Hey all.... new to the forum....not an owner but yet...waiting for the sport....
True...Suzuki does not have overwhelming experience with cars but they have been making them for a number of years....Look at a company like Honda...they make everything from motorcycles to cars, generators, jet planes,boats...and thats to name a few... No bodys arguing about their quality and they had to get there somehow. Suzuki has definitly stepped up with their styling now we have to wait and see if build quality is up to par with styliing. Im actually thinking of wailting til ynd of the 2007 model year to see what problems might arise with the SX4. Plus the fact that rebates will be more readily available.
Yes, my "standards" for the early morning (fresh untracked snow) drive from Bend or Sun River to Mt Bachelor has been either an "AWD" Ford Aerostar, or a Jeep Cherokee Limited. The Aerostar AWD is 30/70 F/R without wheelslip/spin and 50/50 otherwise.
The Jeep is now in "retirement" on a cattle ranch in north central MT, but we continue to rely on the Ford.
I don't remember a time wherein the Mt bachelor road was closed nor the Portland/Mt Hood highway, Meadows being the only exception. But I would guess the commercial interests apply enough pressure not to close those roads and there is clearly an expectation, mostly justified, that folks traveling "these" roads are prepared for the experience.
Years ago on the way to Mt Bachelor I was told to put all four chains on our Jeep as all four wheels were "driven".
But for me the big, GREAT, advantage to snow chains is the ability to pass, drive right on by, those that are stalled, spinning, or even over in the ditch as a result of thinking that AWD, 4WD, or 4X4, would suffice.
In the Jeep there were even countless times that I was able to take to the ditch to get around "clusters" of vehicles scattered helter-skelter all over the roadbed.
Vivid images, memories of December of 1990, here on the eastside of Seattle, SR520, comes to mind. BMWs, Porsches, MBs, the pungent smell of burning rubber, spread all the slight incline into the Microsoft Campus. Poor souls...
But looking back a bit, 1961-65, I survived some very severe winter driving in MT with RWD and the use of tire chains when/if needed. So in my mind I think I would rather put my trust in that configuration over and above most modern day AWD versions, but most certainly above ANY FWD or front biased AWD system.
It no longer suffices to simply say AWD, that doesn't nearly convey enough information to the reader. Clearly, some of the AWD systems out there in the marketplace today are just barely improvements over FWD, not nearly up to snuff when compared to a simple RWD.
'Remember that Suzuki makes mostly motorcycles. Cars aren't their primary business.'
This is a common misconception, but Suzuki's are very popular in Japan and other parts of the world. Suzuki plans to increase sales dramatically in the next few years and they are having very significant success in their home market.
Why? Well, The "Chevy" Tracker WAS a Suzuki product. My inlaws had a 1990 tracker, red... manual, and they got it used in Oct of 1995-Oct 99. got it with 53,000, traded in @ 217,000!!!!!!!!!(he drove 670 miles per week for work, still does, and yes, his pay is quite good,lol). Anyhow, NO PROBLEMS. Mother in law has a 96 Tracker, green, automatic. Problem? Yes.... paint of hood is faded. Mileage is around 90,000+. HOW'S THAT FOR RELIABILITY!?
Anyhow, father in law has a 2007 SX4.....got it 5 weeks ago today. he has travelled nearly 3,200 miles already in 5 weeks. No rattles, buzzes, nothing to cry about(and, most likely won't have issues, unlike my 97 200sx-a rebadged, Nissan Sentra, for example..dumped it at 66,000 miles it was stalling, messed up ignition coil and rebuilt the starter, needed new timing chain gear and chain....should I continue?). If I had to place a bet on what lasts longer ,w/o any issues, I'd say Suzuki(and not the GM-DAT ones, either).
As for rebates? Ummmmmmmm, these sx4's ain't that highly priced over Dealers Invoice vs MSRP(compared to Toyota, Honda, and even Hyundai, these days). I believe Owners, I know, first hand, over opinions. I think the Trackers were horrid when it came to NVH, driveability, etc( they were bad,I would never personally have purchased one), BUT, reliability? Last forever.
I have owned 2 Nissans, 1 Toyota(Scion tC), Chevy's, Hyundai's, and know people who have owned Mazdas, Toyota(truck)Ford,Chrysler, and even a guy back in 1992 hwo had a Yugo with 93,000+ miles, and the manual tranny was dying(but he got it for 1,500 dollars, and got 50,000 miles out of it over 3 years time) :surprise: I know a guy with a Chrysler manual shift died out at 86,000! It was probably the closest to NVH, etc, of a tracker Anyhow, buy one, ya won't regret it. If yer worried, go to yer dealership, and ask if you can have one overnight(ya might have ta pay a like a rental, though . I dunno.).
Remember that Suzuki makes mostly motorcycles. Cars aren't their primary business. Remember that Suzuki makes mostly motorcycles. Cars aren't their primary business.
Sorry, but this cannot be further from the truth. What is the number-one selling passenger car of all the cars in Japan? Suzuki (WagonR). In fact, in an average month, Suzuki sells more WagonR than the Fit and Yaris (Vitz) combined. And it's been like this month after month for years. And WagonR is not the only Suzuki that sells well. What Suzuki does not have experience in is building and selling big cars. But when it comes to small cars, Suzuki is one of the all-time leaders in the world automotive market (sans North America).
Suzuki is one of the all-time leaders in the world automotive market (sans North America). :confuse:
Suzuki is not one of the top EIGHT in number of vehicles sold, value of vehicles sold, heck, they are not even in the top 10. Even Renault-Dacia-Samsung is larger than Suzuki.
Remember, bigger is not always better, and Suzuki is proof.
I did qualify my statement by saying "when it comes to small cars." I did not say that Suzuki was one of the all-time leaders of automotive industry in any class. In the open class, it is not, by any manner or means. But, as you check the statistics, I believe you would disover that, when the displacement drops down to between 360 cc and 1.3 liters, Suzuki is indeed one of the all-time leaders of the automotive world. A hint of that is Suzuki's dominance in the 'K'-class cars in the Japanese market. Suzuki has been No. 1 in this class in Japan for 33 consecutive years. And when you go to some poor third-world countries, you see a lot of those tiny Suzukis literally crawling around.
