What is "wrong" with these new subcompacts?

iluvmysephia1

the success of Subaru has taught me.

Americans obviously don't have much pride when it comes to how nice or ugly their cars are.

Them Subaru's are some of the ugliest rigs out there.

You'd have to pay me and my car insurance company to drive one. And even then I'd be at my closest Kia or Scion or Suzuki dealer trying to pawn that piece of Sasquatch dung off.

Driving a Subaru would be like taking a dude that wants to listen to Foghat or The Guess Who or The Tragically Hip or ZZ Top or The Drive-By Truckers and forcing them to listen to any Britney Spears CD. Would not work. Would not do the trick. Imposter recording artist. Imposter automobile manufacturer. When a dumb American buys a Subaru it sends them the wrong message. It tells them that "Hey, maybe our cars are cool cars. Maybe these American people can be buffaloed into thinking that what their car looks like on the outside doesn't really matter that much."

Instead of David Bowie's 'Young Americans' just substitute 'Dumb Americans' and you'll be rockin'.

For me to be hamm-clawed into driving a Subaru would be like forcing me to abandon my Foghat or Drive-By Truckers t-shirt and making me wear a t-shirt that reads 'Bar-bwa Wa Wa Rocks My World!'

snakeweasel

Them Subaru's are some of the ugliest rigs out there.

Oh come one first off there is the Aztek, xB, Element and the FJ Cruiser (there is one down the street from where I live and its causing property values to drop) just to name a few that are far uglier than anything Subaru makes.

Subaru makes some pretty decent looking cars.

Mr_Shiftright

I wouldn't call Subarus ugly but they are amazingly uninteresting to look at IMO.

logic1

the FJ Cruiser (there is one down the street from where I live and its causing property values to drop)

Making things even worse, seems every other FJ I see here in NY is in that LOUD yellow.

Can a car driver scream 'look at me, look at me!' any louder?

plekto

Why doesn't Subaru make cars with windows that are in frames? The rear doors on most of their cars - you see door - glass - but the glass is bigger than the door - It's hard to describe. Someone flunked ergonomics 101 in their cars big-time. It just isn't half as nice as say, a Honda Fit, which has been for sale in Japan and the rest of the world for years.

*****
The Suzuki has a bigger engine and you get 4*4 added for free.

Naw your paying for it, I would suspect that if it was a FWD car it would cost considerably less.

While I would be the first to admit that in some situations AWD is better I don't think that it is so much better that it justifies the additional cost (at least for most people).

I am keeping with the notion that it is just a marketing gimmick.

But what a nice gimmick it is. Consider that GM sells their Vibe with AWD as an option. Toyota does as well in Japan and other markets.

As for price, the reality is that it's maybe a $500 option that they are adding in. $15,000 is probably the price-point that they are aiming for and would sell it as 2wd anyways, so my point stands. It's an example of one Japanese company with huge egos and hugely overpriced cars being beat by the other Japanese company with no ego and rock-bottom pricing.

Quality-wise, I'd personally rate Suzuki about the same as GM. It's not Honda or Toyota, but it's still a huge notch above the Korean models.

Plus you get AWD thrown in for free. Oh - and cruise control, steering wheel mounted audio controls... and a ton of other features you have to upgrade to the top-end model with the Toyota/GM versions to get.

And lastly, Suzuki is smart - no options. All included. ABS, side airbags - interior features - you have two options, like the Honda Fit. And several colors. Easy as pie shopping. Plus, the sport version isn't much more expensive.

30mpg highway isnt so terrible, either.

snakeweasel

LOL that one down the street from me is that LOUD yellow. Few cars actually look good in yellow, this one is not one of them.

iluvmysephia1

it is so nice to read posts from somebody with an open mind!

I mean, people know me on here always extolling the virtues of Kia Motors, how my 1999 Kia Sephia started me off into a different way of thinking. Asian cars, good cars. Ya don't need Fo-Mo-Co any more. Don't have to be expensive. Hyundai, Kia, Suzuki...you get my drift.

I already had owned my 1999 Kia Sephia for about a year and a half before the Long Haul Warranty was introduced. Wow. With that Warranty it became clear that the domestics were sunk. Sunk like the SS Luisitania, my car loving compadres.

