Review: 2010 Suzuki Kizashi
12-12-09, 04:38 PM
#1
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Review: 2010 Suzuki Kizashi
By CL-member request, a review of the 2010 Suzuki Kizashi.
http://www.suzukiauto.com/kizashi/
In a Nutshell: A good value, refined and well-finished, but not a car for large people.
(Beige interior)
(Air bags deployed)
Suzuki, long acknowledged as a prime manufacturer of motorcycles and small, off-road-capable SUV's, has never been noted in the American market for its regular passenger cars, although sometimes those cars have been a good value, and are often overlooked by those more concerned with the panache of more popular brands like Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc..... The company's rather sparse network of auto dealerships has not helped much either. Just in the last couple of years, for instance, two nearby Suzuki dealerships in the Northern Virginia/D.C. suburbs, where I live, have folded (one of them folded with its partner Buick franchise, where both brands were sold). Fortunately, there are a few left in the D.C. area,.....one of them right on a Metro subway stop for convienence. But there is little doubt that the company is not popular in America. Suzuki did not field a public display at last year's 2009 D.C. auto show......we'll see if they do one for the 2010 show next month.
As stated above, Suzuki's regular passenger cars, in the U.S. market, have never been as popular as their small SUVs. In the 1980s and 1990s, Suzuki sold the subcompact, Swift hatchback/sedan, but, with the Suzuki nameplate, it never sold in the numbers that its rebadged Chevy/Geo Sprint/Metro version did (Suzuki never offered a 3-cylinder, high-mileage version either, like Chevy/Geo). Suzuki then introduced the compact, Corolla-like Esteem sedan/wagon, which was an OK small car for commuting, but not very impressive in its road manners, chassis, or drivetrain (I test-drove one when it first came out). The Esteem did not sell in very high numbers either, and was discontinued after a few years. Suzuki then introduced several new cars that were actually either Korean Daewoo products specially-built for Suzuki or simply rebadged Daewoos.......the Reno compact Hatchback, the Forenza compact sedan, and the Verona mid-size sedan. Again, these cars still failed to sell in large numbers, though I looked at and test-drove a mid-sized Verona and felt it was an excellent value, dollar-for-dollar, and had good fit/finish. It also had the world's only transverse-mounted in-line-6, making a rather paltry, 4-cylinder-like 155 HP....the car's primary weak point. Suzuki then introuced the subcompact SX-4 sedan/wagon, which was a joint Suzuki-Fiat design, and was a great value, not only well-built with good quality and standard AWD with a three-position dash switch that allowed you to run the car in FWD mode for more power and better gas mileage when you didn't need the AWD's extra traction. It was an excellent value, starting at only 15-16K, and one of the best competitors I've seen yet to the base AWD Subaru Impreza. But (yet again) it failed to sell in large numbers, and Suzuki (mistakenly, IMO) only offered AWD on the hatchback version, not the sedan.
More popular, but rather crude in their design, were the small Suzuki SUVs. Popular with young people, but dangerous, was the primitive Samurai of the late 1980's. It was light, short, narrow, tall, had a very high center-of-gravity relative to its width, and was notorious for flip-overs, especially with inexperienced, immature drivers who did not realize that you cannot drive that type of vehicle like a sports car. Added to that was the Samurai's extreme crudeness (the door hold-back straps, for example, that worked wth the hinges, were made of simple fabric). Consumer Reports quickly rated the Samurai Not Acceptable, and won a civil suit that Suzuki filed over the rating. Daihatsu, which was just starting to sell its competing Rocky SUV in the American market at the time, was smart. Unlike the Samurai, Daihatsu produced a Rocky version for the American market that had a wider-track (and more stability) that its narrow-track home-market Japanese version......Suzuki chose not to do that.
The somewhat (but not much) better Sidekick replaced the ill-fated Samurai.....a rebadged version was also sold as the Chevy/Geo Tracker. Again, as with the Swift/Metro twins, the Tracker handlily outsold its Suzuki-badged cousin, but both sold in good enough numbers to hang on for a number of years, when Suzuki then introduced the Vitara/Grand Vitara and the stretched XL-7 version. Chevy never got a version of that, but the latest Grand Vitara is now on a GM-world platform shared by several smaller SUV's, and the XL-7 is gone. The Sidekick, Tracker, and first-generation Vitara/Grand Vitara were truck-based and ladder-frame, not unibody SUVs, so they could be used for more serious off-roading and higher towing limits than regular car-based cute-utes like the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. Suzuki has also recently introduced its first small pickup truck, the Equator, a rebadged Nissan Frontier that is the result of a joint Suzuki-Nissan venture.
For the moment, however (and the subject of this review, of course), the attention is on the all-new Kizashi small-to-mid-sized sedan, which is just now being introduced to the American market as I speak. For 2010, the Kizashi offers four trim levels, although the quirky, gimmicky web site makes it rather difficult to see which is which. There is a base S model, SE, GTS, and the top-level STS. One engine is offered.....an in-line 4 of 185 HP with manual or 180 HP with CVT transmission and 170 ft-lbs. of torque. Two transmissions are offered....a conventional 6-speed manual or a CVT (Continously Variable transmission), with or without shift paddles. A choice of FWD or AWD is offered.......AWD comes only with the CVT automatic, while FWD comes with either transmission. Suzuki is hoping, of course, that this latest sedan will sell better then their past efforts have done.
