2007 Suzuki SX4

1679111215

Comments

  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    I was looking at the most recent version of Motor Trend, SUV of the year article. Mercedes gl450 was the winner, but what caught my eye was the Toyota RAV4... 269 hp v6 and 21/28 EPA mileage to boot. Okay, so it weights 3700 lbs and isn't going to be the sportiest of rides. And yes it's spendy. Base v6 4wd is going to invoice around $23.5k.

    So why is it that the SX4 (which I really like), weights 1000 lbs less, has a much smaller 4 cyl, has over 125 less hp... Only gets 23/28 EPA. Yes it's going to be sportier and it does cost $10 grand less, but...

    I wish the SX4 had better fuel economy. Heck, I could live with 23/28 EPA, IF the SX4 had a little more power. As it stands, the auto I drove is SLOW, and the 5 speed I drove is only adequate, not fun, just adequate. It certainly would make my next buying decision easier if Suzuki could offer a bit more.
  • 1999johnner1999johnner Member Posts: 27
    I assume the Rav4 has a 5 speed auto; and I doubt it actually get that high on the highway... I know my auto SX4 with abouth 2000 miles, averaged 31.9 mpg while driving on the garden state parkway.

    got to say this little beast is sure fun and is saving me money :-)
  • dudeboydudeboy Member Posts: 55
    "Okay, so it weights 3700 lbs and isn't going to be the sportiest of rides."

    0-60 MPH in the low 6's is pretty sporty in my book! :D
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye Member Posts: 473
    when you said you were getting 31.9mpg wereyou using that monitor or real world numbers from calculating distance driven vs gallons put in the tank. i ask this because my girlfriend has a chrysler sebring convertible with a that same monitor and to be honest that monitor is rarely (real world) if you drift down a hill it says your getting 90mpg!!! then it jumps up and down depending on the terrain. basically in the end it says she should be getting alot more mpg than her Odometer is telling... personally them mpg meters are a Novelty. Ive never had one that added up to what the pump and the tripometer said.. and honestly if you think about it, WHY are they there? can they improve MPG? what is their useful function? like i said its more of a Novelty item than anything else. It "might" be right. But i wouldnt put much faith in them as i never seen one that was actually True...
  • 1999johnner1999johnner Member Posts: 27
    I agree until I did the math and gal used into miles driven was pretty close about 30.6
  • dshortdshort Member Posts: 1
    Hi I called the dealer the other day and they gave me a vague answer that they should arrive sometime next year. :confuse: Do any of you know when they'll be on the dealers lots ready to test drive?
    Thanks
    D :)
  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    Fast yes. Sporty no. SX4 is more fun in the corners than a RAV4. Never driven a car based SUV that I'd call sporty in the corners. Well... maybe the Forester turbo. For the most part, the reason I like vehicles like the SX4 and Outback is they offer some level driving enjoyment and off road ability. Rav4 is a great family vehicle, but it's no canyon carver.
  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    Sport trim in December. Probably won't be many available until next year though.

    http://www.suzukiauto.com/sr_07/sx4/
  • bduboffbduboff Member Posts: 1
    I think the Turanza's look pretty good - according to Consumer Reports, the only areas that they really didn't do well was for Rolling Resistance and Tread Life - for Snow and Ice they match the top rated Dunlop and were a little behind with Dry and Wet Braking, but keep in mind the SX4 has 4 wheel disks and ABS. My plans (for my future SPORT) will be to drive the Turanza's for the first year and see how they do in the winter then probably switch to a real winter tire like the CR top rated Viking SnowTech to maximize the AWD safety and ability.
  • 1999johnner1999johnner Member Posts: 27
    I bought a set of Goodyear GW3 snow tires for winter and will reinstall the stock tires in the spring.
  • scotta0e316scotta0e316 Member Posts: 5
    My dealer told me that they have no idea when the Sport will ship. According to what they have been told it will be late Dec. maybe..
  • ratbert1ratbert1 Member Posts: 72
    My dealer told us in the beginning of November. I think we'll have to check on that again.
  • robandfabrobandfab Member Posts: 8
    Keep us posted on what you find out. I'm waiting for the Sport too and can't find out anything firm on when it's coming.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    You don't suppose.....

