By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
First, the performance on Mobil 1 5W30 synthetic. So Far its great. The car runs cooler, has a smoother feel and no hesitation. Its quieter. I think my decision to put synthetic looks very good. However, I did this after 8000 miles on the car. It is important to note that the effects of adding synth. on very new cars or very old cars may be different as tolerances in these cars may be different. I will keep you posted on the mileage on synth.
As far as 04veronaowner's questions: A 15 MPG in city driving conditions (stop and Go- as I do every day) in the begining seems to be the pattern in my Car. After 3000 miles this improved to 18 MPG. I dont have highway figures as I dont use them too much (My work place is just 10 min. away thru' side roads). I am not sure if Verona would give better gas mileage than it already does. It seems from what forum members say, Veronas doing the highway more often give a higher MPG than city driving folks. The adaptive system in the car seems to tune up better on highway driving conditions. Maybe Suzuki could consider a Hybrid Verona solely focusing on Gas mileage--shelve the comments or questions on so called low HP/accelaration. That would certainly justify and enhance the great value the car offers. Comments?
As far as the diagnosis of Oil type, I think it is safe to assume that the Car comes with 5W30 as the dealers generally follow the user manual specs. If unsure or facing poor performance it may be wiser to change the oil. I think spending $20-$30.0 for peace of mind and performance is worth it.
I have never been in a life threatening accident, nor has anyone else in my family. I cannot even think of a friend that has been in one. Everyone always walked away from the accident and this includes many cars built back in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's before safety was such an issue. There is one exception. My father-in-law was damn near killed back in the early 70's driving an old pick-up truck that didn't even have seat belts. It din't come with them. I cannot imagine that even the Verona is as unsafe as that thing.
I am not saying that safety isn't important. Only that it needs to be put into perspective. For myself, I don't worry. If I had a family riding in that car daily, that would be another story.
Tom
As far as the Verona, I think Suzuki, actually Daewoo, just needs to up the mileage a little, to put it in the low range of the larger 4's. That would make this engine much more competative, maybe 22/30 mpg. It's close now. Then maybe they could offer a high performance version without dismal mileage figures.
Tom
Autozone is showing an air filter, STP #AF3963 for $16.
NAPA shows a cabin filter for $20 and an air filter for $15.
I hate paying inflated dealer prices for parts.
Tom
But if you use the torque the car has to get a good jump at the lights so you can change lanes...well, I'm getting 18 mpg because I can't seem to help it. So it's not how fast you go as much as quickly you get to that speed.
But like the person pointed out about the hybrids, even at $2.30/gallon, the difference between 24mpg and 18 mpg is still only going to be about $300/year for me, since I live 3.2 miles from my work (one of the few good things about driving in Hawaii...)
Definitely worth it, when you consider I got a car I like as well as an Accord or Camry, and better than a Civic or Corolla for thousands less. Mind you, I'm not saying it's better than a Camry, but I like it better.
That being said, Suzuki apparently thinks there's something fishy about the tests, and they said they would look into it.
But here's the bottom line, and I hope Suzuki hears it: If they keep making cars like this and pricing it like this, I'll buy another Suzuki and be happy. But if they want me to become a lifelong customer, they have to get the Verona gas mileage up a little higher and improve the crash ratings to at least average, while still keeping the car at least a thousand less than a similarly-equipped Camry or Accord. They'll have to keep the smoothness and torque, too. But the one deciding factor on winning my loyalty for life is how well this car was made. They said they want to be known for quality. If my 2004 Verona doesn't leave me that impression, I'm going back to Honda.
However, just under 6k miles and 4 months of ownership, I'm still tickled pink with the quality. I still get a rush looking at its styling. I still get a thrill feeling the torque off the traffic light change and being able to get the spot in the traffic I want. And I like the room and comfort. They hit a home run with me on this one. Shouldn't I hope they hit another home run to win my heart forever?
Which makes me think that the low gas mileage for the Verona comes from the fact that it revs up easily, almost too easily. A strong acceleration can get you above 5k quickly, maybe without you realizing it. That uses a lot of gas, I'm sure.
I posted without noticing your comment that 2000 RPM is too low. It is. There's no way to get to 60 mph at all without doing at least 2500 RPM.
In Hawaii, the acceleration you get at 2500 RPMs isn't usually slow at all, although also not fast. If you need to change lanes, you do sometimes have to rev the engine faster.
