Topic: Here's The Brand New Suzuki Vitara We Won't Get

[Autos_Editor]

Newest Suzuki SUV to take on compact rivals

Read More...

[blotter]

that's actually a nice looking ute.

[Scaerio]

Looks car-based, sadly, so it won't have the true off-road capability of its predecessor.  My suspicion is that Suzuki will have a fully revamped and competent line-up over the next couple of years, but we won't get any of it...

[Noto]

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

[RoadRageous]

Looks car-based, sadly, so it won't have the true off-road capability of its predecessor.

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

I love it ... The quandry of Suzuki in two posts: They made a good, unique vehicle that no-one "got".

With Suzuki cars gone from our market, the number of well-built, reliable Jeeps is down to ... One ?

[X-Traction]

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

There is an aspect where that sentiment does not apply.  The last Grand Vitara was the only small suv available in North America with a full low range.  Only the Patriot and recent Compass came close, with an option package including a single low gear on a cvt.

So for those few people who need that combination, there is nothing on the market except used Grand Vitaras.  Also, until the new mini-Jeep arrives, there's nothing like the Suzuki Jimny sold in other markets.

[revalations]

I see Range Rover hues in the styling. Too bad we don't get, it looks good.

[rrocket]

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

There is an aspect where that sentiment does not apply.  The last Grand Vitara was the only small suv available in North America with a full low range.  Only the Patriot and recent Compass came close, with an option package including a single low gear on a cvt.

So for those few people who need that combination, there is nothing on the market except used Grand Vitaras.  Also, until the new mini-Jeep arrives, there's nothing like the Suzuki Jimny sold in other markets.

I'm sure all 8 people who needed that option in a CUV were grateful.   

[redman]

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

Agreed, yet another hyped up vehicle from Suzuki that was bound to fail. veni vidi perii (to perish)

[pcsp]

A new or refreshed Suzuki model has about as much relevance in Canada as a new Peugeot model. At least their departure has allowed their dealerships to do what they do best - peddle used cars.

[mixmanmash]

A new or refreshed Suzuki model has about as much relevance in Canada as a new Peugeot model. At least their departure has allowed their dealerships to do what they do best - peddle used cars.

This is so true.  The one in my area was very good at peddling used cars while selling new Suzukis.  Now they are focused completely on selling used vehicles.

[tazcubed]

Suzuki has gone down the same route as Isuzu before it, and probably Mitsubishi soon to go (again). They may have traction in other markets where cheap price is a bigger part of the equation, but the build quality was terrible at best.

[X-Traction]

Suzuki has gone down the same route as Isuzu before it, and probably Mitsubishi soon to go (again). They may have traction in other markets where cheap price is a bigger part of the equation, but the build quality was terrible at best.

Agreed that Suzuki sold some rebranded junk made by others.  But, I don't think reliability studies such as truedelta back up your claim. Though it's a small sample, our '06 Grand Vitara has been the most reliable vehicle I've ever owned, despite it being the first year of a new generation.  In fact, it seems to have been engineered to last forever.  Suzuki forums are not full of reliability problems.

So far as I know, Suzukis don't succeed in other markets because they cost less. Do you know how their pricing compares in Japan, India, Australia, South America, Europe, Russia?

[X-Traction]

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

There is an aspect where that sentiment does not apply.  The last Grand Vitara was the only small suv available in North America with a full low range.  Only the Patriot and recent Compass came close, with an option package including a single low gear on a cvt.

So for those few people who need that combination, there is nothing on the market except used Grand Vitaras.  Also, until the new mini-Jeep arrives, there's nothing like the Suzuki Jimny sold in other markets.

I'm sure all 8 people who needed that option in a CUV were grateful.   

Ok, let's explore this a bit.  Obviously there is a market for lots of Jeeps, and lots of cuv's. Then what is the logic that there is no market for something between them? 