    This is being done in case you downshift to slow or stop with the gas pedla fully released and then release the clutch so fast the engine revs cannot be raised fast enough to prevent loss of control...?

    I know this isn't adviseable as common practice for a FWD or front torque biased AWD but has anyone tried actually downshifting to reach a reasonably high level of engine braking to see if the DBW engine control automatically raises the engine RPM so as to prevent loss of directional control?
  • 05s2r05s2r Member Posts: 4
    This is the explanation I received from Suzuki Canada regarding the engine revs hanging between shifts:

    "Thank you for contacting Suzuki Canada.
    The described condition is a part of the emissions system with the fly by wire throttle. It holds the RPM for a moment to prevent excessive hydrocarbon emissions.
    This is normal and can not be adjusted."

    After receiving this explanation I was able to get another test drive in a 5-speed SX4 where the dealer let me have the car for more than an hour. I found that if you only lightly depress the clutch pedal while shifting instead of pushing it all the way to the floor, the hanging revs between shifts are all but eliminated.
    Bottom line; It's a quirk of the engine that with time spent in the car will become a non-issue as you adapt to it.
  • ratbert1ratbert1 Member Posts: 72
    You have to understand how they work. If you are going down a long hill, your instantaneous MPG is close to infinite since many cars turn off fuel injectors at that point. As to calculating incorrect averages, you have to compare averages over the same range of miles. We calculate based on when we fill up. So the average MPG is the miles driven from fill up to fill up. The computer doesn't necessarily do that. It calculates based on a rolling average. They key to that is to find out how many miles the computer uses for it's average, then you can drive for the same number of miles between fill ups and I'd bet that those 2 MPG numbers match.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    That procedure might also result in a premature clutch BURN-OUT...!!!
  • nantnant Member Posts: 1
    My question is... I live on clay roads, and have 6 miles to travel on them everyday. These roads are North Florida backwoods roads, very rough.
    The suspension on this new one, how does it hold up?? I have heavy duty vehicles now a Durango4x4 and GMC 3/4 ton 4x4 and a Jeep Cherokee. That get beat on my roads, but have great suspension so they can handle it...

    I don't want to have to buy a new car again too soon
    :confuse:
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Does anyone know the details of the operation of i-AWD, electrically and mechanically? Physical location of components, transaxle, PTO(transfer case), drive shaft, rear diff'l?

    Or where I can go to read up on same?
  • iluvmysephia1iluvmysephia1 Member Posts: 7,709
    image

    ...here's an article written by Jim Kerr, a Canadian auto mechanic and a teacher of auto shop. The article gives a basic overview of the 2007 Suzuki SX4's powertrain and compares it to other vehicles AWD and 4WD systems. It's well-written and should help give you a better view of how this fine new crossover from Suzuki offers so much for so little money. It still tops my futures list as I rack up miles on my 2001 Kia Sportage 4x4(presently 122,935 and running great). Here's the article link.

    http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/060906.htm

    2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick

  • 05s2r05s2r Member Posts: 4
    "That procedure might also result in a premature clutch BURN-OUT...!!!"

    The SX4 manual I drove had a very light clutch pedal with the clutch engaging/disengaging close to beginning of the clutch pedal travel. I doubt there would be any risk of clutch burn-out with the clutch actuation point this far out in the pedal travel, as opposed to clutches that have there actuation points closer to the floor of the vehicle.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Thanks, Kerr said about everything except whether or not tire chains could be used on the rear first/only. Dealer only had two in stock, both automatics. Didn't do a test drive since I would be buying a stick shift. I did check the rear tire wheelwell clearance and it appeared that rear tire chains could be fitted.

    Anyone yet seen an owners manual and can answer the tire chiain question?
  • robandfabrobandfab Member Posts: 8
    When will the Sport model be available already?!

    http://cars.about.com/od/suzuki/fr/ag_07sx4.htm
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye Member Posts: 473
    the comment about about the fuel economy and weight is something that kinda bothered me from the start when compared to other cars in its class, bases in 2wd mode.
  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    My guess is tire chains (or maybe the cable chains) front only. Subaru recommends front. Most FWD biased AWD vehicles are set up for chains in the front.