Two Kia's later, being 100% satisfied with both of my two Kia's and experiencing enormously low maintenance/repair costs associated with my two South Korean rigs, Suzuki all-of-a-sudden introduces this 2007 Suzuki SX4. Didn't see that one coming, baby. I mean, who would have known that Libarace was _ _ _? Yeah, the 2007 Suzuki SX4 developed jointly by Suzuki and Fiat. Body-designed in Italy. Suzuki really kept this one under wraps, or, I missed the fanfare at Geneva in February of 2006. Most likely that would be the case. I'm so used to the formula of the American car companies...introduce overpriced car after overpriced SUV after overpriced, dull-looking crossover...that little 'ole Suzuki just snuck this baby in there.

Spartan good looks, strong and bold driving stance, interesting triangle notch at the forward bottom of it's A-Pillars. Humm...just what do we have here? $14,999 with i-AWD? The ability to pop it into 2WD(FWD) at the happy flick of an easily-reached toggle switch? Yes, that be true. The ability to toggle to AWD-Lock for true 4WD. The ability to toggle to AWD-Auto for rainy weather traction. P205/60R16 Yokohama's for superior ride and handling. A sidenote to the Yokohama note is that one test-driver of the SX4 noted Bridgestone's on his test drive car. Eeek! Not a deal-breaker but not as good a tire. Would it stop up a deal? Of course not.

Is the 2007 Suzuki SX4 a compact? Or a subcompact? Who has the method of inchology memorized or who wants to go research it out to let us know if this pup is a compact or a subcompact? It is pretty small to call it a compact. The only reason I ask is that one reviewer of the SX4 toted it as a compact.

lilengineerboy

Its cool you are so excited about your new purchase, and its also cool that you are totally absent of any type of buyers remorse for previous purchases. The car gawds are shining on you.
Its good to see someone fired up and excited about something.

snakeweasel

But what a nice gimmick it is.

Is it? I look at it like putting wipers on the rear door windows, sure they will work but they are mostly useless. I mean I can count on the fingers of one hand of a high school shop teacher the times in my life that I truely needed AWD.

As for price, the reality is that it's maybe a $500 option that they are adding in.

Usually its $1,000 give or take a couple of hundred. Just the same give me FWD and knock of the extra cost. AWD really isn't worth it.

Plus you get AWD thrown in for free.

Again its not free, it is built into the price of the car. If you think its free e-mail me I have a wonderful deal for you. But please no checks cash only.

30mpg highway isnt so terrible, either.

It is when I am getting better than that on my 7 year old much roomier (and less expensive) car. So basically to get this car I have to spend more money on a smaller car and get less mileage. Yep that makes sense.

nippononly

I think you misunderstand - iluv has not purchased a Suzuki. It is his latest excitement, that's all. By my calculations his '01 Sportage now has approximately 122,000 miles, and is his daily driver.

If he is keeping the Sportage until the payments are done, then it will be at least a year before he purchases said Suzuki. Maybe by then they will have more than a dozen dealers nationwide, and I will take a more serious look at the SX4 myself. For now, I would have to drive too far for warranty servicing, and the dealer is so pressed for profits he is marking all Suzukis up either $2000 or $3000. With no competition to speak of, why wouldn't he? This has kept me from anything more than a casual look-see at the new SX4.

Correct me if I'm wrong on the purchasing timeline, iluv? Glad to see you remain as enthusiastic as ever!

;-)

daysailer

Your first Kia was a '99 and you're on your third? How do you know that Kia's are reliable and low maintenance? Unless you drive an extraordinary amount, you haven't owned them long enough to fully assess their longevity/reliability.

iluvmysephia1

snake, we are so practical, aren't we?

The 2007 Suzuki SX4 also possesses great looks. Little design nuances that can't be found on even my beloved Kia's and Hyundai's. Little things like the wrap-around headlamp/turn signal cluster.

The silver bumper cover guards. The fender flares. On and on I could go.

snakeweasel-if it isn't trade in time this might not give you the "gotta have it" grab and feel. It is doing it to me because it is trade in time, though the Mrs. doesn't agree with me. Therein may lie my problem with getting one of these SX4's. If just me at my address I'd be down there at the Suzuki dealer in Sierra Vista, Arizona, signing on the dotted line. Would've happened about a week ago. Still might happen-I'm waiting for some planets to align perfectly. I'll get back to ya on that.

