Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2007 Suzuki SX4



  • erics6erics6 Posts: 684
    Actually, WRC does mean something. Just look at the Subaru WRX. Yes, the WRC Suzuki is not a street car, but they can learn from the race car, and hopefully put what they learn into a production car. SX4 could be turbo'd with a beefer transmission and differential.
  • kernickkernick Posts: 4,072
    can: I dont understand why ppl keep bashing that car??!!

    me: I have nothing specifically bad to say about the Aveo; it just came to mind as a very low power, low optioned car. If I'm taking in an AWD vehicle with ABS, stability control and side-airbags, I want a rental that has those features.

    If I buy a car I don't want to hear from the dealer or salesman or mfr. rep. that I shouldn't expect to be treated well because I didn't pay much. I'm handing over "perfect" $ and I expect to trade that for a similar product or service. I understand things aren't perfect and that's why it's important then to get treated well when you are inconvenienced. If I take an SX4 in for service I don't expect to get an Aveo or Neon, or an S-10 pickup.

    If after 5 days my car wasn't ready and they wanted a rental back, they'd have to physically come and find it and tow it back.
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    "SX4 could be turbo'd with a beefer transmission and differential."

    Does suzuki turbo any of their cars now? I cant see them putting turbo and all kinds of money into one of their lowest budget cars. Now i know Subaru puts turbos in some of their cars. but it also comes with a Nice price tag. A price tag i dont believe people are willing to spend on a suzuki. at least not at this time. Espeically with suzuki's resale value. My sister had a Aerio. It was a great car! NO problems. but when she needed something more and went for a trade in. OMG what a hit she took.. I think suzuki makes good cars! but i dont see them sinking a ton of money into a market that they dont even have. (turbo's and what not) when people think performance suzuki automotive is not one of the options to choice from. Im not even sure suzuki wants to even go that path. from the way they label the sx4, its more of a "get lot for your money type car". Their whole marketing thing seems to be (look what we give you for the money). So i doubt they start producing race car inspired suzukis anytime soon. Its just not their market. nor do i think they want it to be..
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    i just went on suzuki's website today and i seen they LOWERED the epa estimated mpg for the sx4. it was 23/30 Now they are saying 23/28. Makes me wonder what other specs changed? Interesting.
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Manson, WAPosts: 6,929
    a great deal. What other car on the market for $14,999 allows you to toggle a switch and drive in FWD(2WD), then with another flip of a toggle switch go into AWD-Auto for 4 season driving?

    Want to drive through some snow or ice? Well, you should have told me! Just toggle the switch to AWD-Lock and lock your powertrain/axles together so they turn in unison(4WD). This is the breakthrough rig for Suzuki.

    The thing that seals the deal for this padre is the great Warranty. 7 years and 100,000 miles. Plus, a rental car for up to 5 days to cover your driving needs while your little monster is getting fixed. It all adds up to a little 'ole carmaker from Japan that wants to be your carmaker.

    The 2007 Suzuki SX4 is the car that finally turns the corner for this manufacturer and it will be the one that propels them upward and outward. Thing is, too many Americans are numb-brained into thinking that the Cadadillac Escalade is the thing turning water into wine that they won't notice this great little rig from Suzuki.

    Their loss. Numbskulls. ;)

    2011 Kia Soul Sport 5-speed

  • I hear you about wanting a rental car similar to what you are driving ;)
    my point was that even if the aveo happens to be one of the cheapest cars on the market, it is unfair to classify it as "cheap" ;) go read the owners reviews, you,ll be surprised ;)
    the LT version comes with power windows and locks, ABS are available, sunroof, spoiler, 15" alloy wheels, A/C is standard, anti-theft system, MP3 player, cruise control...and then some. i also want to add that it is available in 11 colors!
    to me that is plenty for a car in that price range.

    the sx4 sure sounds like a great deal , i just wish the MPG were a bit higher :(
    I also wish Subaru would bring back the little Justy (I had one in 1989) awesome little car, 4WD and at least 35 MPG!!! :shades:

    and by the way... I currently own a chevy S-10 pick up :surprise:
  • erics6erics6 Posts: 684
    The turbo would be an upgrade. Look at the price differential between the base Impreza and the WRX. It could be a "halo" car. Get buyers in and they might choose the normally aspirated SX4. Don't forget the old Swift turbo. Sure, the market is small, but I could see a good business case for a turbo model in a few years. We'll see.
  • Actually, if you look at the consumer ratings just through edmunds, the user reviews for the Accent, Rio, Versa, xA, and Fit are all between 9.3 and 9.5. The Aveo is at 8.4.
  • if you consider that both the versa and fit are new cars on the market this yr, those are reviews from new owners, usually ppl are not that objective when they 1st get the car.
    again, i am sure that there are cars that got lower than 8.4... and i will not check because it will be a never ending conversation ;)
    I think i gave my opinion about the aveo and will go back to talk about the SX4 from now on :)
  • as you said, interesting!!!
    anyone heard about that happening before?
  • kernickkernick Posts: 4,072
    I believe the 2 different ratings are 1 for the auto. and 1 for manual; with the auto. having the higher rating.
  • erics6erics6 Posts: 684
    Suzuki website now shows 23/28 for both stick and automatic. I believe the original EPA estimates were 24/29 stick and 24/30 for the auto. Maybe the new numbers are the final EPA certification. Real world numbers always differ anyway. I really wonder why Suzuki can't do better. The Subaru Legacy Outback is rated 23/28 and weighs 400-500 lbs more, and it has a 17 gallon fuel tank. Suzuki would be more fun to drive, but mileage is dissappointing.
  • kernickkernick Posts: 4,072
    ark: Espeically with suzuki's resale value.

    me: I had a Jaguar and that took quite a hit from MSRP. Lost about 40% in 1.5 years. Fortunately I didn't pay anywhere near MSRP.

    ark: Its just not their market.

    me: You should consider that there are many brands that sell all types of vehicles. Chevy for instance never sold performance cars in the 50's, and the Corvette wasn't a performance car until the 60's. They now sell Aveos, Impalas, Silverados and Corvettes all next to each other. You can buy a $200 Sony TV or a $10,000 Sony TV. And Subaru wasn't into racing years or sold anything sporty years ago. Don't get locked into paradigms!
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,907
    Well, those are C/D's estimates. Like the old fuel economy numbers? :(
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Manson, WAPosts: 6,929
    2007 Suzuki SX4. It is "another small patch of white space going dark" according to the C&D article.

    The article is right...the SX4 is different and one way it's different is the fact that one can put the small car into a separate 2WD(FWD)drive mode to optimize fuel economy.

    To have the choice to do this is good when not wanting the better traction provided by AWD-Auto or the 4WD traction provided by the AWD-Lock mode. More of what we've already mentioned but it is the strong points of this sport crossover for all four seasons.

    To get this for only $14,999 with that car very, very well-equipped should go over really well. I saw the potential right away, I don't know about you guys.

    Like was mentioned in the C&D article another white patch goes dark.

    2011 Kia Soul Sport 5-speed

  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    I really like the AWD feature of the sx4. but i have to ask this, how many times are you going to NEED the awd feature? In C&D they said suzuki mentioned the drop is gas mileage is a small price to pay for the awd. here i live in western PA here the mountains. I only needed 4x4 2 times the whole year last year. and actually i went out on purpose just to see how my tracker would do in the snow. Im not saying you wont Ever need it. but the trade off for lower MPG is it really worth it? I guess if i live in a alaska or someplace where winters are non-stop snow and the roads never got plowed or what not. I also noticed something else about the sx4 engine. they said it is 143hp and 136ftlbs. my trackers 2.0 engine is 127hp and 135ftlbs of torque. The torque is what you feel when you climb i a hill or punch the throttle. i was wondering why my tracker had almost the same torque numbers has the engine with the higher Horsepower. i think this is why i thought it was weak during the test drive. the torque was the same but in a Heavier car.. I thought the MPG was on the low side when i seen the sticker. and this was when suzuki was claiming (24/30) Now they are showing highway mileage out of the 30's and into the 20s its making me question the sx4 even more. at least compared to other suv's with bigger more powerful engines.
  • kernickkernick Posts: 4,072
    ark: I only needed 4x4 2 times the whole year last year.

    me: you might want to define what you mean by "need". For instance you may not "need" 4x4 if your retired and can stay home when it snows. Or you may not "need" 4x4 if you don't mind shoveling snow and then after 1/2 an hour you get free. Or you may not need 4x4 if you don't mind spinning your wheels for a few seconds until you get traction - which can be dangerous if your trying to enter a break in traffic.

    Also most people don't "need" their airbags every year. But I do agree with you that extra power just like airbags, stability control, and AWD are nice capabilities to have.

    I also agree with you that the SX4 is not a powerhouse. This seems to trouble you. Maybe you're looking at the wrong vehicles. But even other small SUV's don't give you the combination of power and mpg you want.

    You might just want to go shopping for a Civic, though that doesn't have much torque either. Or wait for 1008 and see what Subaru comes out with for an Impreza. But expect to pay more for more power and space, and about the same mileage.