And yeah, I like the surge of power. I haven't been able to make myself stay under 2500 RPMs consistently enough to see any change in gas mileage. But being aware of it is changing my habits slightly. I don't always accelerate as fast as I can, because I'm watching the tachometer and seeing if I can keep it low.
In any case, it's made me more aware of how the car works and revs.
But the bottom line for me is: If I use discipline and keep the car under 2500 rpms as much as possible, I might see a 2 mpg improvement, and probably just 1 mpg.
Let's say you drive 90 miles per day. If you get 18 mpg, that's 5 gallons you just used, compared to 4.5 gallons if you got 20 mpg. That works out to about $1.15 in increased costs, or $34/month, or $408/year. That's the extent of your motivation to stay slow.
In Hawaii, I do average 27 miles per day. That means a cost of about $.38/day, and $136 a year.
That's for 2 mpg. The Camry and Accord actually do more like 3-5 mpg better. Assuming 5 mpg improvement over what I currently get, I "lose" $340/year over the gas costs of an Accord. But I saved at least $6000 over a similarly-equipped Accord, so I can drive the car nearly 18 years before I break even (aside from maintenance costs...we'll see how the car holds up). Since I'm planning on keeping the car only about 5 years (my financial situation will be quite a bit better when I have it paid off), and a max of 7, it's not really worth it to me to keep the RPMs low.
Particularly since other people have reported using synthetic 5W-30 oil improves gas mileage by 1-3 mpg, anyway.
...but I don't like wasting money on gas, so I'm going to play around with different things to see what kind of mileage improvement I can get, i.e., synthetic oil, a K&N air filter, maybe some premium spark plugs eventually, and maybe even try the cold-air vortext air inflow attachment that I've seen on eBay. I'll report on 'em as I go, but I'm still trying to establish my baseline gas mileage.
The aspect of rpms influencing the mileage is interesting. Personally, as I live in a hilly region, it is impossible to look at the rpm meter. Also the adaptive system and the computer would "learn" the pattern when you rethink your driving to keeping under 2500 rpm. So what happens when you want to use torque to slice in on the highway from the ramp?. This is important especially in areas where there is agressive driving. You are often "pressurized" to push harder. I would like to know if any members have read about or used a product called vornado which is actually a vortex tube fitted before the air intake to create a vortex flow of air into the fuel chamber. What happens to the air fuel mixture? and does it affect the oxygen sensors? The system claims to improve gas mileage.
Comments?.
I no longer get surprised with what goes on with my Verona. I just go with the flow. I will admit though since my Lemon Law claim, I pretty much get what I want from the dealership when it comes to my Verona.
Easterbaby
24,000 and hanging in there!
Tom
My question is this: Has anyone heard anything about the '05 models? I know one person on this forum just purchased one but I would like to hear more from actual owners. Does anyone have any advice for the potential '05 owner? People who are fans of synthetic oils should know that I plan to keep with my tradition of using 5W-30 synthetic oil on any new Verona.
The engine is what is referred to as an over square engine. This means that the stroke of the piston is longer then the diameter. This leads to more torque but less snap. I notice when accellerating onto the freeway, especially uphill, the car doesn't snap when the transmission downshifts but seems to flatten out later delivering the needed speed. When cruising down the freeway, the high torque means less throttle moves to maintain speed. Like I said, cruisn. Ultimately, it's personal preference. I think of the Vernoa's in line 6 cy as deluxe 4cy instead of a V6. Hey the price is about the same, actually cheaper.
I do think that the mileage should be a little better. The Verona gets mileage figures comparable with a V6 while delivering the performance more comparable to a 4. Look at what you save on the car compared to a few dollars more for fuel a month.
Also check the transmission shift characteristics. The first to second shift seems a little slow. But it doesn't cause a problem. If I accellerate hard it responds by shifting faster. And if I am chatting with my wife in the car, I don't notice it at all. I think it is optimized for smoothness, it's just that we are accustomed to a harder shift.
The fit and finish are flawless.
Overall I am real happy with it. It's a nice automobile for a nice price.
Tom
http://homepage.uvt.nl/~s924354/AutoScoops/Scoops/Chevrolet Evanda 1.jpg
http://homepage.uvt.nl/~s924354/AutoScoops/Scoops/Chevrolet Evanda 2.jpg
rumor has it will come with a base 2.4 Ecotec 4 170 HP and a 250 HP GM V6.
Kind of lame. They just need to supply a better transmission on the current engine and keep that as the base engine.