What I'm saying is it's in the details. And this car includes the details. Suzuki is not a new flash-in-the-pan car maker. There ain't no need to worry about reliability.

Most car problems occur in the first 20,000 miles of driving. We've discussed this one before so no need to hammer Charles Barkley about it. Suzuki offers a 7 year and 100,000 mile Warranty. Plus, breakdown tows are covered as are loaner cars for up to 5 days.

What couldn't the dudes find and fix in 5 days?

daysailer, are we still in the business of hammering Hyundai and Kia till they're purple and blue? Wow, some people learn slowly. In case you haven't noticed Kia and Hyundai are waving goodbye to you in their rear-view mirrors. Oh, don't just take my word for it.

Read the Washington Post. Read Car and Driver. The 2006 Kia Rio5 is one of their top 28 cars for 2006 and came in 3rd place in their 7 car comparo several months back. Same great Long-Haul Warranty and same great cars.

Oh, I forgot. You know rroyce(BTW-where has rroyce been)and he deems Kia's unnecessary roughness and penalizes them 15 yards. When you're good you do make others jealous, I know.

Kia Motor's future is so bright they best be sportin' some nice, big Burton Cummings shades or they'll gain cataracts. :shades: :shades:

boaz47

I don't think we were saying the Suzuki was a bad deal. If you need AWD it isn't bad. AWD isn't needed by many of us in the western states and the AWD option does lower fuel mileage, always. Not only because it takes more moving parts but because it weighs more. Still the SX4 is not a sub compact even if it is less expensive than a Subaru. It doesn't get 30 MPG even on the Highway however, close but still 29 is 29 and 24 in the city is 24. It isn't a lightweight either at just under a ton and a half.

I think the point is to equate Suzuki with Kia is a slam for Suzuki. At least to date with Kia rated as low as it is. One persons good fortune with a brand hardly equates to the whole brand being as good as a better rated brand. Yes, there are exceptions and sometimes one manufacturer will have a success with one model but over the long haul you have to be shy when trying to pull a company like Kia into the same league as Suzuki.

Still we have drifted from sub compacts to talk about small SUVs and AWD.

snakeweasel

The 2007 Suzuki SX4 also possesses great looks.

Very subjective.

The silver bumper cover guards. The fender flares. On and on I could go.

Meaningless fluff (actually silver bumper guards might not look to good).

I will check one out, maybe this weekend, but from what I see its nothing to write home about.

nippononly

The sticker on the window of the SX4 says 24/30 for mpg.

I wouldn't mind seeing Subaru make multi-mode AWD systems standard in its smaller cars - I would like the opportunity to go to FWD for commuting and other such low-fun drives.

Of course, then base-model Subarus would cost $22K, and they would be completely out of the price range of similarly-sized competitors. If the SX4 shines the light on one thing for sure, it is that the competition at the $15K price point and the consequent expectations of feature content at that price have been significantly ramped up by the new onslaught of the latest subcompacts. The Fit certainly had something to do with that too.

iluvmysephia1

you missed my point completely. I don't go by what others like. If I did I'd be driving an ugly, large pick-em-up truck or an ugly Escalade or...oh, no...here it comes into my mind again, an ugly Subaru.

Yuk! Them are some homely rigs them Subaru's! You can have 'em! Even the WRX is homely as hell.

No, this is what it's all about. Coming here and shopping for cars and discussing them all we want before making a purchase.

Believe me snake, your opinion is much like my neighbor's nose. He has one. So does Jay Leno. So does Knarles Barkley.
BTW-tell that dude that sings for Knarles Barkley that hot tea with honey splashed helps with the larynx. He has roughed up his larynx badly from screeching his voice in that song 'Crazy' for too many gigs in a row. Sure does sound great, though.

Point is, we might think that our opinion resonates with the Car Gods, but, fact is, it is just our opinion. And, unless I've lost count there are some 300 million American people. If I write good things about Kia and the 2007 Suzuki SX4 in here some people might read it and say "Wow, what a studly dude. He is not only a handsome devil, he really knows what he's talking about with cars."