    As I said before if you want good real-world mpg and better acceleration get the lighter, 5-speed. If you've learned to drive for mpg, I'm sure you'll get 30+mpg. And one more thing - if you've got sufficient money to buy a new car and all the taxes and insurances that go along with that, you really shouldn't be too worried whether that car gets 28 or 31 mpg; it really works out to a $2-$3 a week.
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Manson, WAPosts: 6,929
    this guy arkainzeye just seems to want to come here and bellyache about the 2007 Suzuki SX4. I basically ignore his comments, they're like listening to Bill Walton on NBA telecasts, like listening to a speaking brickwall.

    Oh, I read that Suzuki is installing Yokohama tires on our 2007 Suzuki SX4's. To me this is great news because I can still remember the performance improvement on my 1999 Kia Sephia-the exact car that inspired my Edmunds nickname. The car handled better after the Yokohama's were put on.

    2011 Kia Soul Sport 5-speed

  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    i think what troubles me is how a more powerful engine than the Suzuki engine i already have now in my tracker could feel so much weaker than my tracker! Dont get me wrong. When i test drove the SX4 everything else beside the rear backseat room or lack there of and the power was all i didnt like. everything else was Top Notch!!I think what was a let down for me was when i read the ad's about the 143hp engine. Im running a 2.0 suzuki engine in my tracker and it is only 127hp. So i thought GREAT more pickup and go. But when i test drove it it felt less powerful than my tracker! and i think this confused me. I even asked the saleman if it was running correctly or not. But lastnight as i researched into my tracker and the sx4 i found even though there is more HP in the sx4 there is only (1)ftlbs more in the sx4 over the 2.0 tracker engine. and this torque is what you feel when you push the gas pedal to the floor. actually my motorcycle and the sx4 has the same torque. the only difference is my motorcycles torque is at the rear wheel and not the crank. Anyways. my point about the awd was the weight of the awd might be what is killing the Fuel economy and Power. My believe is a car that size should be getting better fuel economy than 23city and 28 highway. and there is no Guaranty than you will even get them numbers. so if you shooting for a AWD car that you will actually use the awd system then maybe the lesser MPG and power will be exactly what you need or want. But if your getting it and using it in 2wd 99% of the time then you might be spending more on fuel than you need to be. this is just my opinion as i have been comparing honda fits, nissans,suzuki's and what not. yes the suzuki has awd. but what about in the summer when you are still getting Low to mid 20's and NOT using that awd and other cars in the same class are getting low to mid 30's with the same if not larger inside room and equal if not great acceleration... example based on the lower epa rating for the sx4 and the honda fit and figuring in 15000 miles @ $2.50 a gall average. there is over a $400 difference in fuel useage. but look at the acceleration numbers and resale values and other features like that. I wonder if suzuki will come out with a 2wheel drive only sx4. not one that you switch into 2wd and still getting poor fuel economy. Who knows i might take another test drive. maybe the one i drove wasnt working correctly?
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Manson, WAPosts: 6,929
    driving was working right, arkainzeye. You are right, it is the extra weight of the AWD system that is in part weighing the 2007 Suzuki SX4 down a tad.

    Here's where I'm coming from. To me the extra weight is fine. I am currently driving a 3000lb. 2001 Kia Sportage 4x4, which, yes, has available 4WD. The Sportage has gotten me out of no less than 4 snow/ice incidents in the last 2 years. I want my next vehicle to have 4WD. What has me captivated with the SX4 is you can toggle it to 2WD(FWD), AWD-Auto for rain traction(up to 50% of the power can go to the rear wheels if needed)and AWD-Lock. When in AWD-Lock your 2 axles are actually locked together-that's right-you're in 4WD then, man! Awesome! I plan on taking my SX4 up the Mt.Graham road here in SE Arizona. Mt.Graham has an observatory at the top that the Vatican has a telescope on(yep, it's working fine). Also, the U.of Arizona is building an observatory that has a new state of the art technology of mirrors they're employing that, when done, is going to be the most effective telescope in the world for clarity and depth of view. It blows the Hubble telescope out-o-the water, man.

    So, I want to head up there. Sometimes when I go traveling it will no doubt get nasty. Therein lies why I want a 2007 Suzuki SX4.

    Did I mention wonderfully good looks? Italian design in it's body. State of the art electronics abound. Purchase price?

    Only $14,999 for the 5-speed. Gentlemen-that is a flaming bargain. Suzuki is offering '0'% interest financing. I plan on test driving within the next few days-I'll keep y'all updated on my impressions.

    Oh, 2007 Suzuki SX4 tires. They're installing P205/60R16 Yokohama's at their Japanese factory. The Japanese Suzuki factory is installing these Yokohama's for our The reason I mention this is that Fiat and Suzuki are also building 2007 SX4's at a factory in Eastern Europe-Hungary IIRC. So, we are no doubt going to get P205/60R16 Yokohama's on our 2007 Suzuki SX4's. Very, very cool, gentlemen. These Yokohama's are great tires.