My test car was an SE AWD model with attracive light Ice-Blue Metallic paint (a silvery-blue shade that is becoming popular) and beige cloth interior....the first Kizashi to arrive at that dealership (they gave me a heads-up last night that it was coming). I was generally pleased with the car, as it offered what is probably Suzuki's best effort yet at refinement and fit/finish, but also found a few quirks and negative features, especially for big, tall people. Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Suzuki Kizashi SE AWD
Base Price: $22,749
Options:
Premire Floormats: $125
Premium Metallic Paint: $130
Destination/Freight: $735 (reasonable, compared to many other vehicles)
List Price as Reviewed: $23,739
Drivetrain: AWD, Transverse-mounted DOHC 2.4L in-line 4, 180 HP @ 6000 RPM, Torque 170 Ft-lbs. @ 4000 RPM,
CVT (Continuously Variable transmission).
EPA Mileage Rating: 22 City, 29 Highway
Exterior Color: Ice Blue Metallic
Interior: Beige Cloth
PLUSSES:
Good EPA mileage figures for an AWD vehicle.
Relatively handsome (IMO) exterior styling.
CVT transmission had programmable, manual-shift ranges.
Slick-operating, fore-aft transmission shifter.
AWD deactivation switch (?).
Generally good road/wind-noise isolation for a small car.
Smoother-than-expected ride on good surfaces.
Firm, but not harsh, ride over bumps.
Fairly good steering response.
Smooth, German-feel, no-sponge, effective, but rather sensitive brakes.
Engine timing chain eliminates need for belt changes.
Generally good underhood layout.
Smooth, excellent paint job.
Well-done exterior mirrors.
Solid body sheet metal, hood, doors.
Relatively solid-closing doors.
Nice-quality exterior trim.
Nice, soft-surface door-panel trim.
Good front-seat headroom/legroom (without the sunroof).
Nice, smooth steering-wheel leather wrapping.
Plain-looking but nice seat fabric.
Solid interior hardware.
Nice, but not superb, stereo sound quality.
Push-button engine starter unusual in cars of this class.
Dual-zone climate control also unusual in this class.
Nice aluminum dash trim.
Well-designed, easy-to-use buttons/controls.
Versatile, dual-fold rear seats with center pass-through.
SE model reasonably-priced for its content.
Suzuki-designed/built for easier parts availability.
Excellent, transferable 7/100 powertrain and 3/36 bumper-to-bumper warranties.
MINUSES:
Sluggish engine/CVT response on initial acceleration from a stop.
No AWD/manual-transmission combination.
Power steering is smooth, but lacks some road feel.
Manual hood prop-rod instead of struts.
Plastic engine cover is unneeded and blocks some access.
Extra-cost (though inexpensive) for metallic paint.
OK but uninspiring paint-color choices.
No body-side moldings for parking-lot protection.
Front seats somewhat small for tall, large people.
Tight rear headroom and rear-door access for tall people.
Tight rear legroom if front seats are pushed back.
Legible but busy speedometer/odometer markings.
OK but so-so sun visor/headliner material.
Rather small trunk-lid opening.
Hard-to-clean alloy wheels.
Relatively sparse dealer network.
All-new design means unproven reliability.
Limited availability (at first) may affect price discounting.
Quirky Suzuki web site and Build-Your-Own feature.
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the Kizashi for the first time, there is no visual resemblance to any other U.S.-market Suzuki product. The exterior styling is distinctive, a little on the conservative side, and, IMO, fairly handsome, although the sharply-raked rear roofline cuts into the trunk lid a bit (more on that below). The car, to my eyes at least, looks a little smaller in person than it does in pictures. It is described in the auto press as a mid-size car, but seems to be more of a compact on the outside.....about the size of a Corolla or Civic. The body sheet metal is solid and substantial; the doors close with a reasonably solid sound/feel, and the paint job, smooth and glitch-free, is one of the best I've seen on a Suzuki product yet. Suzuki, Euro-style, charges extra for metallics like the Ice Blue on my test car, but, fortunately, only $130....not $400-700 like the Germans do. And, like a growing number of carmakers these days, Suzuki skimped on body-side moldings to protect from parking-lot dings. The twin outside mirrors are superb....large enough for good vision, solid/durable plastic housings, and a smooth, solid, easy snap/swivel/lock motion. The rear roofline and seat height makes getting in the back seat, through the back door, a head-bumper for tall people like me (6" 2")....generally, that is not a problem up front. The alloy wheels on the SE model, with dozens of spokes and slots, look sharp, but will probably be difficult to clean by hand. The paint color choices are OK, but, like wih many cars, rather dull and uninspiring....the Ice Blue on my car was one of the nicer ones (I had to judge this, of course, mostly by color-chips, as my Kizashi was currently the only one available).
UNDERHOOD:
Lift the solid, fairly heavy hood (it has substantial sheet metal), and you have to prop it up manually with a rod...no struts here. Ordinarily, on a car in this price range, that's no big deal, except that some other inexpensive vehicles are now offering struts.....and this, of course, is a brand-new design. Underneath the hood, there is a nice insulation pad to help with engine noise......and it works (more on that below). The underhood layout is generally good except for a large, unneeded plastic cover on the engine that blocks access to most top-engine components. The transverse-mounted 2.4L in-line four fits in OK, with some space around it to work and reach components, but it is clear that there is not enough room to fit in a larger V6. The battery, back to the left, is nicely exposed, without any covers, and easy to reach, and all dipsticks (yes, Suzuki, unlike some others, still allows you to check your own oil), filler caps, and reservoirs are easy to reach.