No, Suzuki is not one of the biggest automotive manufacturers. But when it comes to its speciality, it is indeed a world leader.
You do have to remember that sometimes its the luck of the draw...My family...well so far we're Nissan people. My Nissana maxima has 220k miles on it with the original auto tranny and engine, I love the car. My brother had an Infiniti I30 that he traded in at 150k miles...His G20 has 110 k on it now and going strong....Thats why I bought a G35...proven reliability with Nissan/Infiniti.Their maintenance shops are phenomenal as well. I had a 94 Chrysler that had more problems then I could deal with...junked it at 105k miles. Also the more goodies you have on a car the more likely it could have a problem...The SX4 is a new car that is yet unproven.I believe that their colaboration with fiat is new for them as well....new AWD system ....you never know what changes may have to made to it,if any, in the long run.
Personally I love the look of the SX4...Aslo love the features...But Im still going to wait ....at least until next summer to see hou all you owners report back on the reliability.... Im definitly excited about a car with AWD, low price tag, acceptable gas mileage, and hopefully good reliability...Its what I need for my 25-30k miles I drive a year....If only it had a CVT tranny...maybe in a couple years.
For what it's worth, my '99 Tracker which has 105K on it, has never had a major problem. A/C went out twice. An interior door handle broke off. Exhaust needed a couple hundred $ worth of repair 2 years ago. That's pretty incredible for 7 and a half years of driving. Doesn't drive like a Lexus, but it's indestructible. While I've got your ear, anyone heard any news about when the SX4 Sport is going to be available?
about Suzuki the car manufacturer, though. The fact that they are the leading seller of small cars for the last 33 years in Japan.
Tell ya what, the 2007 Suzuki SX4 sure looks good on paper. 5-speeds and either Bright Red or Techno Metallic Blue with the only option being an armrest would work well for me.
Everyone that has one please come back here to comment on how your SX4 is treating you. It is firmly at the top of my futures list along with the Kia Rio5 and possibly the Kia Rio LX sedan.
Hey, harrychezt, I agree with your last post completely. And if I was ready to buy(our '01 Kia Sportage 4x4 is zipping along well at 123,350 miles, happily)I wouldn't hesitate right now to trade the Sportsman in. I have enough confidence in Suzuki as it stands right now. Ya gotta dig that 7 year 100,000 mile Warrranty, too.
Our auto has about 2800 miles - only issue we have seen a few times is a vary hard start. Not sure if its me though as our other SUV has "autostart" (needs the key in the ignition - just a quick twist)
yeah, you might just be experiencing a "manufacturer's starting difference" there. Although, a brand new 2007 Suzuki SX4 shouldn't be having any slow or "hard" starting issues already. With that top-notch warranty you can always ask your dealer's service department about it.
BTW, do you trust your dealer's service department, 1999johnner?
I've been considering buying an SX4 since I learned about it many months ago.
I'm the kind of person who likes to get a new car every few years and I prefer to drive a car covered by a bumper-to-bumper warranty (I will never be making loan payments AND paying for repairs on the same car again). I drive about 20,000 miles per year, so that means the typical 3 yr/36,000 mile warranty that most car manufacturers offer expires in less than two years for me.
Due to the depreciation involved with basically any brand new car, I've decided it's simply a no-brainer for me to buy a newer used car with very low mileage and a huge discount from the original sticker price. That's what I did with my current car, a 2004 Suzuki Aerio SX, and it has worked out great. In November 2004, I bought an '04 with only 10,000 miles for only $11,000 (MSRP $17,500 or so).
Also, I think I've decided that for once I don't want to compromise on performance and will get something fast rather than something merely adequate. :shades:
Right now, I'm seriously considering a loaded 2005 Saturn Vue V6 AWD with power, heated, leather seats and power moonroof, only 7,000 miles... for only $16,000-$17,000 versus the original sticker of about $27,000. I'll have to find out when the VUE was originally sold/titled... hopefully it will still have more than a year left on its 3/36 warranty. 250 hp = 0-60 in 7 seconds.
I've only averaged about 22 mpg with my Aerio SX (which all-in-all has been a wonderful car), so the mpg with the VUE (likely high teens) won't be too much worse.
Anyhow, maybe down the road I'll consider a gently used Suzuki SX4 (when I get the need for speed out of my system).
I hope all current and future SX4 owners will enjoy and have good experiences with their cars. I'll probably continue to visit the SX4 forums to read your comments, learn about the economy of the SX4 and keep up on any news.
Perhaps Suzuki will actually release a higher-powered turbo or supercharged SX4 like the old Neon SRT-4, Subaru WRX or Mitsubishi Lancer Evo. :shades:
tonight - was at the auto show, people were very interested in this model. iluv had piqued my interest before, and with the added prodding of a couple of auto show look-sees, I wanted to go see what it is like on the road.
So, I was off to my nearest dealer, some 20 miles away, the sparse Suzuki dealer network being one of the downsides to getting a Suzuki (poor resale and zero public awareness being another). Once there, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that they had a stick shift this time, where I had visited once before when it first came out, and all they had had at the time were automatics.
I came away with mostly good impressions, enough to continue my interest, that's for sure. It looks good on the outside and inside, red dash lighting not being my favorite color but everything else falling right to hand and being easy to use. Outside, the looks are SO MUCH BETTER than the Aerio SX, it's not funny. They had leftover Aerio SX's sitting right next to the SX4s, and the older models just looked so awkward.
The throttle-by-wire is pretty hyperactive - a slight tap of the pedal in neutral and the revs are zinging to redline. It is VERY peppy, even in higher gears, when you step on the pedal, and I think this and the 3300 rpm it turns at 65 mph (!!) is a big part of the reason the fuel economy is so low. But since for me it would be replacing a truck and would only be a weekender and snow car, the fuel economy numbers are just fine. And the plus side is it makes maximum use of the power it has.