Then again, they might read of my continued success with my two(read two here, daysailer, not three, one can tell when someone is just coming in to cherry-pick some inflammation)South Korean built Kia's and think to themselves, "Ya know, I'm an American person. I like to eat fine foods. Drink fine wine. And drive some of the homeliest cars on the planet we call earth, Subaru's. Our cars have AWD. We be cool. Don't ask us about how the AWD systems work because we can't tell you how they work. After all, my roommate has just run up my cell phone bill to $400 this month and I can't pay it all. And they won't pay the bill! "

"Now, I've got to go on Judge Mathis to get on TV and look funny and cute. Judge Mathis will make my roommate pay my cell phone bill."

Ask the average American about their car and they'll tell you a few things about it. Usually people focus on their car's cost. Here's where we must think a little deeper.

I don't want to pay Subaru $22,000 for a rig with AWD(and don't tell me I could get by for less money for a similarly-equipped Subaru as a SX4, please and come on!)that looks homely and costs me an extra $100 clams on my payment. Kabeesh?

Thank goodness for Edmunds.com and research. Research is good. Even Hyundai and Kia were covered by the automotive press, even extensively in the fall of 1998. That's when I didn't even have a computer of my own yet.

I would stay after work at The Boeing Company in Everett, WA, and utilize my computer's Internet connection. I read about the devaluation of the Korean won, about the Korean Chaebol, what it meant and how it affected HyunKia operations day-to-day.

I read how Kia was doomed to fail. How Hyundai was having a rough time. Labor strife was occurring often and it was up front and personal. Hot and humid engineering rooms to design in with white-collar angst. Oh, yeah, the Internet opens things up for us all. News we can use. News to ponder and news to digest to help us pinpoint which car we want to buy.

Bingo! Edmunds.com.

It's a wonderful life, if you don't weaken. The Tragically Hip is coming out with a new CD soon, to boot. Excuse me while I go brew me up another cup of Taster's choice.

Bye week for Seattle's Seahawks. Hope Chicago loses their game. It's fun to have teams to hate, isn't it? It's fun to watch Pittsburgh stumble and fumble. Makes the football season more interesting, eh? :P

andre1969

is a good looking little rig. It has a certain stance to it, coming off about as rugged looking as something that small can.

I kinda wish they'd offer it with just FWD though. I wonder how much that would boost the EPA estimates?

iluvmysephia1

you do bring up a valid question.

I am fine with the 2007 Suzuki SX4's 23 mpg city and 29 highway for the 5-speed manual.

Somebody else might not and if that is what is important to them(ghastly costs are an important concern, yeppa they are)then the 2007 Suzuki SX4 is probably not their rig.

There are some 300 million Americans, though, and a lot of us drive. Suzuki figures they'll put a rig like the SX4 out there and give it a go. They've done a wonderful job with it.

Is it everybody else's rig? Hee-hee probably not.

OTOH-one can put their 2007 Suzuki SX4 in 2WD(FWD)and just leave it there and get maximum ghastly mileage and be happy with it, too.

Whoa..this old Rod Stewart cassette sounds good. Right down to the late Ronny Lane on bass guitar and Ron Wood on lead and slide guitar. Rod Stewart and Faces are rocking my early-morning Wednesday, October 4th, world. I can feel The Tragically Hip's 'Yer Favourites' CD coming on in my mind and I'm gonna have to put that one on the platter very soon.

snakeweasel

you miseed my point completely

I understand yours but you missed mine. You think that the Suzuki is a great looking car and that Subarus are all ugly. That is your opinion that is not, nor can be, based on any facts. It is simply a personal choice of how the vehicle looks. Therefor it is subjective.

I don't want to pay Subaru $22,000 for a rig with AWD(and don't tell me I could get by for less money for a similarly-equipped Subaru as a SX4, please and come on!)that looks homely and costs me an extra $100 clams on my payment. Kabeesh?

Who mentioned Subaru? Only you. I said my current daily drive has more room (far more cargo room) gets better mileage and costs less. With the exception of AWD (which we really don't need) has pretty much the same equipment. Of course the 2007's will be all new and price points may change but I am sure it will hold its own.

Bye week for Seattle's Seahawks...