INTERIOR:
The interior, while not lavish, has good material quality, fit/finish, and hardware, though it does not, on the whole, seem designed for taller persons. The headroom and legroom in front, on my non-sunroof car was good, especially with the power seat cushion down (all drivers' seat adjustments are power except for the headrest). But getting in and out the back door was a head-banging affair for big guys like me; rear headroom was tight even without the sunroof housing, and rear legroom was tight if the front seats were adjusted back for taller occupants. The two front seats seemed rather small for large torsos and legs, with no thigh support, although some thigh support could be added by tilting the front seat cushion up, which was easy to do with the power-adjusters.
But, outside of the rather tight dimensions, there wasn't much else to complain about inside.....this is clearly one of Suzuki's best efforts to date. The SE's seat fabric itself was rather plain-looking, without much pattern, but felt nice and reasonably durable. The inside door panels were nice, multi-textured soft surfaces. The aluminum trim on the dash not only had a nicely-done look to it, but felt, to me at least, like real aluminum and not painted-silver plastic...if so, that is a nice touch in a car of this class. Wood-tone is not available on the SE model, but this aluminum trim is so nice that, IMO, the wood will not be missed. The sun-visor/headliner material is not the nicest or softest I've seen, but OK, and, at least, is not the hard, stucco-like plastic that some other inexpensive cars use. The stereo sound quality is on the better side of average.....nice, but not superb (Peter Criss, from KISS, did the music honors today, with "Hooligan"). The stereo and climate-control buttons/***** were all solid, well-marked, easy to use, and, in my car, were not integrated with a complex NAV system. The steering wheel was well-done and had a nice, smooth leather wrapping with comfortable stitching. The twin primary gauges (speedometer and tach) were generally well-done, but the white dual-markings on them were rather busy-looking and not always easy to read at a glance.....there are hundereds of white hash marks on each of them. Most of the interior hardware was solid and felt of high quality. The CVT's transmission shifter, on the console, had a nice fore-aft motion without annoying zig-zags, and the motion was slick and fluid. There were no shift-paddles on the steering column (you have to move up to higher trim-versions to get paddles), but there was a nice, Sport-shift manual gate. The -/+ bump=shift pattern was similiar to BMW and Mazda vehicles, and the opposite of most other cars.......I myself prefer the opposite (+/-) pattern, which I'm used to, but won't complain. Nice meshed-net map-pockets line the back of the two front seats for holding things.....but tall people in the back, with big legs, can abrade the things inside those pockets.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The sloping rear roofline cuts into the size of the trunk lid some (as it does with many newer sedans), so the lid and opening itself are a little on the small size, but the cargo area itself, inside, is not bad for a car this size, and, though not lavishly finished, has a thin black fabric/carpet covering on the floor and walls. Two black plastic flip-hooks on the back walls hold the optional cargo net (which my car did not have). Under the floor lies a foam tool-carrier, and, under that, the temporary spare tire. Given the car's fairly low price, I'm not going to complain about the temporary spare like I often do, or list it as a complaint, as no other car in this price range that I know of has a real spare. The rear seats are very well-designed for cargo-folding, with dual fold-downs combined with a center pass-through for long, thin items like fishing poles or skis. The folding/anchoring hardware for the seats also seems solid and well-done.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 2.4L in-line four, and you get another nice surprise.....an engine START/STOP button, which is unusual in this class, where most cars start up with a conventional key/ignition switch. There are some references, in the press and in Consumer Reports magazine, to a deactivation switch for the AWD, similiar to the one in the smaller Suzuki SX-4, that allows you to run the car in FWD for better power/gas mileage if conditions don't necessitate AWD, but I didn't see the switch.....the salesman didn't either.
Anyhow, the in-line four starts up reasonably smoothly and quietly (larger fours are often noisy, but the underhood insulation pad here does its job). This is clearly not a performance car, though.....in AWD mode, response from a dead stop, on initial acceleration, was more show than go....sluggish at best. The CVT doesn't show much sign of "motorboating" or "rubber-banding", but doesn't seem to do much to get the engine into its powerband quickly (the added weight/drag of AWD, of course, plays a part, too). Performance, with one or two aboard, is adequate for normal street-driving (I'm not sure about having the seats and trunk filled, though), but this is a car for sedate, not aggressive driving. The CVT transmission, though, is otherwise smooth and quiet (I've alrerady described the shifter above), and the engine is not loud or boisterous, the exhaust-noise level being on the rather mild side.
As with the drivetrain, the chassis, while adequate and capable, does not seem to be set up for aggressive driving either. Steering response is OK.....neither slow nor quick, but the smooth-feeling power steering is a little short on road feel. Cornering exibits some understeer and body roll, but it is not pronounced. The ride-comfort level, overall, is better than I expected with the relatively high-pressure (35 PSI front, 38 rear) 55-series tires, being relatively smooth on good road surfaces, but the stiff tires do give some bumps and audible thumps on choppier surfaces. The 35/38 tire PSI
recommendation is also strange in that most engineers, with front-engined, front-heavy, AWD cars, usually recommend a few PSI more in the front tires than the rear, to take into account the car's weight distribution and differences in tire-rotation speed (even with the same-size tires) that the weight distribution causes. That is done so that constant differences in tire-rotation speeds don't wear out the center differential prematurely. I didn't ask, in the service department, why Suzuki engineers do that with the Kizashi......perhaps I should have.