Noise at speed isn't too bad, and this thing just loves to rev. At 70 mph the noise was about an even mix of road, wind, and engine, and the combined effect was quite acceptable in a $15K car.
The clutch is light as they all seem to be these days, the shifter is a touch notchy but short and precise through the gates, qualities I appreciate. The brakes are firm and effective - I don't know what some reviewers meant when they said the brakes in this car are mushy.
What else to say? I didn't get a chance to autocross it (:-P) but the handling seemed solid. It has a nice tight turning radius. There's lots of room inside, nothing encroaches from above or the sides. I like the larger greenhouse which runs counter to the current trend of bathtub cars, and it allowed me to rest my arm on the windowsill without feeling like my elbow was three feet above my head. Not to mention it provides great outward visibility, with the exception of the weird front quarter windows that make the A-pillar HUGE. Those front quarter windows are ANOTHER oddity that are suddenly showing up on a lot of cars out there - the new Civic and the Fit have them too, just to name a couple.
The 3-mode AWD is a bit gimmicky, if you ask me. The FWD mode - why would you ever need it? I was thinking this through. The thing runs 100% in FWD anyway unless it detects slip, and in that case, wouldn't you want AWD engaged to do something about the slipping wheel? As for the lock mode, it puts 30% of power to the rear, which can be increased by the computer to 50%, but only until you hit 36 mph and then it's back to regular AWD operation. So no good on the highway portion of the drive to the snow, although maybe useful if are driving around town at low speeds in snow or ice. I dunno, maybe that's just a California perspective at work: the snow is something I drive TO, and then later I drive home, but am never IN for days/weeks/months. Bottom line: I think I would just leave it in AWD all the time. The only question is whether the rather bright green AWD dash indicator would bug me, in which case I guess I could always switch to FWD to make the light go out.
I have NO IDEA why everyone is calling this car an SUV. It is a touch bigger than an xA and a Fit, seems to me, and smaller than a Matrix. It does not have a very high roof, yet does manage to have more headroom than many cars I was in at the auto show. It is basically a small hatchback, roughly the same size as an Impreza. Compact at best. Are we just calling anything with AWD an SUV these days?
I had no idea until I started reading all the comments here that the Sports are not yet available. I would actually be almost 100% satisfied with the base with convenience package, but geez, for an extra $1000 the Sport is such a deal! Not to mention, it does have one thing missing from the base model that I would quite like - traction/stability control. Well, that and the much better stereo with subwoofer. I could live without them, but I have to say that in my old Outback Sport I DID live without them (TCS still not available now on the Subaru), and there were some times when it would have been really nice to have had them. Can you even BELIEVE how much stuff you get on this car that still, in Sport trim, barely reaches $17K? It puts many of the much larger automakers to shame with their offerings here in the States anyway.
My least favorite feature of this car right now is the rear seats: they don't fold flat, and if you fold them forward and "tumble" them, they just sit there folded up against the front seats and secured with straps? If the designers were going to go that far, they should have had made the seats removeable, which would clear out a TON of useable cargo space back there. Oh well. Guess that improvement will have to wait until SX4, gen II, eh?! ;-)
Oh, one last note, to the peeople that think Suzuki is almost solely a motorcycle company - the VERY loud announcer in the Suzuki display area at the show today was throwing out trivia questions, and one of them was how many cars Suzuki sold last year. Answer? 2 million. Yes, MILLION, with an 'M'. Suzuki is the number one kei-car manufacturer in its home country, and the rest of their cars (the true Suzukis, NOT the warmed-over, decade-old Daewoos) are well above average in reliability and durability. So avoid Reno and Forenza, and you probably can't go too far wrong at the Suzuki store.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Good review. Add the new XL-7 to the Suzukis to avoid... GM's theta platform. I saw one at Costco. Not bad looking in person, but I'd avoid v1 of a GM/Suzuki combo. At least the engine is Suzuki.
07 Subaru Impreza's are selling at $17k around here. Makes the SX4 Sport sticker a little spendy IMO. Real world prices should be better in a year or so. Maybe even sooner.
Agree. Suzuki's make a great slightly used car. Reliable, but an unknown brand here in the states (with an big hit in devaluation) make them a good value slightly used. Cars like Honda/Toyota/Subaru hold more of their value, so they aren't such a good deal used. Suzuki's are almost as reliable, but just aren't know. Amazing what a reputation does for car brand, deserved or undeserved. (eg. Toyota engine sludge).
The XL7's engine is the new DOHC 3.6 that GM is using in a few models now. However, supposedly Suzuki tweaked it for its own use (don't ask me what they tweaked), and certainly is building the engine in its own plant under license.
I noticed people at the show weren't very interested in the XL7 (I personally think it's kind of ugly) but they WERE quite interested in the Grand Vitara.
Yes, I could get the Impreza hatch for $17K, but it wouldn't have auto climate control (kinda nice), leather-wrapped wheel (a detail that I am more attached to than I should be!), the 8-speaker stereo with sub woofer (very nice), or traction/stability control (can come in handy when you're in a bad spot). The Subaru also has a very narrow seat with seat-bottom side bolsters that don't allow me to splay out my legs to the pedals without feeling constricted. I like the Suzuki's seat a lot more.
Plus, I have to admit that although I don't find the Impreza particularly ugly, I certainly prefer the looks of the SX4.
Just thinking out loud here...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Ummmm, as someone who has actually owned an Impreza before, I can say that the Subaru engines, while they are very compact and low to the ground to improve handling, are also thrummy and rough, and begin to clatter more and more as they get older. By the time you have over 100K miles, they can begin to sound like old VW Beetle engines.
