Jalopnik
Exterior Design:***
Design touches such as the split A-pillar, metal-look skid plates and black plastic everywhere give the 2008 Suzuki SX4 a distinctive and tough look that unfortunately distracts from its sporty and capable soul. If we're being generous, the car is a triathlete, pretty good at almost everything. At least it looks unique.
Interior Design:****
Did I mention the back seats tumble all the way forward? That's a nice touch. Though most of the buttons and switches come out of the Suzuki parts bin, everything is within easy reach and everything works like you'd expect it to. Everything but the shifter. The tall greenhouse also means those long of torso and rich with gear can move a lot for a little.
Acceleration:**
If I could change one thing about this car it would be the transmission. Though power plays into the equation, and the 143 horses tied together with Suzuki's version of variable valve timing try hard, the five forward gears are one shy of awesome and a reconsideration of the ratios could push this car into knock-out economy car territory.
Braking:****
The four-wheel disc brakes, front ventilated and rear solid, have an easy feel and would do well on a larger, heavier car. On the lilliputian SX4 they're perfect for creating a little stop-short moment with your lady friend.
Ride:**
For a big chunk of our bike riding adventure one of my passengers was facing down a sharp bike pedal. Though he made it out without a scratch, it got a little close. Suzuki made a decision to err on the side of handling, and though most would agree it was the right choice, there's a touch more bump than some economy buyers are willing to accept.
Handling:****
"Are our cars as exciting as our bikes?" Suzuki asks in its advertisements. I'm not a big bike guy, but I'm willing to guess no way in hell. But it's closer than you think. The best part of this crossover is how it handles when it needs to. The SX4 goes where you point it and the auto AWD system provides just a touch of energy when necessary. Even in slippery conditions the car maintains its composure and is, most importantly, easy to predict.
Gearbox:**
A sixth gear and an aluminum ring is all that's needed to make this an excellent gearbox. The throws are a touch long but the clutch works well even with clunky footwork and the placement is right in my sweet spot but it revs way too high in freeway driving, literally whining for that extra gear.
Audio:*
This is, without a doubt, the worst FM radio in any new car I've ever driven. Chicago is all buildings and, therefore, signals aren't at their best. But I constantly lost signals and rear passengers couldn't hear anything. Thumb controls are a nice touch, but they don't connect to a radio I'd like in my car.
Toys:***
The entire car is a toy, but we have to give credit to Suzuki for providing gimmicks like tumble-forward rear seats, a sharp center information strip with fuel range and external temperature and other smart touches. The AWD system, though lacking in low/high range (c'mon, what did you expect?), has a great "2WD/Auto/Lock" switch next to the handbrake that makes you feel like you're in a far more expensive ride.
Value:****
For $16,870 you get three-mode AWD, a six-disc changer, 100,000-mile limited powertrain warranty, roadside assistance, six airbags, cruise control, power everything and even rear intermittent wipers. Throw in automatic air-conditioning that cleverly mimics climate control and you're hard-pressed to find another bargain for this MSRP. Oh, and it has keyless entry, though it requires carrying around a key fob that might be mistaken for a Sega Game Gear.
Overall: ****
It's hard to know what the Suzuki SX4 aspires to be, but it's not the usual SUV-car dichotomy that most crossovers try to fake. You're not going to mistake this for a Range Rover. The real question you have to ask when judging this car is whether or not it is an exciting bargain car or an exciting car that's a bargain, and though I'd lean towards the former, it's a question that doesn't even come up with other cars in this price range.
Also see:
Comments
Starry night or starry night.
@Matt Hardigree: Lots of "Get-up-and-Van-Gogh" and "Value-for-the-Monet?"
/got nothing
//nice review so far
@Ash & Carry: Thanks, people prefer to talk when they disagree, i mix metaphors or they think i'm full of it.
I could see having one of these when used ones are dirt-cheap.
At this point in my life, a new car is out of the question, and leasing is for suckers like my parents.
@Matt Hardigree: I think the grammar hounds are still trying to sniff down the reveiw.
It sucks that the gearbox is soo terrible.
It specs out well enough to spark interest at its price-point. If I didn't know what it looked like, I'd be intrigued. But something about looking (to me) like any number of modern econo-boxes turns me away.
I don't care that it has parts bin switchgear. I'd gladly put up with a few cheap components in an overall functional, fun, and stylish car.
And sorry, but if I'm going to spend $17k on something, 2 out of 3 ain't good enough.
@Paul Y. is Going Dumb at the Sideshow: The SX4 is already cheap for a 2007 model, if you can find them. I have an SX4 and cant agree more with the article, its dead on, I am glad I did not upgrade my audio package.
All they need is a couple turbos and a decent gearbox to make this take off.
Now I have that Don McLean "Vincent" song stuck in my head.
Starry
Starry night...
I think its a great looking car.. not your average box at all.