    Have you ever owned an AWD car? I've never put chains on any AWD car I've owned, and I've been in some pretty deep snow. I guess if you were plowing really deep snow...
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    That article was nice, but it glossed over the 4WD mode.

    Yes, the thing has full-time AWD that works like 4*4 up to 30mph or so. In snow, it'll be exactly the thing you need :)
  • guestguest Member Posts: 770
    Some of the reviews I've read on the SX4 have suggested that the car has a cabin air filter and that the DOHC engine has variable valve timing. I think both of these claims are false. Has anyone else heard these claims, or know if either is true?
  • 1999johnner1999johnner Member Posts: 27
    VVT I thought I saw somewhere but I can't find it now... I doubt our little 2.0 has it though. as far as the cabin filter its listed n the Suzuki website no?
  • dudeboydudeboy Member Posts: 55
    Here's a link to the article that suggests that it has VVT. I can't remember where I saw the one that said it had a cabin filter. Maybe that's a part of the climate control system on models so equipped?
    2007 Suzuki SX4 Preview
  • reeser8reeser8 Member Posts: 33
    The mpg meter has both an instantaneous mode, and an "AVG" mode. You can control when to reset the average by holding down the mode switching button.
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye Member Posts: 473
    i dont see anywhere in that article where they mention VVT ? where does it suggest this.? maybe i over looked something. usually from the other car makers like toyota and honda when they had VVT in their engines they paste it everything showing off that they had this feature. VVT is a major plus for a smaller engine. thats how the honda fit squeezes out the power that it does from a 1.5l
  • ratbert1ratbert1 Member Posts: 72
    That's good to know. Do you know what they use as the mileage to calculate the average?
  • carritocarrito Member Posts: 38
    Hi

    I'm deciding between the SX4 sport and the Subaru Impreza 2.5i sport wagon. MPG for SX4 is 2 mpg better and costs around $2,000 less.
    reliability for the Impreza is much better and they have their symetrical AWD pretty much error-free as compared to a fairly new iAWD system for the SX4.

    I think Impreza's cargo room is also better with back seats up but not sure with seats folded? not even sure you can have flat folded seat with the Impreza?

    SX4 has rear side-curtain air bags but Impreza has IIHS top safety pick 2006 gold marks.

    Impreza has 174 hp vs 143 SX4.

    what are your thoughts on which car would be better?
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye Member Posts: 473
    well if i was you and you dont keep cars very long, i would also look into the fact of resale. Even though suzuki makes great cars! They have one of the lowest resale values. This is from first hand experience. you mentioned about cargo space how much difference is there between the two as far as cargo space. you might also want to test drive both of them! My guess is the SUB is much quicker car in terms of performance. read alot of the posts here relating to power or lack there of as some put it. You might save a penny or two on the price but what about when it is time to trade it in? just my thoughts.
  • drdan3drdan3 Member Posts: 13
    Regarding interior space, that issue really depends on the likelihood that you will be carrying large loads or a bunch of people. If the use of the vehicle is mainly for commuting, perhaps in rough weather/roads, than the small differences in space shouldn't be much of an issue. Moreover, the SX4 handles very nicely, making tight turns and is very easy to park.

    In addition, there are some pluses that should be kept in mind regarding the sport version: it will come with keyless ignition, which I've enjoyed with my Prius. The SX4 has a high seating arrangement, which might be an advantage over the Sub. It has the advantage of offering options over the use of 4wd which the Sub doesn't.

    The resale sounds like a big deal, but that really depends on how long you keep it. I had an '96 Legacy/Outback that cost $21,000 new. I traded it in with 80k for $5,000 in 2003. It needed major work on the steering system that cost me $1000 six months prior to selling it. Thus, I was out $17,000 for about 8 years of use, roughly $2,000 a year in depreciation. If you kept the $18,000 SX4 for 8 years with $2,000 a year in depreciation, you could trade it for $2,000 and be even with the Sub's depreciation (since the Suzuki warranty would have caught the repair in the Sub). If you plan on selling it within a couple of years, you take a bath with most cars (I sold an MDX after 3 years and lost $15,000!).