Now, does the Impreza provide a whole lot more power and somewhat better handling with the same fuel economy as the SX4? Yes, which has me still thinking twice over the whole thing. Thing is, the 2.0 in the SX4 has its own good points too, like an amazing eagerness to rev which the flat-4 in the Subaru does not exhibit. And that driver's seat in the Impreza - I am going to check it out again, but if it's too narrow, it's just too narrow - there's not much I can do about that.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I like the Suzuki engine. It is smooth, but a little slow. Just not enough ommph for the weight (plus the gearing). The Subaru engine is pretty good, but a little rough. (I've owned two and a a 2.2 turbo.) The extra HP & torque is nice though. I think they widened the seat a bit in 05. The Impreza seat used to be even tighter. They are both nice. Both have pluses and minuses.
i was trying to find again at what rpm's the sx4 is at when driving at 65mph and even over that speed. today i noticed while in my tracker (4x4)with the 2.0 suzuki engine that at 74Mph i was at 2900rpm.
We bought our new SX-4 6 weeks ago and love it more each day. We have owned Sidekicks (still have one) and also a Grand Vitara and an Aereo. This is the best effort yet by Suzuki and I am amazed at the quality and comfort improvements and this car feels sturdy and heavy and is stable at 80 mph and Semi trucks dont blow it around. It is a blast to drive around town and turns and parks on a dime. The 4 wheel disc ABS brake set up has the best feel of any car we have ever owned and I like the idea of all the air bags it has. It would be a pleasure to drive it cross country from coast to coast. Other cars considered were the Nissan Versa, Subaru Forester or Impreza, Pontiac Vibe and either the Dodge Caliber or Jeep Compass. For the price and features this one is the bargain and we were not interested in the Fit or Yaris. Best Suzuki yet in our opinion but we have never had the chance to drive an XL-7. Still breaking this one in and I remember it took us about 5,000 miles on our Aerio before it loosened up and gave the best gas mileage and it felt much faster by then too. For back seat room the Nissan Versa has everyone beat but we didnt need that. Try one out....we just wanted to drive one and were going to wait 6 months to buy one but the first few blocks convinced us not to wait for the Sport version and we dont like Cruise Control anyway (puts us to sleep and we dont pay attention) but the Stbilty control would have been nice. Only complaint is that Suzuki guages are black on a black background and are difficult to read during the day (always been that way) and white faced guages would solve the problem or light up the cluster. The AWD will be handy in the mountains, in rain storms and if we move back to Colorado.
I decided back in June that my next transportation would be the SX4 Sports Package. My 2002 SX has 147,000 miles on it and has proven the over-all value and quality of Suzuki in that time my only major problem has been getting a new clutch. This Tuesday was the first at the dealership to get clear pricing for a SX4 sports 5 speed ( was even a couple of dollars below list but not much ) and put my deposit down for a mid or late December delivery. Never in my life have I waited for a auto and now it will be 6 months but I really feel the SX4 and SX4 5speed sports package is a great looking and fantastic value. GET YOURS TODAY BEFORE THEY REPRICE!!! In Japan Suzuki has overtaken Honda in Sales for the first time and now is third. Suzuki Plants are going full out and they are increasing world wide production by over 500,000 per year. Suzuki out sells Subaru by over 2 to 1 in Japan.
"GET YOURS TODAY BEFORE THEY REPRICE!!!" if everybody listen to johnsx4, Suzuki dealers will be more reluctant to go below MSRP. I'm sure the sport package is a hot model now but I'll wait a couple of months and get a better deal.
In Japan Suzuki has overtaken Honda in Sales for the first time and now is third.
Actually, Suzuki is No. 3 in Japan not for sales (far from it), but in the number of units produced. In the first fiscal six months in Japan (over there, it's April through September) of 2006, Suzuki has overtaken Nissan (not Honda) to be No. 3 in the units produced. The November 11 issue of the Nikkei has a detail on this.
Now, in the "Kei" car market which Suzuki has dominated in the past 33 years, it is actually quite conceivable that Daihatsu may pull off the unthinkable - stealing the No. 1 spot from Suzuki. Suzuki projects the Kei car annual output ending in March 2007 to be 605,000 units whereas Daihatsu projects the same-period output to be 615,000 units. Daihatasu may be optimistic, but it remains to be seen.
Suzuki out sells Subaru by over 2 to 1 in Japan.
That's because Suzuki has to sell two of its vehicles to Subaru's one in order to have the same revenue. Remember, Suzuki's JDM strength is the Kei cars, and they don't cost much.
The reason Daihatsu my over take Suzuki in Kei car units is Suzuki is increasing the number of SX4's it builds. The same report that listed the Daihatsu numbers explained why they may be number one. Suzuki does not have the factory capacity to build more SX4s. Kei productions will be reduced to allow for greater SX4 production.
The reason Daihatsu my over take Suzuki in Kei car units is Suzuki is increasing the number of SX4's it builds.
No, that's not the reason. The reason that Daihatsu's output may exceed Suzuki's in the Kei market is that Suzuki's Kei sales are slowing down. In October, Suzuki's Kei sales dropped 8.6% from the same month of the previous year. Daihatsu has recently introduced some amazing models such as the Sonica, and they are managing to eat up what Suzuki has coughed up. In the November 11 Nikkei article, Mr. Osamu Suzuki, the chairman of Suzuki, said that his company does not intend to force to raise the sales figure just for the purpose of keeping the No. 1 position in the Kei sales. By saying that, he is clearly implying that it is what is happening to the Kei sales that may cause Suzuki to be dethroned. He said, "Our priority is the profit, not the honor."
By saying that Suzuki should save the profits, not the face, Mr. Suzuki is saying that the emphasis will go to non-Kei cars. But it is not the emphasis on the non-Kei cars that is slowing down Suzuki's Kei car sales.
The other interesting thing to note is that Daihatsu is majority-owned by Toyota.
Toyota has always had a major stake in Daihatsu, but in 1998 it effectively became a subsidiary of Toyota. The current chairman of the company is a former EVP of Toyota, by the way. Daihatsu has assembled a variety of Toyotas over the years, and even engineered and supplied engines to Toyota. For instance, the 1.0 and 1.3 L engines used in the JDM Vitz (Yaris) are both Daihatsu engines.
test-driven the 2007 Suzuki SX4 or own one, can you answer me a question? An earlier poster mentioned that the gauges in the dash are "black on black and difficult to read during the day."