You know you keep going off on these little tangents, are you sure you're taking your meds?

daysailer

I'm not "hammering" any vehicle - merely responding to a comment that seemed to draw conclusions from limited personal experience rather than the broader data you now cite. I don't carry a "hammer" to discussions.

iluvmysephia1

AAMOF I'm really digging Rod Stewart's 1994 release on Polygram Records, Inc., entitled 'Best of Rod Stewart Featuring Reason to Believe'. Whoa, those boys knew how to deliver the goods. A lot of Rod's early success was the wonderful guitar work of Ronnie Wood, now a member of The Rolling Stones. Rod Stewart and Faces delivers the goods. Unlike Karl Malone, who couldn't get the Lakers going when he went there. Good to see him off my TV screen for good. What a dope. Now Karl's in trouble for offering a bribe of $20,000 to a guy to get him out of trouble with the U.S. Forest Service or the Agency that oversees the treatment of animals and when and when not to hunt them. Seems that Karl was starting up his own guide service and got a little...ummm...greedy. He's in trouble? Poor Karl. Throw all of the book at him. You know how hard it is to remember all of the bureaucratic Agency names, it's just horrible.

Subaru is fine, if you like homely looking cars that cost too much. Your choice, not mine. We all have opinions, remember.

Mine is just more valid than yours.

snakeweasel

First of all you are listening to the wrong Stewart.

Mine is just more valid than yours.

Actually you are posting opinions on the looks of the Subaru, I am not. I am posting that opinions of looks are strictly subjective and that others could see the Subaru as very good looking cars. That is not an opinion, that is a fact.

iluvmysephia1

looking at Subaru's and calling them good-looking cars is not saying a lot about the intelligence of the American(or Canadian, or Japanese, or...ummm Mexican people). It says that they see with forked eyes.

Chief Running Bear says American people both dumb and opinionated. And that doesn't bode well for any of us here. Nice to be in a remote Arizona desert town to use as a base for posting opinionated messages like this one.

Remember snake, my opinion about the looks of cars is just...better. Smarter and better. And that is a fact. Not a factoid.

rorr

"Chief Running Bear says American people both dumb and opinionated."
.
.
.
Remember snake, my opinion about the looks of cars is just...better. Smarter and better.

Ha! I think the Chief may be onto something there..... :P

bumpy

Still we have drifted from sub compacts to talk about small SUVs and AWD.

How about subcompacts with AWD? Only ones I can think of in this country are 10-year-old Imprezas, though.

daysailer

Wasn't their last subcompact the "Justy"?

rorr

Oh c'mon daysailer; if we can discuss the Seahawks, the Mailman, and iluv's musical tastes, I don't think Suburu is TOO far out of bounds.....

I say we give iluv some slack; he certainly keeps the thread entertaining.....

andre1969

well technically, I think the Impreza is a subcompact. Albeit a ~3000 pound one. From my experience sitting in them, I'd call it compact on the outside, but definitely subcompact on the inside.

tsgeisel

"First of all you are listening to the wrong Stewart. "

Yeah, but while Tony Stewart can drive, he's a lousy singer.

For the record, I don't think Subaru's are any uglier than most cars on the road - with the exception of the WRX *with* spoiler.

If the SX4 had come out last year, or even earlier this year, I might own one - depending on how it drove. I don't need the AWD, but I can think of a couple times when it might have been useful to have. But my only option was the too tall, too skinny, too noisy Aerio. Anyway, I'm perfectly happy with my Elantra hatch, but maybe in 10 years or so when I change out cars again, I'll go that route.

Unless, of course, I get a Miata.

snakeweasel

Yeah, but while Tony Stewart can drive, he's a lousy singer.

Still the wrong Stewart.

rorr

"Still the wrong Stewart."

Ummm, Al Stewart? :confuse:

iluvmysephia1

the full, here. Another singer besides Rod Stewart.

Stewart Copeland of The Police? Sting sings, not Copeland. Scratch that idea.

I know! Martha Stewart! She does sing! Hey, Ron...hey Ronnie Laney? Crank up that bass a little better.

Why should we leave Martha Stewart out of here? I mean, none of us has seen enough of her on TV recently.

snakeweasel

You get the churchill. :shades:

snakeweasel

I mean, none of us has seen enough of her on TV recently.

And for that we give thanks.

rorr

How about Jackie Stewart - the wee Scot? I'm sure the sound of Jackie in a little Lotus at Indy might be considered music to some folks.....