    Finally, the SX4 is slow, of that I offer no argument. Speed, like many things, is a matter of taste. I've driven a Matrix for 3 years. It's "slow" by most standards (I have the AWD version). It doesn't bother me much. It just means you have to depress the accelerator a bit more aggressively when going from a standing position or attempting to pass. I say, drive the two cars, decide what's really important...then make the decision. (Of course, there are no 'sport' models to drive at this time... :( )
  • 1999johnner1999johnner Member Posts: 27
    I've never owned a Sube before; but have driven a few... and yes they have an "older" or more tested AWD system then our SX4 (I assume). But I have done some testing with my SX4 auto on steep hills covered with wet leafs. And I got to say the quality of this cars iAWD is GREAT. I didn't even feel any front wheel slip as you do in many automatic awd systems. We did have a 1gen CR-V with RealTime4WD which was OK; but very slow to engage. And I really like the fact that you manually lock the system if needed. Of course I'll hold my final judgment on iAWD once the snow starts falling and sticking here in CT.

    Build quality of the whole car seems pretty good too

    After about 2500 miles on ours so far it does feel more quick?
  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    I'm assuming you are talking about $2000 difference in MSRP. Real world prices are much closer. The SX4 is new, but you should be able to get it for around invoice. Subaru's in the NW are heavily discounted below invoice and with rebates. The price differential should be closer than $2000.

    Subaru's do hold their value. Used Subaru's go for insane money around here. You are almost better off buying new. Suzuki's have not held their value well, which makes them a good value used... kind of like the Korean cars.

    Both are pretty reliable vehicles. I think Subaru has a better AWD system, but I think the Suzuki one is fine too. Suzuki does have more stuff on it. I think the only place where Suzuki does a lot better than Subaru is beauty. The Impreza is one ugly car. I'd look at the Legacy wagon as well. With discounts, it's pretty close in price to the Impreza. I think I remember seeing one on ad last weekend for about $17k. The base Legacy Outback wagons are going for $18.5k.

    The base SX4 is a good value at $15k. The Sport really creeps into Subaru territory though. I think the SX4 is meant for buyers stepping up to that price point. If you can afford the extra money and can deal with an ugly car like the Impreza, I'd go with the Subaru.
  • carritocarrito Member Posts: 38
    I like to think that we take good care of our cars and we keep them for at least 10 years. Resale value is not that important to us. This new car (SUB or SX4) will replace my wife's 1993 Mazda Protege which is in very good condition and we are only changing it because of our baby. The Protege doesn't even have air bags! not to mention any other kind of safety gadgets. We live in Canada and we get pretty nasty winters and having AWD is a big plus. My wife uses my Tribute AWD during the winter as she drives to work 30 minutes each way compared to the 4 minutes that I drive.

    I too like better the looks of the SX4, the higher seats and rear curtain air-bags. We already have the sport model available (don't ask me why we get them here first) so I will test drive both.
  • reeser8reeser8 Member Posts: 33
    I turned on the iAWD for the first time for a real drive the other day since we had our first bout of rain in the San Francisco area. Previously, I'd just turned it on for novelty after driving into a dirt lot or something of that sort. My 5-spd. SX4 felt surprisingly zippier with the iAWD turned on. Does this mean an increase in net hp? The zippy feeling was unmistakable. I wonder if my city mpg might actually increase if I keep AWD on. Of course cruising on the interstate in 2WD is the way to go as far as mileage is concerned.
  • guestguest Member Posts: 770
    How do you know the reliability is better on the Subie? The SX4 is too new to have much of a record yet. Also the sport is going to have some features that may not be available on the Imprezza such as stability control, climate control, etc. Does the Subie AWD have several modes as does the SX4?
  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    Look at reliability ratings from Consumer reports/Consumer digest, etc. Subaru gets better ratings than Suzuki. It is better vehicle, but it costs more. SX4 is pretty nice for the price though and much nicer looking than the Impreza.

