stable on the open road. It was always a chore to keep it going straight.
At 16,000 miles, the Geolanders needed to be replaced. And the 17" tires weren't cheap at the time. I thought it was ridiculous to have a $600 a year maintenance item such as tires to be replaced. Suzuki said it was normal and denied our claim.
Along with all the silly oil leaks and numerous visits to the dealer, we happily got rid of our GV. :lemon:
Did you rotate you tires every 6000 miles?
Also is your model 2 or 4 wheel drive??
I don't think you can mix tires on the "all" wheel drive model. It may cause problems with the drivetrain.
No I did not rotate the tires at all, did not have time, it is my wife's car. As it turns out, I think that the only thing that would be accomplished by rotating the tires , is that ALL the tires would wear out faster. The front end does not wear the tires abnormally. When I took it to the dealer, I was told that since I did not rotate, the tires would not be covered by Yokohama's warranty AND I was accused of overinflation. I am not a mechanic, but I know my way around a car fairly well, and I am not stupid. I did not/have not ever overinflated tires. I have a good gauge and an air compressor in my garage. From what I have read anywhere on the internet, this abnormal wear on the rear tires has happened on both 2 and 4 wheel drive, perhaps more frequently on 2 wheel drive
And since they're matched, it doesn't make sense NOT to rotate them and thus spread the wear over all four. Rotation doesn't, of course, change the amount of wear, but by spreading the wear over the tire faces of the set, you don't end up with two completely worn out on one side of the tread.
Even if the alignment is correct, and it sounds like yours is far off, the GV must have tires rotated because of the cambered rear wheels.
As I've said before, our '06 GV has about 35,000km on the original tires, and they're not quite half worn out. They have been rotated at about 4000km intervals.
I did read a report that the GV was more expensive than CRV over time, not for me so far. Try to get a leather and loaded CRV new in 2006 for 24,000 dollars as far as resell not an issue when you keep your car over ten years like I do. I just dropped my 2000 Tundra at the shop for a new front axle it has 128000 miles on it and this is the first time in the shop for a non routine problem.
I wasn't aware of this until recently, but apparently manufacturers have been "gaming" the cost of ownership stats. The way they do it is to cut far back on maintenance visits, (ahem, BMW) which means you spend less on servicing. You then pay for replacing parts earlier, but after the surveys aren't interested any more. It seems to me that Suzuki requires the GV have a lot of service visits, which end up costing enough to make the cost of ownership look bad. But presumably the vehicle will last a lot longer.
I did my own survey to compare resale values to original cost, and the GV didn't do badly. The Escape and the Forester had the worst resale values compared to original cost. CRV and Rav4 were only a little better than the GV.
Another cost of ownership when it comes to Hybrids battery replacement. True story here my daughter and her husband have a Hybrid, I will not say what one because I'm not here to bash any brands. Back to the issue at hand, after five years the batteries died and the cost to replace them is eight grand. So add the the extra cost at purchase with the cost to replace batteries and that is a crap load of gas. As of today they now have an under powered non hybrid hybrid.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
My guess is that about 5-10% of the GV's had this problem.
I have no idea how it will handle your driving conditions, unfortunately.
Besides the squirming and tire wear, you are also getting bad mileage and prematurely wearing the drivetrain. Worst of all, this is a serious safety hazard, since it is like being a little out of control all the time.
The GV owners who never had this problem, or have had it fixed, find the GV is extraordinarily sure-footed. The worse the conditions, the better it seems compared to everything else on the road. The original tires should be good for 50,000km or 30,000miles. Good luck with it.
I took it in to same mechanic, where it sat for 2 days without being looked at. I got nervous and took it to a different mechanic that my landlord (a Porsche mechanic) recommended. They ran a diagnostic and took all belts off to see about rattle. They said that the 2 sensors that control the air/ gas ratio are bad and that all my tensioners for 3 timing chains are bad and I need to pay over $2,600. Does that sound right?
I don't have experience with Suzuki vehicles and I love my GV but is it pretty much downhill from here? If I did get the repairs done is everything else pretty reliable? I am hearing so many negatives about Suzuki, that they are just throw-away vehicles with no long life expectancy. I thought they were better than that though.
Anyway, thank you for your time in reading this and any advice or opinions you have are greatly appreciated!