Wind-noise is generally well-controlled, although the car, of course, is not Lexus-quiet. Road noise was fairly quiet overall, but, like in most most cars, more noticeable on coarse, porous surfaces than smooth ones. Brakes were clearly one of the car's strong points. The pedal was firm, quick, had virtually no sponginess (a.k.a. BMW-Audi), and were effective, though were somewhat sensitive.....you got marked braking action with very little pedal travel. You learned to press the pedal very lightly for initial response.....more if you needed stronger braking (somewhat like the old power-brakes on the 1950s/60's vintage big American cars). The brake pedal was also well-placed so that my big clodhopper size 15's didn't hang up on its bottom when going from gas pedal to brake....a problem on some cars.
THE VERDICT:
A very good effort on Suzuki's part (one of their best to date), though this is clearly not a car for everyone. The Kizashi, at least in SE trim, is reasonably-priced, though loaded, higher-line versions run into the high 20s, near 30K. A good number of features, however is included, though, for the money (especially if one can find that FWD-AWD deactivation switch). Fit/finish is well above average for a small/mid-sized car, most of the materials are of high quality, and there is an excellent warranty (which is transferable) to back it up.
But some quirks remain. Though front-seat head-leg room is OK if the seat is adjusted for it, this is clearly not a car for large, tall people....especially in back. The engine/CVT interconnect could use a little more work, especially at low speeds and stop/go. The brake pedal could use a little less initial sensitivity in what are otherwise excellent brakes. And, please.....even with an inexpensive car like this, don't insult us with a manual prop-rod, especially with a heavy steel hood.
So, there you have it. Yes, there are a few negatives, but, overall......nice job, Suzuki. Let's hope that this car sells better in the American market than past Suzuki efforts.
http://www.suzukiauto.com/kizashi/
In a Nutshell: A good value, refined and well-finished, but not a car for large people.
(Beige interior)
(Air bags deployed)
Suzuki, long acknowledged as a prime manufacturer of motorcycles and small, off-road-capable SUV's, has never been noted in the American market for its regular passenger cars, although sometimes those cars have been a good value, and are often overlooked by those more concerned with the panache of more popular brands like Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc..... The company's rather sparse network of auto dealerships has not helped much either. Just in the last couple of years, for instance, two nearby Suzuki dealerships in the Northern Virginia/D.C. suburbs, where I live, have folded (one of them folded with its partner Buick franchise, where both brands were sold). Fortunately, there are a few left in the D.C. area,.....one of them right on a Metro subway stop for convienence. But there is little doubt that the company is not popular in America. Suzuki did not field a public display at last year's 2009 D.C. auto show......we'll see if they do one for the 2010 show next month.
As stated above, Suzuki's regular passenger cars, in the U.S. market, have never been as popular as their small SUVs. In the 1980s and 1990s, Suzuki sold the subcompact, Swift hatchback/sedan, but, with the Suzuki nameplate, it never sold in the numbers that its rebadged Chevy/Geo Sprint/Metro version did (Suzuki never offered a 3-cylinder, high-mileage version either, like Chevy/Geo). Suzuki then introduced the compact, Corolla-like Esteem sedan/wagon, which was an OK small car for commuting, but not very impressive in its road manners, chassis, or drivetrain (I test-drove one when it first came out). The Esteem did not sell in very high numbers either, and was discontinued after a few years. Suzuki then introduced several new cars that were actually either Korean Daewoo products specially-built for Suzuki or simply rebadged Daewoos.......the Reno compact Hatchback, the Forenza compact sedan, and the Verona mid-size sedan. Again, these cars still failed to sell in large numbers, though I looked at and test-drove a mid-sized Verona and felt it was an excellent value, dollar-for-dollar, and had good fit/finish. It also had the world's only transverse-mounted in-line-6, making a rather paltry, 4-cylinder-like 155 HP....the car's primary weak point. Suzuki then introuced the subcompact SX-4 sedan/wagon, which was a joint Suzuki-Fiat design, and was a great value, not only well-built with good quality and standard AWD with a three-position dash switch that allowed you to run the car in FWD mode for more power and better gas mileage when you didn't need the AWD's extra traction. It was an excellent value, starting at only 15-16K, and one of the best competitors I've seen yet to the base AWD Subaru Impreza. But (yet again) it failed to sell in large numbers, and Suzuki (mistakenly, IMO) only offered AWD on the hatchback version, not the sedan.
More popular, but rather crude in their design, were the small Suzuki SUVs. Popular with young people, but dangerous, was the primitive Samurai of the late 1980's. It was light, short, narrow, tall, had a very high center-of-gravity relative to its width, and was notorious for flip-overs, especially with inexperienced, immature drivers who did not realize that you cannot drive that type of vehicle like a sports car. Added to that was the Samurai's extreme crudeness (the door hold-back straps, for example, that worked wth the hinges, were made of simple fabric). Consumer Reports quickly rated the Samurai Not Acceptable, and won a civil suit that Suzuki filed over the rating. Daihatsu, which was just starting to sell its competing Rocky SUV in the American market at the time, was smart. Unlike the Samurai, Daihatsu produced a Rocky version for the American market that had a wider-track (and more stability) that its narrow-track home-market Japanese version......Suzuki chose not to do that.