What? Why would they not color them white on black or some other readable combination? It seems to me that I've read reviews on the car that showed easily-readable gauges. Please edumacate me!
I don't know what that poster meant , but SX4 has very clearly marked gauges (white numbers on black background) which are very easy to read in any lighting condition. And I think they are one of the best and stylish among that class of cars. I personaly have owned SX4 for 2 months now and so far I've enjoyed this car a lot. A perfect combination of style, features and value.
the 2007 Suzuki SX4-a perfect blend of style, features and value. And the gauge combo of white on black makes much more sense than black on black. I remain confused by that other poster's comment on the speedo dial colors. Not something that would be smart for Suzuki to do and not something they would do. I have much more respect than that for Suzuki Motors.
This car is really a subcompact, isn't it? Pretty small. I've yet to test drive one but I have talked to someone standing right next to their new SX4(silver, automatic tranny)so I saw how little they are. And I think that makes me want a SX4 even more. BTW-22 mpg city and 28 mpg highway are agreeable gas mileage numbers for me. How about you guys? Will they work out for you, too? As long as the Sportage 4x4 runs great we're keeping it. When it needs replacing I will get a Bright Red or Techno Blue Metallic Suzuki SX4 with 5-speeds and armrest for an accessory.
Saw the weekend ad. Two base SX4 automatics (only ones in stock at this dealer). Just under $15k. Almost $1000 under invoice. The discounts have started.
I saw that too, and thought about giving them a call. There were enough disclaimers in the ad that I figured there was a catch of some kind. Was it for real? I'm considering buying a second one if the prices drop.
I saw that too, and thought about giving them a call. There were enough disclaimers in the ad that I figured there was a catch of some kind. Was it for real? I'm considering buying a second one if the prices drop.
Well, seems legit. This is a high pressure dealership. Small Suzuki franchise. I think they took over the Carr Suzuki franchise. They don't move may Suzuki's. They still had the one I test drove... the automatic, which I did not like. Let me know if they feed you a different story.
I have had a few people that have been in the back...All said it was very comfortable, and had room. The taller people had to raise the head rests... which made it a little hard for me to see, (I'm only 5'1):-P
iluvmysephia1, you have got to be the SX4's biggest fan who has not yet driven one yet. Some dealership within a few hours' drive from where you live must have one for you to test! Make a road trip out of it! Heck, come out to California and I'll let you drive mine! Don't you want to finally opine on the car based on first-hand experience?
any owners out there have any passengers in the rear seats yet? i wanted to hear what the passengers thought while riding in the back...
The back seats feel great! The rear head rests shouldn't be the cause of obstruction of view since the passenger's head-silouette covers it -- blame it on your friends' big heads if your view is obstructed! I took a short ride (20 minutes) in the backseat of my own SX4, and I didn't feel like I was sitting in a subcompact. It wasn't like the backseat of my old Ford Taurus, but you can't expect a car to be a subcompact on the outside, and a family car on the inside!
Because of the additional height given to the rear passengers (the seats are 2" higher than the front seats) I was able to sit with my legs relaxed while not requiring that much leg room. I can sit on the back seat with my shins almost perpendicular to the ground (I'm a 5'6" woman). The front driver and front passenger seats need to be adjusted 3" forward of the backstop to give the rear passengers enough room, but then again, the front seats go pretty far back. I would say, only the very tall (6'2" or taller) would need to have the front seat all the way back to be comfortable.
The color you have is the color of my 2004 Suzuki Aerio SX. I'd like to see a green paint option like that of (what I assume is your Taurus) the car on the other side of your new SX4.
Keep us updated and let us know about your fuel economy.
I can see your gas gauge needle moving in the picture! (just kidding). Just to show you how observant I am, I've owned mine for (2) months, and just now see (from your picture) that it has a 140 MPH speedometer!
i thank everyone for the replys about the rear seat. Im 5'11 and i usually have to drive with any seat in its furthest position back. when i put the seat back i looked at the rear seat and i couldnt picture myself getting back there IF someone like me was driving... I think im going to have to give the sx4 another test drive when the Sport comes out. I would also want to see one with the 4 speed automatic. and i would REALLY like to hear some fuel economy numbers with that (OPTIONAL $1000) 4 speed.
I have the 4 speed auto... I live in the mountains (WV) I'm avg. about 24.6 city.. and about 26 maybe highway...not bad I dont think... I was told the 5-speed gets less for some reason...Get the sport! I wish i would have waited for it.. but oh well i was the first around here to get the SX4 and i still love it! And people cant stand that i have it..some vandalism has happened to it :mad: people ever grow up?
thank you for the reply! your sx4 with the 4speed is getting the same mileage as my tracker 4x4 2.0 litre engine (suzuki) with the 4 speed. Ive been in other trackers that only had the 3speed and WOW did the engine rev High at highway speeds! Im located at the south western most part of PA. right above morgantown. Even though i rarely ever used the trackers 4x4 as they do a great job anymore at keeping the roads clean in time for work. But it is nice to go offroading from time to time. even though i said i rarely use 4x4 i would still like to have a 4x4 or awd.
Comments
True...Suzuki does not have overwhelming experience with cars but they have been making them for a number of years....Look at a company like Honda...they make everything from motorcycles to cars, generators, jet planes,boats...and thats to name a few... No bodys arguing about their quality and they had to get there somehow.
Suzuki has definitly stepped up with their styling now we have to wait and see if build quality is up to par with styliing. Im actually thinking of wailting til ynd of the 2007 model year to see what problems might arise with the SX4. Plus the fact that rebates will be more readily available.
http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/ly/07sx4.htm
The Jeep is now in "retirement" on a cattle ranch in north central MT, but we continue to rely on the Ford.
I don't remember a time wherein the Mt bachelor road was closed nor the Portland/Mt Hood highway, Meadows being the only exception. But I would guess the commercial interests apply enough pressure not to close those roads and there is clearly an expectation, mostly justified, that folks traveling "these" roads are prepared for the experience.