I think Suzuki failed in North America because they had no grasp of what marketing would work, they sold some junk made by others, and the long-festering disagreement with Consumer Reports.  I've always said that if the Grand Vitara had had a Toyota badge on it, people would have been falling over themselves to praise and buy it.  Probably the same goes for the Kizashi and the SX4.

For instance, recall that people raked the Grand Vitara over the coals for the side-opening tailgate, but few criticized the Rav4 for the same design.

[mixmanmash]

Suzuki has gone down the same route as Isuzu before it, and probably Mitsubishi soon to go (again). They may have traction in other markets where cheap price is a bigger part of the equation, but the build quality was terrible at best.

Agreed that Suzuki sold some rebranded junk made by others.  But, I don't think reliability studies such as truedelta back up your claim. Though it's a small sample, our '06 Grand Vitara has been the most reliable vehicle I've ever owned, despite it being the first year of a new generation.  In fact, it seems to have been engineered to last forever.  Suzuki forums are not full of reliability problems.

So far as I know, Suzukis don't succeed in other markets because they cost less. Do you know how their pricing compares in Japan, India, Australia, South America, Europe, Russia?

Maruti-Suzuki does awesome in India with a 38.9% market share last year.  But you look at the cars they offer in those markets versus the crap that they offered here (rebranded crap in most cases).  I thought the 2010 Swift I rode in India was top notch compared to the crap here.  Build quality was superb.

[ThePointblank]

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

There is an aspect where that sentiment does not apply.  The last Grand Vitara was the only small suv available in North America with a full low range.  Only the Patriot and recent Compass came close, with an option package including a single low gear on a cvt.

So for those few people who need that combination, there is nothing on the market except used Grand Vitaras.  Also, until the new mini-Jeep arrives, there's nothing like the Suzuki Jimny sold in other markets.

I'm sure all 8 people who needed that option in a CUV were grateful.   

Ok, let's explore this a bit.  Obviously there is a market for lots of Jeeps, and lots of cuv's. Then what is the logic that there is no market for something between them? 

I think Suzuki failed in North America because they had no grasp of what marketing would work, they sold some junk made by others, and the long-festering disagreement with Consumer Reports.  I've always said that if the Grand Vitara had had a Toyota badge on it, people would have been falling over themselves to praise and buy it.  Probably the same goes for the Kizashi and the SX4.

For instance, recall that people raked the Grand Vitara over the coals for the side-opening tailgate, but few criticized the Rav4 for the same design.

The main issue was that the Grand Vitara only had a few, minor redeeming features while the RAV4 had a number of major aces in its sleeve to compensate for the side-opening tailgate. The RAV4 was larger, could hold more cargo, was more refined, had better engines, was more fuel efficient, handled better, while having a passable interior. The Grand Vitara only had its off-road capabilities as its main feature, and this was only appreciated by a small number of potential customers. The RAV4's interior space, better drive and fuel economy was more appreciated by the majority of consumers.

From my vantage point, the main issue I had with Suzuki was three issues:
1. Re-badging other vehicles. The Suzuki Swift+ as everyone knows was a re-badged Chevy Aveo. It was cheap in all aspects, and it showed. Nothing inspiring. If they had re-badged a nicer vehicle, or made modifications to improve quality, it would have been more of a hit, rather than a staple of economy rental car fleets.
2. Cheap interiors. Suzuki used some of the worst interiors in their vehicles, with terrible quality fabrics and tons of hard plastic. At a time where everyone was starting to really step up their game, this was unacceptable.
3. Dealer network. Suzuki's dealers weren't that great, and they were few in between. Most acted like they didn't care about the product, and I agree with the point that most Suzuki dealers tend to focus more on used cars than new Suzuki's. In fact, the two main former Suzuki dealers near where I live, one turned into a Mitsubishi dealer (and is just as slow), and the other kept the Suzuki name and focuses more on used cars (they have a few unsold Suzuki's that they never were able to sell).