    My concern is rapid depreciation for any lower priced car. Get in an minor accident and the car can be totalled by the insurance company. They look at the market value and a $15k car is now worth $9k. Body repairs have gotten seriously out-of-hand. Doesn't take much to get to the approximate 50% of the car value, depending on how the insurance company figures it.
  • arkainzeyearkainzeye Member Posts: 473
    i thought from what i read that the iawd ONLY engages when it senses wheel slippeage? if this is so then how would it make any differnece in mpg if you were in 2wd vs. awd on dry surfaces? im just wondering...
  • 1999johnner1999johnner Member Posts: 27
    I started to think the same thing - either its just a gimmick (I do like the lock mode though)

    or

    Maybe it unhooks the transfer case from the drive shaft; as the center dif is located on the rear dif which is strange to begin with. So MAYBE to reduce friction to save some fuel???

    I don't know so maybe I should have posted as this is my best guess?
  • ethan8ethan8 Member Posts: 13
    I think you have to remember that Suzuki has had a lot of problems with the GM products that it sells. I wonder if that has caused the over all reliability rating to be lower. The SX4 is built by Suzuki, not GM.
  • wwestwwest Member Posts: 10,706
    Having tire chains only on the front on a low traction, slippery, roadbed is a recipe for disaster. "Think" drag chains on the rearmost axle of a tractor/trailer rig. On a slippery roadbed having higher traction during braking, actual or engine compression, on the front vs the rear results in a higher potential for loss of control than otherwise.

    But that's right there in your owners manual.

    Yes, I have a 2001 AWD RX300, most definitely front torque biased, but it is modified, 1.5" wheel spacers, so rear tire chains can be fitted when/if the need arises. It has. During the winter months I carry both sets but have yet to need to add the front ones. I run on summer tires, Bridgestone Turanzas, year 'round for quietness and comfort.

    And "snow", regardless of depth, is almost never the issue. An icy roadbed, snow packed down to an icy layer (sometimes "hiding" under a layer of freshly fallen snow) , those are the conditions that require chains. Our own WSP has just issued an edict that when chains are required on our passes there will be NO exceptions. Too many people with wannabe, pretend, AWD, like my own RX, were causing our passes to be closed due to accidents.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    an edict that when chains are required

    I don't suppose the police are specifying which axles may or may not have chains on them? Yet anyway. :shades:
  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    I have been through many a "snow event" in the Cascades with AWD and have never used chains. I carry them as required, but have never used them. I've been on very icy roads and always drive appropriately for the condition. Never had a problem. I use M&S all seasons. My P5 (which is FWD) has studded M&S tires.

    I prefer car AWD's and not the more top heavy car based SUVs. I've driven some, and they feel less stable to me in snow and ice.

    In Oregon, they usually close the roads if chains are required. Makes sense to me.

    http://167.131.0.179/Pages/RCMap.asp?mainNav=RoadConditions&staticNav=ChainLaws
  • erics6erics6 Member Posts: 684
    GM products? Are you thinking the Daweoo? I was thinking specific models made in Japan, not the overall brand.

    I do think Suzuki's are pretty reliable. I would be a bit worried about the new GM Theta platform XL-7, although it does have a Suzuki built engine. Between the two, I think Subaru's are a little more reliable, but I wouldn't hesitate to recommend most Suzuki models.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    Remember that Suzuki makes mostly motorcycles. Cars aren't their primary business. Now, true, they make kick-[non-permissible content removed] bikes, but cars are a lot more complex.
  • canuck785canuck785 Member Posts: 160
    just my 2 cent here...
    i am from Quebec, Canada,(above NY state ;)
    moved in kansas last yr.
    as far as I know, not many places in USA get as much snow as we get up there and NEVER in my life have I seen ANY car driving down the road with chains!
    i think it is illegal anyways, most ppl drive with winter tires(maybe that is the difference??!!) or 4 season tires (the brave ones do that ;)
    we always had 4x4 trucks or AWD cars when i was a kid, I personally owned a 4x4 wrangler and a cherokee and i never needed to use chains on any of them.
    the only thing i can think of that has chains on the tires are snow blowers :)

    as i said, this is just my comments :)
This discussion has been closed.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.