Years ago on the way to Mt Bachelor I was told to put all four chains on our Jeep as all four wheels were "driven".
But for me the big, GREAT, advantage to snow chains is the ability to pass, drive right on by, those that are stalled, spinning, or even over in the ditch as a result of thinking that AWD, 4WD, or 4X4, would suffice.
In the Jeep there were even countless times that I was able to take to the ditch to get around "clusters" of vehicles scattered helter-skelter all over the roadbed.
Vivid images, memories of December of 1990, here on the eastside of Seattle, SR520, comes to mind. BMWs, Porsches, MBs, the pungent smell of burning rubber, spread all the slight incline into the Microsoft Campus. Poor souls...
But looking back a bit, 1961-65, I survived some very severe winter driving in MT with RWD and the use of tire chains when/if needed. So in my mind I think I would rather put my trust in that configuration over and above most modern day AWD versions, but most certainly above ANY FWD or front biased AWD system.
It no longer suffices to simply say AWD, that doesn't nearly convey enough information to the reader. Clearly, some of the AWD systems out there in the marketplace today are just barely improvements over FWD, not nearly up to snuff when compared to a simple RWD.
The SX4 Sedan arrives Spring 2007.
This is a common misconception, but Suzuki's are very popular in Japan and other parts of the world. Suzuki plans to increase sales dramatically in the next few years and they are having very significant success in their home market.
http://www.autospies.com/news/Suzuki-Overtakes-Honda-in-Japanese-Car-Market-9996- /
Anyhow, NO PROBLEMS.
Mother in law has a 96 Tracker, green, automatic. Problem? Yes.... paint of hood is faded.
Mileage is around 90,000+.
HOW'S THAT FOR RELIABILITY!?
Anyhow, father in law has a 2007 SX4.....got it 5 weeks ago today.
he has travelled nearly 3,200 miles already in 5 weeks.
No rattles, buzzes, nothing to cry about(and, most likely won't have issues, unlike my 97 200sx-a rebadged, Nissan Sentra, for example..dumped it at 66,000 miles it was stalling, messed up ignition coil and rebuilt the starter, needed new timing chain gear and chain....should I continue?).
If I had to place a bet on what lasts longer ,w/o any issues, I'd say Suzuki(and not the GM-DAT ones, either).
As for rebates? Ummmmmmmm, these sx4's ain't that highly priced over Dealers Invoice vs MSRP(compared to Toyota, Honda, and even Hyundai, these days).
I believe Owners, I know, first hand, over opinions.
I think the Trackers were horrid when it came to NVH, driveability, etc( they were bad,I would never personally have purchased one), BUT, reliability? Last forever.
I have owned 2 Nissans, 1 Toyota(Scion tC), Chevy's, Hyundai's, and know people who have owned Mazdas, Toyota(truck)Ford,Chrysler, and even a guy back in 1992 hwo had a Yugo with 93,000+ miles, and the manual tranny was dying(but he got it for 1,500 dollars, and got 50,000 miles out of it over 3 years time) :surprise: I know a guy with a Chrysler manual shift died out at 86,000!
It was probably the closest to NVH, etc, of a tracker
Anyhow, buy one, ya won't regret it.
If yer worried, go to yer dealership, and ask if you can have one overnight(ya might have ta pay a like a rental, though . I dunno.).
take care/not offense.
Sorry, but this cannot be further from the truth. What is the number-one selling passenger car of all the cars in Japan? Suzuki (WagonR). In fact, in an average month, Suzuki sells more WagonR than the Fit and Yaris (Vitz) combined. And it's been like this month after month for years. And WagonR is not the only Suzuki that sells well. What Suzuki does not have experience in is building and selling big cars. But when it comes to small cars, Suzuki is one of the all-time leaders in the world automotive market (sans North America).
Suzuki is not one of the top EIGHT in number of vehicles sold, value of vehicles sold, heck, they are not even in the top 10. Even Renault-Dacia-Samsung is larger than Suzuki.
Remember, bigger is not always better, and Suzuki is proof.
No, Suzuki is not one of the biggest automotive manufacturers. But when it comes to its speciality, it is indeed a world leader.
Also the more goodies you have on a car the more likely it could have a problem...The SX4 is a new car that is yet unproven.I believe that their colaboration with fiat is new for them as well....new AWD system ....you never know what changes may have to made to it,if any, in the long run.
Personally I love the look of the SX4...Aslo love the features...But Im still going to wait ....at least until next summer to see hou all you owners report back on the reliability.... Im definitly excited about a car with AWD, low price tag, acceptable gas mileage, and hopefully good reliability...Its what I need for my 25-30k miles I drive a year....If only it had a CVT tranny...maybe in a couple years.
Tell ya what, the 2007 Suzuki SX4 sure looks good on paper. 5-speeds and either Bright Red or Techno Metallic Blue with the only option being an armrest would work well for me.
Everyone that has one please come back here to comment on how your SX4 is treating you. It is firmly at the top of my futures list along with the Kia Rio5 and possibly the Kia Rio LX sedan.
Hey, harrychezt, I agree with your last post completely. And if I was ready to buy(our '01 Kia Sportage 4x4 is zipping along well at 123,350 miles, happily)I wouldn't hesitate right now to trade the Sportsman in. I have enough confidence in Suzuki as it stands right now. Ya gotta dig that 7 year 100,000 mile Warrranty, too.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
BTW, do you trust your dealer's service department, 1999johnner?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I'm the kind of person who likes to get a new car every few years and I prefer to drive a car covered by a bumper-to-bumper warranty (I will never be making loan payments AND paying for repairs on the same car again). I drive about 20,000 miles per year, so that means the typical 3 yr/36,000 mile warranty that most car manufacturers offer expires in less than two years for me.
Due to the depreciation involved with basically any brand new car, I've decided it's simply a no-brainer for me to buy a newer used car with very low mileage and a huge discount from the original sticker price. That's what I did with my current car, a 2004 Suzuki Aerio SX, and it has worked out great. In November 2004, I bought an '04 with only 10,000 miles for only $11,000 (MSRP $17,500 or so).