Heck, weren't those cars considered subcompacts compared to the rest of the Indy cars of the era? (he says getting back on topic in a VERY oblique way.....)

andre1969

Why should we leave Martha Stewart out of here? I mean, none of us has seen enough of her on TV recently.

Because she just doesn't fit in. :P Yes, I confess I watched that awful Apprentice show of hers. Hey, there was nothing else on...TVLand was running the Dick #2 episodes of Bewitched so there was nothing else to watch. Yeah, that's the ticket. :P

rorr

"You get the churchill."

Cool - I haven't listened to 'Time Passages' or 'Year of the Cat in AGES......

boaz47

But edmunds says 29. That still is no great shakes for a Compact in todays market. Still I am pulling for Suzuki to get a hit on their hands. I took a hard look at the predecessor of the SX4 about two years ago and gave it serious consideration. However when driving down the street one day I happened ot ask my wife what she thought of that Suzuki. She asked if it was a hybrid? I asked why she might think that and she said, because it is ugly and all hybrids seem to be Ugly. That was before the Civic and escape hybrids. I knew right at that point the Suzuki was not in contention. Who knows, if after a few years we see the SX4 as a dependable I might get a used one for running around in the winter. I am still trying for an old Justy for that however. It is not much bigger than a golf cart and should be great for running around town. That is what I call a sub compact.

nippononly

Yes, we are both right. Apparently the stick gets 29 highway, the automatic I saw (which is all the dealer had) said 30. So the automatic does better than the stick, a discouraging trend in today's automobiles! :-P

iluv is hilarious, keep 'em up iluv! Edmunds needs a little tongue in cheek, as serious as it has gotten lately.

When you go test drive that SX4, keep a close eye (or ear?) out for road noise - a common complaint on this model - all the write-ups for the 'Zuke mention lots of noise. And my bet is STILL on the wife not letting you trade until the payments on the Sportster are done! :-)

And BTW, the Impreza hatch is $18K, and is a compact. For $3K more, I am not sure that you do that much better in content, but you do get the tried-and-true AWD experience of Subaru. Now if only they would offer switchable AWD like the SX4 does.

Speaking of that, yes, Subaru still builds the Justy (a TRUE subcompact) for the home market doesn't it? And last time I checked it had multi-mode 4WD like it used to, but it has admittedly been a long time since I checked.

And boaz: in general, Suzuki cars are well-built and reliable. It is only the rebadged Koreans marketed under the Suzuki name (Forenza, Verona, Reno) that suck in those areas.

Are there any old Justys left on the road in the States? It was never a hot-selling model, half of them were the 3-cylinders that were totally outmatched by American driving conditions and headed to early graves, and let's face it - as cheap as they were the half that weren't doomed would not have received the best of care and repair. I doubt there are more than handful of them left running around here. I sure wouldn't mind having one. I had a friend who just had to have one as soon as he saw it. He got one and ran the wheels off it, dumped when it wouldn't pass smog after a couple hundred K.

michaellno

Dunno where y'all are getting your info, but the official Suzuki website shows the EPA mileage to be 23/28 for both the automatic and manual transmission versions of the SX4.

nippononly

that's not "official", that's Suzuki's early estimate. What's "official" is what shows on the legally mandated Monroney sticker, which is the numbers everyone is quoting.

And who knew that a niche little car by a niche automaker could provoke so much controversy and dialog, eh?! :-)

lilengineerboy

I briefly drove a borrowed Suzuki Swift GT 16 valve while I was in high school (I can't remember why I didn't have my car, I think my g-ma might have been visiting so my dad repo'd my car to drive so his mom could drive his or something...bygones). That thing was a blast!! My friend turned 16, repo'd his car back from me, and then promptly totalled it (I can't remember what happened but I actually think he rolled it off of 192), but it was a hoot while it was alive. He replaced it with a Festiva, which was quite definiteately not the same.

michaellno

Ah! Thanks for the clarification. Guess the propeller-heads that run Suzuki's website need to update the page.

wale_bate1

Suzuki still makes cars?

nippononly

Yeah. Toyota does that quite frequently too, which is OK as long as they are UNDER-promising fuel efficiency as Suzuki is.