The somewhat (but not much) better Sidekick replaced the ill-fated Samurai.....a rebadged version was also sold as the Chevy/Geo Tracker. Again, as with the Swift/Metro twins, the Tracker handlily outsold its Suzuki-badged cousin, but both sold in good enough numbers to hang on for a number of years, when Suzuki then introduced the Vitara/Grand Vitara and the stretched XL-7 version. Chevy never got a version of that, but the latest Grand Vitara is now on a GM-world platform shared by several smaller SUV's, and the XL-7 is gone. The Sidekick, Tracker, and first-generation Vitara/Grand Vitara were truck-based and ladder-frame, not unibody SUVs, so they could be used for more serious off-roading and higher towing limits than regular car-based cute-utes like the Toyota RAV4 and Honda CR-V. Suzuki has also recently introduced its first small pickup truck, the Equator, a rebadged Nissan Frontier that is the result of a joint Suzuki-Nissan venture.
For the moment, however (and the subject of this review, of course), the attention is on the all-new Kizashi small-to-mid-sized sedan, which is just now being introduced to the American market as I speak. For 2010, the Kizashi offers four trim levels, although the quirky, gimmicky web site makes it rather difficult to see which is which. There is a base S model, SE, GTS, and the top-level STS. One engine is offered.....an in-line 4 of 185 HP with manual or 180 HP with CVT transmission and 170 ft-lbs. of torque. Two transmissions are offered....a conventional 6-speed manual or a CVT (Continously Variable transmission), with or without shift paddles. A choice of FWD or AWD is offered.......AWD comes only with the CVT automatic, while FWD comes with either transmission. Suzuki is hoping, of course, that this latest sedan will sell better then their past efforts have done.
My test car was an SE AWD model with attracive light Ice-Blue Metallic paint (a silvery-blue shade that is becoming popular) and beige cloth interior....the first Kizashi to arrive at that dealership (they gave me a heads-up last night that it was coming). I was generally pleased with the car, as it offered what is probably Suzuki's best effort yet at refinement and fit/finish, but also found a few quirks and negative features, especially for big, tall people. Details coming up.
Model Reviewed: 2010 Suzuki Kizashi SE AWD
Base Price: $22,749
Options:
Premire Floormats: $125
Premium Metallic Paint: $130
Destination/Freight: $735 (reasonable, compared to many other vehicles)
List Price as Reviewed: $23,739
Drivetrain: AWD, Transverse-mounted DOHC 2.4L in-line 4, 180 HP @ 6000 RPM, Torque 170 Ft-lbs. @ 4000 RPM,
CVT (Continuously Variable transmission).
EPA Mileage Rating: 22 City, 29 Highway
Exterior Color: Ice Blue Metallic
Interior: Beige Cloth
PLUSSES:
Good EPA mileage figures for an AWD vehicle.
Relatively handsome (IMO) exterior styling.
CVT transmission had programmable, manual-shift ranges.
Slick-operating, fore-aft transmission shifter.
AWD deactivation switch (?).
Generally good road/wind-noise isolation for a small car.
Smoother-than-expected ride on good surfaces.
Firm, but not harsh, ride over bumps.
Fairly good steering response.
Smooth, German-feel, no-sponge, effective, but rather sensitive brakes.
Engine timing chain eliminates need for belt changes.
Generally good underhood layout.
Smooth, excellent paint job.
Well-done exterior mirrors.
Solid body sheet metal, hood, doors.
Relatively solid-closing doors.
Nice-quality exterior trim.
Nice, soft-surface door-panel trim.
Good front-seat headroom/legroom (without the sunroof).
Nice, smooth steering-wheel leather wrapping.
Plain-looking but nice seat fabric.
Solid interior hardware.
Nice, but not superb, stereo sound quality.
Push-button engine starter unusual in cars of this class.
Dual-zone climate control also unusual in this class.
Nice aluminum dash trim.
Well-designed, easy-to-use buttons/controls.
Versatile, dual-fold rear seats with center pass-through.
SE model reasonably-priced for its content.
Suzuki-designed/built for easier parts availability.
Excellent, transferable 7/100 powertrain and 3/36 bumper-to-bumper warranties.
MINUSES:
Sluggish engine/CVT response on initial acceleration from a stop.
No AWD/manual-transmission combination.
Power steering is smooth, but lacks some road feel.
Manual hood prop-rod instead of struts.
Plastic engine cover is unneeded and blocks some access.
Extra-cost (though inexpensive) for metallic paint.
OK but uninspiring paint-color choices.
No body-side moldings for parking-lot protection.
Front seats somewhat small for tall, large people.
Tight rear headroom and rear-door access for tall people.
Tight rear legroom if front seats are pushed back.
Legible but busy speedometer/odometer markings.
OK but so-so sun visor/headliner material.
Rather small trunk-lid opening.
Hard-to-clean alloy wheels.
Relatively sparse dealer network.
All-new design means unproven reliability.
Limited availability (at first) may affect price discounting.
Quirky Suzuki web site and Build-Your-Own feature.