Also, I think I've decided that for once I don't want to compromise on performance and will get something fast rather than something merely adequate. :shades:
Right now, I'm seriously considering a loaded 2005 Saturn Vue V6 AWD with power, heated, leather seats and power moonroof, only 7,000 miles... for only $16,000-$17,000 versus the original sticker of about $27,000. I'll have to find out when the VUE was originally sold/titled... hopefully it will still have more than a year left on its 3/36 warranty. 250 hp = 0-60 in 7 seconds.
I've only averaged about 22 mpg with my Aerio SX (which all-in-all has been a wonderful car), so the mpg with the VUE (likely high teens) won't be too much worse.
Anyhow, maybe down the road I'll consider a gently used Suzuki SX4 (when I get the need for speed out of my system).
I hope all current and future SX4 owners will enjoy and have good experiences with their cars. I'll probably continue to visit the SX4 forums to read your comments, learn about the economy of the SX4 and keep up on any news.
Perhaps Suzuki will actually release a higher-powered turbo or supercharged SX4 like the old Neon SRT-4, Subaru WRX or Mitsubishi Lancer Evo. :shades:
So, I was off to my nearest dealer, some 20 miles away, the sparse Suzuki dealer network being one of the downsides to getting a Suzuki (poor resale and zero public awareness being another). Once there, I was pleasantly surprised to discover that they had a stick shift this time, where I had visited once before when it first came out, and all they had had at the time were automatics.
I came away with mostly good impressions, enough to continue my interest, that's for sure.
It looks good on the outside and inside, red dash lighting not being my favorite color but everything else falling right to hand and being easy to use. Outside, the looks are SO MUCH BETTER than the Aerio SX, it's not funny. They had leftover Aerio SX's sitting right next to the SX4s, and the older models just looked so awkward.
The throttle-by-wire is pretty hyperactive - a slight tap of the pedal in neutral and the revs are zinging to redline. It is VERY peppy, even in higher gears, when you step on the pedal, and I think this and the 3300 rpm it turns at 65 mph (!!) is a big part of the reason the fuel economy is so low. But since for me it would be replacing a truck and would only be a weekender and snow car, the fuel economy numbers are just fine. And the plus side is it makes maximum use of the power it has.
Noise at speed isn't too bad, and this thing just loves to rev. At 70 mph the noise was about an even mix of road, wind, and engine, and the combined effect was quite acceptable in a $15K car.
The clutch is light as they all seem to be these days, the shifter is a touch notchy but short and precise through the gates, qualities I appreciate. The brakes are firm and effective - I don't know what some reviewers meant when they said the brakes in this car are mushy.
What else to say? I didn't get a chance to autocross it (:-P) but the handling seemed solid. It has a nice tight turning radius. There's lots of room inside, nothing encroaches from above or the sides. I like the larger greenhouse which runs counter to the current trend of bathtub cars, and it allowed me to rest my arm on the windowsill without feeling like my elbow was three feet above my head. Not to mention it provides great outward visibility, with the exception of the weird front quarter windows that make the A-pillar HUGE. Those front quarter windows are ANOTHER oddity that are suddenly showing up on a lot of cars out there - the new Civic and the Fit have them too, just to name a couple.
The 3-mode AWD is a bit gimmicky, if you ask me. The FWD mode - why would you ever need it? I was thinking this through. The thing runs 100% in FWD anyway unless it detects slip, and in that case, wouldn't you want AWD engaged to do something about the slipping wheel? As for the lock mode, it puts 30% of power to the rear, which can be increased by the computer to 50%, but only until you hit 36 mph and then it's back to regular AWD operation. So no good on the highway portion of the drive to the snow, although maybe useful if are driving around town at low speeds in snow or ice. I dunno, maybe that's just a California perspective at work: the snow is something I drive TO, and then later I drive home, but am never IN for days/weeks/months.
Bottom line: I think I would just leave it in AWD all the time. The only question is whether the rather bright green AWD dash indicator would bug me, in which case I guess I could always switch to FWD to make the light go out.
I have NO IDEA why everyone is calling this car an SUV. It is a touch bigger than an xA and a Fit, seems to me, and smaller than a Matrix. It does not have a very high roof, yet does manage to have more headroom than many cars I was in at the auto show. It is basically a small hatchback, roughly the same size as an Impreza. Compact at best. Are we just calling anything with AWD an SUV these days?
I had no idea until I started reading all the comments here that the Sports are not yet available. I would actually be almost 100% satisfied with the base with convenience package, but geez, for an extra $1000 the Sport is such a deal! Not to mention, it does have one thing missing from the base model that I would quite like - traction/stability control. Well, that and the much better stereo with subwoofer. I could live without them, but I have to say that in my old Outback Sport I DID live without them (TCS still not available now on the Subaru), and there were some times when it would have been really nice to have had them. Can you even BELIEVE how much stuff you get on this car that still, in Sport trim, barely reaches $17K? It puts many of the much larger automakers to shame with their offerings here in the States anyway.
My least favorite feature of this car right now is the rear seats: they don't fold flat, and if you fold them forward and "tumble" them, they just sit there folded up against the front seats and secured with straps? If the designers were going to go that far, they should have had made the seats removeable, which would clear out a TON of useable cargo space back there. Oh well. Guess that improvement will have to wait until SX4, gen II, eh?! ;-)
Oh, one last note, to the peeople that think Suzuki is almost solely a motorcycle company - the VERY loud announcer in the Suzuki display area at the show today was throwing out trivia questions, and one of them was how many cars Suzuki sold last year. Answer? 2 million. Yes, MILLION, with an 'M'. Suzuki is the number one kei-car manufacturer in its home country, and the rest of their cars (the true Suzukis, NOT the warmed-over, decade-old Daewoos) are well above average in reliability and durability. So avoid Reno and Forenza, and you probably can't go too far wrong at the Suzuki store.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
07 Subaru Impreza's are selling at $17k around here. Makes the SX4 Sport sticker a little spendy IMO. Real world prices should be better in a year or so. Maybe even sooner.