All the manufacturers could do with a bit better administration of their websites to both keep them current and make them more interesting.

wale: LOL! Yup, motorcycles too! And in fact Suzuki is Japan's number one seller of minicars (660cc class). They make very well engineered cars, which is why the SX4 ought to be pretty good overall. It is too bad GM twisted their arm into selling rebadged last-gen Daewoos, which are thankfully leaving the line-up one at a time now. That sure isn't the way to rebuild their rep in the U.S.

boaz47

Yes, remember where I live? In the mountain communities people have winter and summer cars. Some of the winter cars are old detroit mastodons that they don't care if they get bumped or pushed a bit. But mostly they have what we call mountain mercedes. Subaru's of all sorts. I had two friends that kept old Justies and my secretary happened to have one. Her husband is a mechanic and kept it in pretty good shape. Like my old Sammies they are easy and cheep to fix. But he hated working on the Justy. So he sold it. I was a bit sad until I realized a good friend of mine still has one his wife drives during the winter. She is a little thing and likes the little car. I will put my bid in before this winter and hope that I am first on the list if he decides to let it go. It would make a pretty good car to run to the store and home after the plows run over the road once.

plekto

Plus you get AWD thrown in for free.

Again its not free, it is built into the price of the car. If you think its free e-mail me I have a wonderful deal for you. But please no checks cash only.
*****

The thing is that it wouldn't make any difference. Trust me on this. The manuifacturer's cost for it is maybe $500 and without it, they'd most likely STILL sell it for $15K as it's lower cost than the competition at that price.

And yes, Suzuki makes fantastic motorcycles and small K-cars. Shoot, they made the Geo Metro series and I don't know how many delivery companies used them until the wheels fell off. Small little cars, but decently reliable to be sure.

But AWD *is* nice.
The MPG ratings are with it in 2wd. If you leave it in 2WD, it drives exactly like the competition, which also weighs about the same. It just has AWD waiting for the times when you need it. Kind of like cruise control. I never use it myself other than on a couple of long freeway trips maybe once or twice a year. But it's nice to have.

BTW - Suzuki made the very fist small cars with ABS. The Geo Metro didn't have it, but the Suzuki Swift could be had with ABS - a first, considering it was 1990 or so. They've always been high on content and low on fluff.

iluvmysephia1

Suzuki made the first cars(Suzuki Swift) with ABS. Funny, because the 2007 Suzuki SX4 has both ABS and EBD standard as well as disc brakes all around. I am becoming more and more convinced of the solidity of the Suzuki brand. Come on people, $14,999? With all of that equipment and there's still some naysayers? The Edmunds crowd can be a tough crowd.

Oh, the Suzuki SX4 is built on the Suzuki Swift chassis. Did everyone know that? Good for you if you did. It might just mean that you're also interested in this breakthrough car for Suzuki. This will be the one that propels them into the next level of acceptance by the masses.

If I'm wrong you can all root for the team the Chicago Bears are playing against this weekend. Be loud and be ruthless my car-loving friends.

Suh-zoo-ki! Suh-zoo-ki!

Kee-a! Kee-a!

wale_bate1

So Suzuki makes cars.

Suzuki actually sells cars?

snakeweasel

The thing is that it wouldn't make any difference. Trust me on this.

Sorry I don't trust you on this, AWD adds onto the cost of any vehicle. I would suspect that if the AWD added $500 to the cost (I think it might be a bit more) that means that they had to price the car at least that much higher. With a $500 less cost they could sell the car for at least that much less which could mean more sales. That is due to the lower price and better fuel economy.

they'd most likely STILL sell it for $15K as it's lower cost than the competition at that price.

What do you consider the competition? There are cars out there with more room, better gas mileage at a lower price.

But AWD *is* nice.

Its pretty much useless for the vast majority of drivers. Thats why it is just a marketing gimmick.

The MPG ratings are with it in 2wd.

Yet the MPG figures are pretty bad for the car itself.

Kind of like cruise control. I never use it myself other than on a couple of long freeway trips maybe once or twice a year. But it's nice to have.

I would suspect that I actually needed AWD maybe twice in my life. Cruise control (which inciedently can save gas) I use routinely, anytime I am on an open road going a constant speed with light traffic. I would say several times a month at least. Used it two different days last weekend (a total of 4 times) and if all goes according to plan I will use it again this weekend.

They've always been high on content and low on fluff.

More often than not being high on content means being high on fluff.