EXTERIOR:
Walking up to the Kizashi for the first time, there is no visual resemblance to any other U.S.-market Suzuki product. The exterior styling is distinctive, a little on the conservative side, and, IMO, fairly handsome, although the sharply-raked rear roofline cuts into the trunk lid a bit (more on that below). The car, to my eyes at least, looks a little smaller in person than it does in pictures. It is described in the auto press as a mid-size car, but seems to be more of a compact on the outside.....about the size of a Corolla or Civic. The body sheet metal is solid and substantial; the doors close with a reasonably solid sound/feel, and the paint job, smooth and glitch-free, is one of the best I've seen on a Suzuki product yet. Suzuki, Euro-style, charges extra for metallics like the Ice Blue on my test car, but, fortunately, only $130....not $400-700 like the Germans do. And, like a growing number of carmakers these days, Suzuki skimped on body-side moldings to protect from parking-lot dings. The twin outside mirrors are superb....large enough for good vision, solid/durable plastic housings, and a smooth, solid, easy snap/swivel/lock motion. The rear roofline and seat height makes getting in the back seat, through the back door, a head-bumper for tall people like me (6" 2")....generally, that is not a problem up front. The alloy wheels on the SE model, with dozens of spokes and slots, look sharp, but will probably be difficult to clean by hand. The paint color choices are OK, but, like wih many cars, rather dull and uninspiring....the Ice Blue on my car was one of the nicer ones (I had to judge this, of course, mostly by color-chips, as my Kizashi was currently the only one available).
UNDERHOOD:
Lift the solid, fairly heavy hood (it has substantial sheet metal), and you have to prop it up manually with a rod...no struts here. Ordinarily, on a car in this price range, that's no big deal, except that some other inexpensive vehicles are now offering struts.....and this, of course, is a brand-new design. Underneath the hood, there is a nice insulation pad to help with engine noise......and it works (more on that below). The underhood layout is generally good except for a large, unneeded plastic cover on the engine that blocks access to most top-engine components. The transverse-mounted 2.4L in-line four fits in OK, with some space around it to work and reach components, but it is clear that there is not enough room to fit in a larger V6. The battery, back to the left, is nicely exposed, without any covers, and easy to reach, and all dipsticks (yes, Suzuki, unlike some others, still allows you to check your own oil), filler caps, and reservoirs are easy to reach.
INTERIOR:
The interior, while not lavish, has good material quality, fit/finish, and hardware, though it does not, on the whole, seem designed for taller persons. The headroom and legroom in front, on my non-sunroof car was good, especially with the power seat cushion down (all drivers' seat adjustments are power except for the headrest). But getting in and out the back door was a head-banging affair for big guys like me; rear headroom was tight even without the sunroof housing, and rear legroom was tight if the front seats were adjusted back for taller occupants. The two front seats seemed rather small for large torsos and legs, with no thigh support, although some thigh support could be added by tilting the front seat cushion up, which was easy to do with the power-adjusters.
But, outside of the rather tight dimensions, there wasn't much else to complain about inside.....this is clearly one of Suzuki's best efforts to date. The SE's seat fabric itself was rather plain-looking, without much pattern, but felt nice and reasonably durable. The inside door panels were nice, multi-textured soft surfaces. The aluminum trim on the dash not only had a nicely-done look to it, but felt, to me at least, like real aluminum and not painted-silver plastic...if so, that is a nice touch in a car of this class. Wood-tone is not available on the SE model, but this aluminum trim is so nice that, IMO, the wood will not be missed. The sun-visor/headliner material is not the nicest or softest I've seen, but OK, and, at least, is not the hard, stucco-like plastic that some other inexpensive cars use. The stereo sound quality is on the better side of average.....nice, but not superb (Peter Criss, from KISS, did the music honors today, with "Hooligan"). The stereo and climate-control buttons/***** were all solid, well-marked, easy to use, and, in my car, were not integrated with a complex NAV system. The steering wheel was well-done and had a nice, smooth leather wrapping with comfortable stitching. The twin primary gauges (speedometer and tach) were generally well-done, but the white dual-markings on them were rather busy-looking and not always easy to read at a glance.....there are hundereds of white hash marks on each of them. Most of the interior hardware was solid and felt of high quality. The CVT's transmission shifter, on the console, had a nice fore-aft motion without annoying zig-zags, and the motion was slick and fluid. There were no shift-paddles on the steering column (you have to move up to higher trim-versions to get paddles), but there was a nice, Sport-shift manual gate. The -/+ bump=shift pattern was similiar to BMW and Mazda vehicles, and the opposite of most other cars.......I myself prefer the opposite (+/-) pattern, which I'm used to, but won't complain. Nice meshed-net map-pockets line the back of the two front seats for holding things.....but tall people in the back, with big legs, can abrade the things inside those pockets.
CARGO AREA/TRUNK:
The sloping rear roofline cuts into the size of the trunk lid some (as it does with many newer sedans), so the lid and opening itself are a little on the small size, but the cargo area itself, inside, is not bad for a car this size, and, though not lavishly finished, has a thin black fabric/carpet covering on the floor and walls. Two black plastic flip-hooks on the back walls hold the optional cargo net (which my car did not have). Under the floor lies a foam tool-carrier, and, under that, the temporary spare tire. Given the car's fairly low price, I'm not going to complain about the temporary spare like I often do, or list it as a complaint, as no other car in this price range that I know of has a real spare. The rear seats are very well-designed for cargo-folding, with dual fold-downs combined with a center pass-through for long, thin items like fishing poles or skis. The folding/anchoring hardware for the seats also seems solid and well-done.