Daewoos new engine(XK6 inline) is a GEM of an engine. Canadian auto reviewers praised it highly with similar quality to a BMW inline six. So it is actually the highlight of your Veronas. But GM cheapened out on the transmission and engine management issues.
In fact if you research the issues with the Chevy Equinox and some GMC models with GM's own inline six engines, they also had the same engine management issues and on one auto show I watched the GM truck with the inline six actually hesitated during idling on the show. Dejavu.
GM Daewoo cars are selling like hotcakes in overseas markets, but I really think it is too late for GM. They have way too much debt (over 300 billion) to survive.
I do question the value of a 5 speed transmission in the Verona. The Verona has a long stroke engine producing high torque. This engine is an under square engine. I think I called it an over square engine earlier. Coupled with variable valve intake control, this engine delivers a nice flat torque output. If your torgue is high and constant, more gears in the transmission won't make much difference. In fact, if engineers could develop a very high torque engine at very low RPM's, no transmission would be needed at all. That's why steam locomotives were used for such a long time. High torque at low RPM, zero actually, meant no transmission at all. I guess engineers have made a high torque at 0 RPM engine. Just go back to steam.
When I purchased the Verona, I knew that it was a Daewoo. I didn't know that GM had a hand in it. I hope this works out OK. Me and GM cars do not get along. So far, so good.
Tom
I've been keeping so busy I have'nt been writing. However I have been enjoying the forum by reading. First the MPG news. I tried the 2500 RPM cycle and checked the mileage change. Also I've had the car on synthetic and run it more on highways. I got a 3 MPG increase. The change may not be solely on one of the factors alone, but due to a combination of all the above factors. I am absolutely convinced on Synth. Oil. The Car runs better and makes no sound. The start ups are smoother. Its worth every cent. However the mileage of verona could be improved. Its probably the kerb weight that causes a part of the lower MPG. As far as the engine is concerned, I think its a great engine. Its smooth and silky and has almost no vibrations. Its an XK6 inline pattern. Like the ones on Jaguars. I think Suzuki could offer V6 variants for those who desire more power. I also feel there has to be a great improvement in the QC of parts. The rear end of Verona needs more design. Its too plaid. I think despite the ECM problems Verona is a good entry car for Suzuki for its first attempt.
CCbloom..its great that you got your taillights. Can we have a picture please?.
Keep writing Guys.
I posted about 3-4 months ago regarding a 2004 Chevy Epica (identical to the Verona). Back then, I told you that it was actually our SECOND Chevy Epica, which was bought back by General Motors because they were not able to deal with our stalling issues.
I thought all was well with our new Chevy Epica. I absolutely love the car, because it has so many features for such a low affordable price. But, the problems have resurfaced with this car, and we are pressing GM to buy it back a second time, and this time, I will NOT be going back to the Epica.
A couple of problems:
1. I can feel this irregular "jerking" motion when the transmission is trying to shift gears. At odd times, this motion is extremely harsh (actually jerking my neck back), and makes clunking sounds.
2. Idle surging. This issue makes the car even more unsafe and unstable. When stopped at a light, the RPMs either surge UPWARDS or DOWNWARDS. Either way, the car tends to jerk forward little bit by little bit unless I actually FORCE pressure on the brake pedal. Apparently, GM knows of this problem. It has something to do with the A/C turned on. They are working on a fix and want me to drive it until they design one.
Let me tell you that I am sick and tired with this car. It looks great, drives great (at times), and it feels great (at times), but I think it's time to say GOOD BYE to Epica.
Hello to...maybe the Impala.
JS
You seem to be having your problems with the Epica thats strange/ I have have had my Epica LT for 16 months now, apart for a brake light recall and a computer adjustment it has performed flawleslly. I live in Western Canada and drive in some challenging conditions, I also know of three other owners who have Epicas and they seem to be be quite happy with there vehicles. I wish you well with your next choice.
1. I can feel this irregular "jerking" motion when the transmission is trying to shift gears. At odd times, this motion is extremely harsh (actually jerking my neck back), and makes clunking sounds.
2. Idle surging. This issue makes the car even more unsafe and unstable. When stopped at a light, the RPMs either surge UPWARDS or DOWNWARDS. Either way, the car tends to jerk forward little bit by little bit unless I actually FORCE pressure on the brake pedal. Apparently, GM knows of this problem. It has something to do with the A/C turned on. They are working on a fix and want me to drive it until they design one.