[X-Traction]

No great loss...as if we don't have enough competition here as it is.

There is an aspect where that sentiment does not apply.  The last Grand Vitara was the only small suv available in North America with a full low range.  Only the Patriot and recent Compass came close, with an option package including a single low gear on a cvt.

So for those few people who need that combination, there is nothing on the market except used Grand Vitaras.  Also, until the new mini-Jeep arrives, there's nothing like the Suzuki Jimny sold in other markets.

I'm sure all 8 people who needed that option in a CUV were grateful.   

Ok, let's explore this a bit.  Obviously there is a market for lots of Jeeps, and lots of cuv's. Then what is the logic that there is no market for something between them? 

I think Suzuki failed in North America because they had no grasp of what marketing would work, they sold some junk made by others, and the long-festering disagreement with Consumer Reports.  I've always said that if the Grand Vitara had had a Toyota badge on it, people would have been falling over themselves to praise and buy it.  Probably the same goes for the Kizashi and the SX4.

For instance, recall that people raked the Grand Vitara over the coals for the side-opening tailgate, but few criticized the Rav4 for the same design.

The main issue was that the Grand Vitara only had a few, minor redeeming features while the RAV4 had a number of major aces in its sleeve to compensate for the side-opening tailgate. The RAV4 was larger, could hold more cargo, was more refined, had better engines, was more fuel efficient, handled better, while having a passable interior. The Grand Vitara only had its off-road capabilities as its main feature, and this was only appreciated by a small number of potential customers. The RAV4's interior space, better drive and fuel economy was more appreciated by the majority of consumers.

The Rav4 did have a longer cargo area, and 3rd row availability.  If it was more refined, it was mostly because of a softer suspension that more suited its more road-centric design.  Fair enough.  The GV also suffered from too many rattles, btw.  I don't know about the engines.  The GV's engines have been pretty reliable.  The fuel efficiency was due to several things (GV geared lower, heavier construction for "offroading", bigger heavier battery, bigger mirrors pushing more wind, always in AWD).  One mistake many made was comparing the V6 GV to the 4-cyl Rav4, instead of the V6 Rav4's mileage.  The Rav4 may be better for boulevard cruising, but I know which had a more sure-footed drive as conditions, such as in the winter, got worse.  That was thanks to the GV's better weight distribution due to the longitudinal engine, combined with the full-time AWD.  Of course, the auto reviewers didn't bother to test these sorts of things.

As for the vaunted V6 Rav4, the GV with the 2.7L V6 was actually faster to about 40mph due to the lower gearing.  I shut one down once with our GV, much to the Rav4's owner's surprise.

From my vantage point, the main issue I had with Suzuki was three issues:
1. Re-badging other vehicles. The Suzuki Swift+ as everyone knows was a re-badged Chevy Aveo. It was cheap in all aspects, and it showed. Nothing inspiring. If they had re-badged a nicer vehicle, or made modifications to improve quality, it would have been more of a hit, rather than a staple of economy rental car fleets.
2. Cheap interiors. Suzuki used some of the worst interiors in their vehicles, with terrible quality fabrics and tons of hard plastic. At a time where everyone was starting to really step up their game, this was unacceptable.

This certainly isn't true of the GV.  It has soft-touch surfaces all over the place. Perforated leather.  Now if you want to see hard surfaces, check out our Escape Hybrid!

3. Dealer network. Suzuki's dealers weren't that great, and they were few in between. Most acted like they didn't care about the product, and I agree with the point that most Suzuki dealers tend to focus more on used cars than new Suzuki's. In fact, the two main former Suzuki dealers near where I live, one turned into a Mitsubishi dealer (and is just as slow), and the other kept the Suzuki name and focuses more on used cars (they have a few unsold Suzuki's that they never were able to sell).

Can't argue with any of this.  Our very limited experience with servicing at a couple of Suzuki dealerships ensured that we found an independent mechanic for it.