ON THE ROAD:
Start up the 2.4L in-line four, and you get another nice surprise.....an engine START/STOP button, which is unusual in this class, where most cars start up with a conventional key/ignition switch. There are some references, in the press and in Consumer Reports magazine, to a deactivation switch for the AWD, similiar to the one in the smaller Suzuki SX-4, that allows you to run the car in FWD for better power/gas mileage if conditions don't necessitate AWD, but I didn't see the switch.....the salesman didn't either.
Anyhow, the in-line four starts up reasonably smoothly and quietly (larger fours are often noisy, but the underhood insulation pad here does its job). This is clearly not a performance car, though.....in AWD mode, response from a dead stop, on initial acceleration, was more show than go....sluggish at best. The CVT doesn't show much sign of "motorboating" or "rubber-banding", but doesn't seem to do much to get the engine into its powerband quickly (the added weight/drag of AWD, of course, plays a part, too). Performance, with one or two aboard, is adequate for normal street-driving (I'm not sure about having the seats and trunk filled, though), but this is a car for sedate, not aggressive driving. The CVT transmission, though, is otherwise smooth and quiet (I've alrerady described the shifter above), and the engine is not loud or boisterous, the exhaust-noise level being on the rather mild side.
As with the drivetrain, the chassis, while adequate and capable, does not seem to be set up for aggressive driving either. Steering response is OK.....neither slow nor quick, but the smooth-feeling power steering is a little short on road feel. Cornering exibits some understeer and body roll, but it is not pronounced. The ride-comfort level, overall, is better than I expected with the relatively high-pressure (35 PSI front, 38 rear) 55-series tires, being relatively smooth on good road surfaces, but the stiff tires do give some bumps and audible thumps on choppier surfaces. The 35/38 tire PSI
recommendation is also strange in that most engineers, with front-engined, front-heavy, AWD cars, usually recommend a few PSI more in the front tires than the rear, to take into account the car's weight distribution and differences in tire-rotation speed (even with the same-size tires) that the weight distribution causes. That is done so that constant differences in tire-rotation speeds don't wear out the center differential prematurely. I didn't ask, in the service department, why Suzuki engineers do that with the Kizashi......perhaps I should have.
Wind-noise is generally well-controlled, although the car, of course, is not Lexus-quiet. Road noise was fairly quiet overall, but, like in most most cars, more noticeable on coarse, porous surfaces than smooth ones. Brakes were clearly one of the car's strong points. The pedal was firm, quick, had virtually no sponginess (a.k.a. BMW-Audi), and were effective, though were somewhat sensitive.....you got marked braking action with very little pedal travel. You learned to press the pedal very lightly for initial response.....more if you needed stronger braking (somewhat like the old power-brakes on the 1950s/60's vintage big American cars). The brake pedal was also well-placed so that my big clodhopper size 15's didn't hang up on its bottom when going from gas pedal to brake....a problem on some cars.
THE VERDICT:
A very good effort on Suzuki's part (one of their best to date), though this is clearly not a car for everyone. The Kizashi, at least in SE trim, is reasonably-priced, though loaded, higher-line versions run into the high 20s, near 30K. A good number of features, however is included, though, for the money (especially if one can find that FWD-AWD deactivation switch). Fit/finish is well above average for a small/mid-sized car, most of the materials are of high quality, and there is an excellent warranty (which is transferable) to back it up.
But some quirks remain. Though front-seat head-leg room is OK if the seat is adjusted for it, this is clearly not a car for large, tall people....especially in back. The engine/CVT interconnect could use a little more work, especially at low speeds and stop/go. The brake pedal could use a little less initial sensitivity in what are otherwise excellent brakes. And, please.....even with an inexpensive car like this, don't insult us with a manual prop-rod, especially with a heavy steel hood.
So, there you have it. Yes, there are a few negatives, but, overall......nice job, Suzuki. Let's hope that this car sells better in the American market than past Suzuki efforts.
Last edited by mmarshall; 12-12-09 at 04:45 PM.
12-12-09, 04:56 PM
#4
wouldnt there be AWD on switch rather than AWD off? I mean you are locking the centre differential. If vehicle is part time awd, then it means that it will have AWD ON switch, for only those situations where you need AWD for short period of time, low speeds, to get yourself out of the mess.
12-12-09, 04:58 PM
#5
12-12-09, 04:59 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Well, the Lexus IS250/350 is also the size of a Civic.....so is an Acura TSX. It all depends on what you get for your money. With a couple of exceptions like the cheap hood prop-rod, the Kizashi, IMO, gives you a pretty fair amount for your money. And, to an extent, it has to be that way. Suzuki passenger cars, tradtionally, don't sell in large U.S-market numbers, so they have to try and appeal in other ways.....value being one of them.
12-12-09, 05:05 PM
#7
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 1,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, the Lexus IS250/350 is also the size of a Civic.....so is an Acura TSX. It all depends on what you get for your money. With a couple of exceptions like the cheap hood prop-rod, the Kizashi, IMO, gives you a pretty fair amount for your money. And, to an extent, it has to be that way. Suzuki passenger cars, tradtionally, don't sell in large U.S-market numbers, so they have to try and appeal in other ways.....value being one of them.