    I put some on my 1999 Kia Sephia back in early 2000 with my tax refund and my little Sephia was immediately turned into a bad little driving machine. No kidding. The car handled so much better, tracked so much better and took bumps way better.

    The 2007 Suzuki SX4 picture just keeps getting clearer and clearer and clearer to me. This will be my next rig, men. :D

    2011 Kia Soul Sport 5-speed

  • erics6erics6 Posts: 684
    I forgot to look. Are the Yokohama tires all season mud and snow rated?

    The base model sticker is good price. Not sure about the Sport though. For example, real world prices of Subaru around here are quite good. Today's paper had Forester X's from $18.5k. I've seen even better deals with the $2500 rebate Subaru had on the 06's. Hopefully Suzuki will offer rebates next year and make it an even better deal.

    Speaking of bargains, for the person looking at the Aveo. They are going for $8k. The new base 2 dr Hyundai Accent is selling for $8.5k.

    Of course, you could by this used Accent - for more than sticker. :-()
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    Can you get the base model with cruise control? I NEED cruise. I would like the Sport because it comes with cruise. hey i was just wondering. does anyone who owns one can you tell me how the headlights are at night? I know alot of honda fit owners are not happy with their headlights and the test drives were during the day so they never noticed anything.. Which little car is it that comes with a Blue Tooth cell phone adaptor built in. its basically a handsfree device for your blue tooth enabled cell phone from what i understand..
  • kernickkernick Posts: 4,072
    That's about the 5th time you've posted that info. and opinion. Can we move on? Obviously if higher torque and higher mpg are important to you, you need to look elsewhere. Be prepared to pay more then if you want AWD, or don't get AWD.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,907
    The Versa has a Bluetooth option.

    Or, a really nice headset that allows hands-free use of any cell phone, in any car (including the SX4) costs about $30.
  • kernickkernick Posts: 4,072
    Personally I wouldn't consider any car that doesn't have AC and ABS. You may not get those at that price. I also agree with the NHTSA that stability control saves lives - something my '04 Jag. X-Type didn't have, and found it to be rather disconcerting on the ice.

    Also, especially in a small car I think side-airbags would be a definite want. You'd seem awful stupid to end-up crippled or dead in an accident without those features; but people could say you saved a few dollars by buying a lesser vehicle.

    If you are looking to buy an SX4, I would assume you want an AWD vehicle. The competitiors to the SX4 thus would be the Caliber RT, the Jeep Compass and Patriot, the Impreza, and maybe the small utes of several companies. The competitors for the SX4 would not necessarily be the Fit, Versa, and Scions which are FWD only. If you want FWD and high mpg (high 30's), that is a different type vehicle than the SX4.
    The SX4 is an alternative to the small SUV's.
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    so posting FACTS bothers you? would you rather someone Lie to you instead? ok i will the sx4 has 100FTLBS MORE torque than anything in its class!! Feel better about the sx4 now? you should
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye pittsburgh paPosts: 473
    you said suzuki is offering 0% interest?! for how many months? I didnt see anything on their website about incentives for the sx4. When i asked my local dealer a week or so ago he said there was NO incentives for the sx4. is this something they just started to do? that makes the deal more interesting since dealers arent cutting any deals on these New suzuki's
  • guestguest Posts: 770
    Don't get too excited. Yokohama Geolandars were standard equipment on my 2004 Suzuki Aerio. Cruddy tires. The Geolandars were (I think) summer performance oriented meaning that they fared poorly on snow and ice and had very poor tread life. I believe they were rated for 30,000 miles which is basically the basement for tires. Mine didn't last 30K, and I read many accounts of people having to replace their tires well short of 20K.

    I would not be surprised if Suzuki uses the same or similar tires for the SX4.

    I'm not saying that ALL Yokohamas are bad, though. My replacement set of tires are 80,000 mile warranty all-season performance Yokohamas which, combined with the AWD, fared much better in winter conditions.
  • While many magazines have compared the SX4 to the Honda Fit, Yaris, Versa... it's actually supposed to be lower priced alternative to the Impreza, Matrix, Patriot, and Caliber. At $16,399 for the GT manual, the SX4 isn't competitive with the Impreza. Subaru has lowered the MSRP of the Impreza to $17,995. For your $1,600 you get almost 40hp more and independant suspension. Let's not forget there is currently NO aftermarket for the SX4. If you're considering this car, just wait a couple months for the HUGE discounts to start. I'm guessing you'll be able to buy a loaded SX4 for around 13 grand in a few months. The hot deal right now is the Saab 9-2x. Dealers are selling the 2.5i linear around here for 17 grand.
This discussion has been closed.