It seems that problem #1 may indeed be related to an electrical issue. I had this same thing with a Ford Contour I had. They never could find the problem, and I had to get rid of it. They knew it was the transaxle not receiving proper instructions from the computer (ecm) but couldn't find the cause. I don't know what #2 could be...but it sounds like GM knows.
WHAT ARE THE CHANCES OF RECEIVING TWO BAD CARS? It seems Suzuki has a real problem on their hands here. I think they know it as well. All advertisements on television are for the Forenza. It seems they are just "treading water" until Suzuki tries to figure out what direction to head with the Verona. It's too bad...
Suzuki doesn't sell enough cars to have large dealerships. The only way you are going to have a large dealership is that Suzuki shares the space with another brand. I would be surprised if there is a dealership that sells 100 new Suzuki cars a month. That would be about three a day........
Maybe after I see an improvement from the all-synthetic oil.
None of the oil places had the right filter. Few had 5W-30 synthetic on hand. So I considered doing it myself.
An auto parts store here said that the filter I needed was Fram PH3593A. For around $5. And they had 11 of them. I was skeptical that they had given me the right one, because why would it be so cheap, and why would they have so many in stock for a car not sold on the island? I didn't want to get the car up on the lift and have the oil draining and find I had the wrong filter.
So I went ahead and let a service shop charge me extra for going to get a filter, and left my car there longer for them to get the right oil (about 3 hours). I told them to leave the box so I could get the right one next time when I change it myself.
Turns out, it was the same filter. I asked the guy at the service shop, and he said that authorized dealers of a product, like Fram for instance, are required to carry the entire line, just in case. Whether they ever sell one.
So even though fram.com says it should PH9897, make sure, because I've got PH3593A on my car right now.
But then I thought about it a little bit. $60 is $40 more than the average oil change. The car not only runs smoother and cooler and lasts longer, it improves gas mileage by 2-3 mpg. $40 divided by 3 months means buying synthetic oil costs $13 more each month. If I drive 1000 miles each month, at 18 mpg and $2.30/gallon, my gas costs are $127/month. But if I get 20 mpg, it's only $115/month, a savings of $12, or only $3 out of pocket for using a far better grade of oil. If I can manage to get 21 mpg, my gas costs are just $110, actually saving a total of $12 every 3 months over getting the regular change.
If gas is more expensive or I drive more, I save even more.
If I change the oil myself, I can save bunches.
I had the oil changed last Friday. So far, the car does run quieter (less of the harmonic overtone I had noticed before). I haven't noticed it running cooler or smoother. It seems to have a bit more pep, but that could be imagination. And it looks like I'm getting 2 mpg more than last week (19 mpg up from 17 last fill-up). I'll provide an update after I've actually filled it up twice. One thing that kills my mileage here is traffic in which it takes me 45 minutes to go 4 miles. Sheesh!
Your car will die, not because of oil related engine failure, but because it will need a $500 brake job, or the front end will deteriorate, or the transmission will crap out. Pennzoil and Quaker State guarantee their engines for 250 or 300K if the oil is changed every 4000 miles. They do this because the chances of oil related engine failure are miniscule in the larger picture.
Conoco-Phillips has so much group III refining capacity that they're almost giving synthetic blend away. In Missouri you can get Trop-Artic 5w30 at a bit over a dollar, or go to Dollar Tree and get 10w30 for a buck. My daughter has an elderly oil-burning Camry that was drinking a quart of SuperTech per week. The Trop Artic goes about three times as long.
If you care to change your own, the combination of a SuperTech filter and the TropArtic oil would be a damn cheap approach. I haven't checked to see whether they'd try to charge me blend prices for an oil change, but given the fact that the stuff is cheaper than most group II oils they should be able to do the change at a reasonable price. In fact, I might see if I they can substitute it for the Pennzoil bulk dino 5w30 (also an excellent group II+ oil) at approximately the same price.
A group III or full synthetic oil's major strength should be in holding up in temperature extremes. I'm not sure what's going on with my daughter's car. Maybe it's swelling the seals and I'll have a catastrophic break down in a month or so. But no one will get a 15% increase in gas mileage (unless you're an Amsoil salesman) just by switching to synthetic.
Well, from now on, I am going to change the oil myself, so it's not like I need to spend that much from now on.
But I am also going to stick with the synthetic. At the very least, I have already noticed the engine running more quietly. And I think I am seeing a 10% increase in gas mileage. But we'll see. Like I said, I'm going to wait a few fill-ups and I'll report.