Trending Topics
12-12-09, 05:06 PM
#8
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
And, for the engineers, they also first have to prove the components with a 180 HP engine, as Subaru and Mitsubishi did, before they go with 300 HP, rally-grade stuff. CVT units traditionaly can't take that kind of torque.....they would probably have to go with another kind of gearbox. Three, I think Suzuki car sales would have to pick up some in the American market (where they are traditionally slow) before the factory would commit any major new programs like that.
12-12-09, 05:13 PM
#9
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
wouldnt there be AWD on switch rather than AWD off? I mean you are locking the centre differential. If vehicle is part time awd, then it means that it will have AWD ON switch, for only those situations where you need AWD for short period of time, low speeds, to get yourself out of the mess.
The 2WD position, of course, was FWD. The AWD was like Subaru's....full-time, car-based AWD with a center diff. The LOCK positon, which locked the diff and rotated all 4 wheels at the same speed, was for extremely slippery stuff and mild off-roading.....not for dry-pavement use.
I agree with you that an on/off switch for AWD, just to get you out of a mess, is a good idea (in fact, Suzuki, with the SX-4, pioneered that idea for regular non-SUV passenger cars), but, of course, makes the AWD system that much more complex, and adds more parts to fail.
Last edited by mmarshall; 12-12-09 at 06:53 PM.
12-12-09, 05:24 PM
#10
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Oh....and the Impreza NOW has hood struts.....no more prop-rod.
12-12-09, 06:54 PM
#12
The smaller Suzuki SX-4, when it first came out, had a 3-position rotary switch on the left-dash, that went 2WD/AWD/Lock. Since than (and I noticed that today when I looked at the new SX-4), they relocated it to the console and made it a rocker-switch.
The 2WD position, of course, was FWD. The AWD was like Subaru's....full-time, car-based AWD with a center diff. The LOCK positon, which locked the diff and rotated all 4 wheels at the same speed, was for extremely slippery stuff and mild off-roading.....not for dry-pavement use.
I agree with you that an on/off switch for AWD, just to get you out of a mess, is a good idea (in fact, Suzuki, with the SX-4, pioneered that idea for regular non-SUV passenger cars), but, of course, makes the AWD system that much more complex, and adds more parts to fail.
The 2WD position, of course, was FWD. The AWD was like Subaru's....full-time, car-based AWD with a center diff. The LOCK positon, which locked the diff and rotated all 4 wheels at the same speed, was for extremely slippery stuff and mild off-roading.....not for dry-pavement use.
I agree with you that an on/off switch for AWD, just to get you out of a mess, is a good idea (in fact, Suzuki, with the SX-4, pioneered that idea for regular non-SUV passenger cars), but, of course, makes the AWD system that much more complex, and adds more parts to fail.
so there could be no such thing as turning off the AWD, as in part time systems it is 2WD that is on, and you can lock the central differential to get the AWD, or let the system decide it for you in Auto mode.
;-)
p.s. yikes, of course, it is nothing to do with permanment awd in subarus, very different systems ;P
Last edited by spwolf; 12-12-09 at 07:00 PM.
12-12-09, 07:13 PM
#13
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
part time awd system provide awd capability by locking the center differential. so what you see in suzuki is 2WD, AWD (which is automatic AWD based on the sensors input, most of the time it is FWD) and LOCK where center differential is always locked, which is not reccomended for daily use.
so there could be no such thing as turning off the AWD, as in part time systems it is 2WD that is on, and you can lock the central differential to get the AWD, or let the system decide it for you in Auto mode.
p.s. yikes, of course, it is nothing to do with permanment awd in subarus, very different systems ;P
so there could be no such thing as turning off the AWD, as in part time systems it is 2WD that is on, and you can lock the central differential to get the AWD, or let the system decide it for you in Auto mode.
p.s. yikes, of course, it is nothing to do with permanment awd in subarus, very different systems ;P
part time awd system provide awd capability by locking the center differential.
Here, for the most part, is how it works:
AWD = open center differential.
4WD = no center differential (or a locked center differential)
Part-time 4WD = same as 4WD with no center differential, except that it has a transfer case for 2WD and can be shifted in and out.
On-Demand 4WD = 2WD when the 2 wheels have traction, and an automatic shift to 4WD/AWD when they don't.
Full-Time 4WD = 4WD with a center differential for different tire speeds AND a locking mechnism for hard-going or off=pavement use.
Confusing? Yep.....you bet it is. I've studied it for years, and parts of it are still somewhat unclear. Even with study, I don't claim to understand the systems 100% myself....it is one of the most confusing parts of automotive drivetrains.
Last edited by mmarshall; 12-12-09 at 07:28 PM.
12-13-09, 03:42 AM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Next planned review is for the Lincoln MKT, though it is from a non-CL request. Still, I'll probably post it.
12-13-09, 12:08 PM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
Very good review Mike, guess i need to try out the FWD version as agreed
I think it looks fantastic and not weird ugly (Civic) or bland to death (Corolla) and not completely forgettable (Elantra). AWD is a rare option in this class as well, a smart option.
I know it would be hard to tell but how do u feel things would possibly hold up over time of ownership?
I think it looks fantastic and not weird ugly (Civic) or bland to death (Corolla) and not completely forgettable (Elantra). AWD is a rare option in this class as well, a smart option.
I know it would be hard to tell but how do u feel things would possibly hold up over time of ownership?