I noticed people at the show weren't very interested in the XL7 (I personally think it's kind of ugly) but they WERE quite interested in the Grand Vitara.
Yes, I could get the Impreza hatch for $17K, but it wouldn't have auto climate control (kinda nice), leather-wrapped wheel (a detail that I am more attached to than I should be!), the 8-speaker stereo with sub woofer (very nice), or traction/stability control (can come in handy when you're in a bad spot). The Subaru also has a very narrow seat with seat-bottom side bolsters that don't allow me to splay out my legs to the pedals without feeling constricted. I like the Suzuki's seat a lot more.
Plus, I have to admit that although I don't find the Impreza particularly ugly, I certainly prefer the looks of the SX4.
Just thinking out loud here...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Impreza has a better engine though. Suzuki does have a lot for the price and it is much nicer looking than the Impreza.
Now, does the Impreza provide a whole lot more power and somewhat better handling with the same fuel economy as the SX4? Yes, which has me still thinking twice over the whole thing. Thing is, the 2.0 in the SX4 has its own good points too, like an amazing eagerness to rev which the flat-4 in the Subaru does not exhibit. And that driver's seat in the Impreza - I am going to check it out again, but if it's too narrow, it's just too narrow - there's not much I can do about that.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Actually, Suzuki is No. 3 in Japan not for sales (far from it), but in the number of units produced. In the first fiscal six months in Japan (over there, it's April through September) of 2006, Suzuki has overtaken Nissan (not Honda) to be No. 3 in the units produced. The November 11 issue of the Nikkei has a detail on this.
Now, in the "Kei" car market which Suzuki has dominated in the past 33 years, it is actually quite conceivable that Daihatsu may pull off the unthinkable - stealing the No. 1 spot from Suzuki. Suzuki projects the Kei car annual output ending in March 2007 to be 605,000 units whereas Daihatsu projects the same-period output to be 615,000 units. Daihatasu may be optimistic, but it remains to be seen.
Suzuki out sells Subaru by over 2 to 1 in Japan.
That's because Suzuki has to sell two of its vehicles to Subaru's one in order to have the same revenue. Remember, Suzuki's JDM strength is the Kei cars, and they don't cost much.
The other interesting thing to note is that Daihatsu is majority-owned by Toyota. Plus both Suzuki and Toyota started out making weaving looms.
Electronic Stability Program (ESP®)** including traction control system (TCS) is offered in the sports model in the US.
No, that's not the reason. The reason that Daihatsu's output may exceed Suzuki's in the Kei market is that Suzuki's Kei sales are slowing down. In October, Suzuki's Kei sales dropped 8.6% from the same month of the previous year. Daihatsu has recently introduced some amazing models such as the Sonica, and they are managing to eat up what Suzuki has coughed up. In the November 11 Nikkei article, Mr. Osamu Suzuki, the chairman of Suzuki, said that his company does not intend to force to raise the sales figure just for the purpose of keeping the No. 1 position in the Kei sales. By saying that, he is clearly implying that it is what is happening to the Kei sales that may cause Suzuki to be dethroned. He said, "Our priority is the profit, not the honor."
By saying that Suzuki should save the profits, not the face, Mr. Suzuki is saying that the emphasis will go to non-Kei cars. But it is not the emphasis on the non-Kei cars that is slowing down Suzuki's Kei car sales.
Toyota has always had a major stake in Daihatsu, but in 1998 it effectively became a subsidiary of Toyota. The current chairman of the company is a former EVP of Toyota, by the way. Daihatsu has assembled a variety of Toyotas over the years, and even engineered and supplied engines to Toyota. For instance, the 1.0 and 1.3 L engines used in the JDM Vitz (Yaris) are both Daihatsu engines.
What? Why would they not color them white on black or some other readable combination? It seems to me that I've read reviews on the car that showed easily-readable gauges. Please edumacate me!
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I personaly have owned SX4 for 2 months now and so far I've enjoyed this car a lot. A perfect combination of style, features and value.
This car is really a subcompact, isn't it? Pretty small. I've yet to test drive one but I have talked to someone standing right next to their new SX4(silver, automatic tranny)so I saw how little they are. And I think that makes me want a SX4 even more. BTW-22 mpg city and 28 mpg highway are agreeable gas mileage numbers for me. How about you guys? Will they work out for you, too? As long as the Sportage 4x4 runs great we're keeping it. When it needs replacing I will get a Bright Red or Techno Blue Metallic Suzuki SX4 with 5-speeds and armrest for an accessory.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Well, seems legit. This is a high pressure dealership. Small Suzuki franchise. I think they took over the Carr Suzuki franchise. They don't move may Suzuki's. They still had the one I test drove... the automatic, which I did not like. Let me know if they feed you a different story.
The back seats feel great! The rear head rests shouldn't be the cause of obstruction of view since the passenger's head-silouette covers it -- blame it on your friends' big heads if your view is obstructed! I took a short ride (20 minutes) in the backseat of my own SX4, and I didn't feel like I was sitting in a subcompact. It wasn't like the backseat of my old Ford Taurus, but you can't expect a car to be a subcompact on the outside, and a family car on the inside!
Because of the additional height given to the rear passengers (the seats are 2" higher than the front seats) I was able to sit with my legs relaxed while not requiring that much leg room. I can sit on the back seat with my shins almost perpendicular to the ground (I'm a 5'6" woman). The front driver and front passenger seats need to be adjusted 3" forward of the backstop to give the rear passengers enough room, but then again, the front seats go pretty far back. I would say, only the very tall (6'2" or taller) would need to have the front seat all the way back to be comfortable.
And here's a pic of me with my new baby girl at delivery:
The color you have is the color of my 2004 Suzuki Aerio SX. I'd like to see a green paint option like that of (what I assume is your Taurus) the car on the other side of your new SX4.
Keep us updated and let us know about your fuel economy.