Suzuki is by far the best dollar-to-car ratio around. I drove a Verona around for a few months that had leather, power sunroof, climate control, pretty nice looking wood-like accents, fog lights, a decent audio system, heated seats, and a V6. Used price 11k. Unreal. I actually wasn't embarrassed to drive it either, and I didn't hate driving it at all.
i forgot where i read it online, but isn't suzuki rumoured to be developing and consequently bringing over a turbo-charged variant?
I'd drive it. It's kinda ugly but I still like it better than Camry/Accord/Civic etc etc. It looks like it's got heart and doesn't appear that it has $5K in electronic add-ons.
Character is more important to me than appliance-like transportation. Everybody else seems to be eliminating most of that.
Top Gear (I think it was..) boy loved the shifter in the SX4 vs Mini comparo. Was pretty much the highlight. Did want a 6th, though.
@Hot_Carl: Bah. Verona isn't really Suzuki.
@beercheck: I like the gearbox, easy to use, no complaints there. I think that is basically what I said. Seriously, one of the most idiot-free sticks out there, but cheap materials/bad look/4K rpm 80+ driving is not going to get you three or four stars.
@Matt Hardigree, anyone else: If Hyudai was the new Honda/Toyota when those two moved upmarket, is Suzuki the new Hyundai when it moves upmarket itself? Or is it all a moot point because no one cars much about econoboxes?
"It's hard to know what the Suzuki SX4 aspires to be.."
Looks like it's trying to be my 1989 Toyota Corolla All-Trac. Which is a good thing in my book. I would give it a look if I were in the market but, alas, the All-Trac is still plugging along. I would think the hp would be plenty but the low gearing is unfortunate.
@rkwadd: People like sporty econoboxes, just not the US.
@rkwadd: @Dr.Danger: I'm curious to see what happens with the swift. If that entry level product can propel people into larger Suzis and they maintain they're sporty/cheaper style I think they could be like Toyota in the 80's.
@Dr.Danger: Luxury compacts and hatcbacks do well there as well. A3, C30, 1 series. I seriously doubt Americans will ever be able to accept expensive, high-class small cars (I see it as a legacy of the landbarges). That forces small cars to be marketed on price, which eats into quality and perpetuates the small=suck perception. It sounds like the SX4 is about as good as it gets for this class.
Don't forget that it is getting standard Nav next year.
Is that Lake Tampier in the background?
even top gear like this car.. so it must be good.. lol
@1300ccsoffury: Maple Lake
@Matt Hardigree: @rkwadd: I think we are getting closer to getting quality sporty econo-vehicles. The auto makers are not about to drop a ton of money and time on vehicles that might not give very much of a profit. We probably will see a trend to better econoboxes and maybe in the near future we might see more.
reasons i won't buy this car or recommend it:
- low mpg
- not an ultra-low emissions vehicle
it's like they decided to punt on the whole energy efficient motor thing
@KVHnik: +1, I was thinking the same thing, and also that it's not a bad thing.
I looked into one of these for the wife recently, but even being such a great deal, we were stuck in the used car price range. I still think it's a great little car, on paper anyway.
As always, looking forward to Part 3 to find out if it's REALLY right for me.
Here's what it aspires to be.
[jalopnik.com]
@Dr.Danger's got the power: but dozens of such vehicles already exist in europe, its just a case of jumping though the hoops required to import and sell them here.
@Wes Siler: I know they do, I wish they would just take a chance and import them over here to the US.
You know, if Suzi were to put a 6-speed sequential box into their cars, they could up the excitement quotient, and tie into their bikes...
Wait a minute... My DRZ is only 5-speed, and is pretty much tapped out at 80 mph...
They DO make their cars like their bikes!
@Matt Hardigree: Yes, but did you take it to the piney woods and give it the airborne Jersey Sidekick test? How can we make an informed decision if we don't have ALL the information?
I really think this would be a cool car and super cheap. It would be great if the after-market gets behind this thing. Coil-overs and exhaust and junk would be cool.
I'll take mine like this.
@FrankGrimes: That reminds me of the rally Focus. They should get into WRC a little more and get some fanboys to drive sales.
@Feds:
Maybe the SX4 engineers are expecting you to cut a 3x3 hole in the airbox, slap a Yoshi header on one end of the block, a FCR carb at the other end, and a 16-39 sprocket set up to improve performance on the freeway...
Then again, neither the DRZ nor the SX4 seem to be intended for the long-distance freeway touring set. Both seem geared toward city commuting and weekend barreling down twisty country roads at 20+, with a little dirt occasionally thrown in.
Perhaps that's why Top Gear wasn't as dismayed with the gearbox, as the UK/European roadmaps have been (historically, at least) less superslab-centric.
@Dr.Danger's got the power: Suzuki IS in the WRC for the 1st time this year with a SX4
[www.suzukisport.com]
Comment on this post
Reply by EmailLogin with your username and password below. Or comment on this post via email.
Forgot your username or password? New User?