CTC Review: 2008 Suzuki Grand Vitara

[X-Traction]

Having had a new generation Grand Vitara for 2 1/2 years, and not seeing many reviews of them since they came out, it's interesting to read a fresh perspective on them.

Someone said the GV costs the same as a Rav4 but has lower resale value.  Similarly equipped GV's cost far less than Rav4's, Foresters, XTrails etc.  (We paid $27,500 after rebates for a new, fully loaded JLX-L in late 2005.  Equivalent competitors were around $35,000.)  So why would the resale value be equal when the GV costs so much less to begin with? In fact, it may retain a higher proportion of its value than the competition.  Check the resale prices.  Used Grand Vitaras and Chevy Trackers are not especially cheap.

To add to that, NONE of the competition other than the Patriot can be had with a low range.  And the Patriot has (optional) one low gear, not a range. Our driving happens to include using the low range many times per year.  I agree if you don't need the GV's off-road abilities, the competition can be better boulevard cruisers.  Due to the off-road biases in the GV, comparing it to mainstream CUV's in terms of what makes them attractive, is somewhat unfair to the GV.

For instance, the GV has taken heat for its "busy", stiff ride.  But it gets no credit for not bottoming out when off-roading.

As for the engine, people take the lower mileage as proof it is crude.  But no one has proven the lower mileage is the engine's fault.  'Ya think that being in 4wd all the time might cost 1l/100km?  Or the extra weight of the vestigal frame and heavier drivetrain?  Or the lowish 5th gear?  If you factored those out, it's possible the engine is more efficient than the competition.  Many people unwittingly compare the GV's mileage to the posted rate for the 4cyl Rav4.  In real life, the V6 Rav4 does not get much better mileage than the GV, and the difference is EASILY explained by aspects other than the engine.  The GV's engine is getting a bum rap for things any knowlegable car enthusiast should be able to quickly figure out.  This same engine was used in the XL-7 for years without anyone complaining about it.

Being in 4wd all the time comes with a safety benefit that must have some value.  The extra gas it uses costs about the same as the interest on the money we saved over buying the competition.

The engine may be also tuned for durability, rather than power.  But I don't know about that.  If your personal vehicle has to accelerate faster than a dragster, then maybe personality issues are clouding practicality. 

Someone posted that the GV is small.  Just park it next to a pre-'09 Forester and you'll see which is smaller.  Try out their back seats.  Park it beside a Rav4 and you won't be able to decide which is larger.  To equate the GV to the Tucson and Sportage is just uninformed.  They are a slightly older design than the GV.  The Escape is a much older design, and the Rav4 is only about 6 months newer.  The latest Escape is not larger than the previous one, it's just a restyling job. The GV's exterior and interior dimensions are practically the same as the Rav4's (except for the length needed for the Rav4's third seat).

The GV's weight is evenly distributed over the four wheels.  In combination with the awd, this is a strikingly agile and stable vehcile.  "Sure-footed" is a phrase that comes easily to the minds of anyone who's driven one in bad conditions.  Such as over the Coquihalla at night in full blizzard conditions.  See the Rav4's creeping along in the ruts with the 2wd's as you pass them in the unplowed lane.

Someone asked about selectable 2wd.  The GV is available in some markets, including the US, with 2wd.  (There are variants with diesels, 4-cyls, and even a cute truncated 2-door.)  But the 4wd models have no provision for selecting 2wd.  They can, however, be put in a neutral position for towing with all wheels on the ground, (or for accidentally rolling away).

I haven't found the side-opening tailgate to be a clearance problem.  What I don't like is that it provides no rain shelter when open.  But the spare is a handy place to mount a bike rack, and the side-opening feature means the tailgate doesn't interfere with long cargo on the roof such as kayaks/canoes or skis.  One problem no tester has reported is that in the rain, when you open the tailgate, any water sitting on the flat top of the little tailgate spoiler will drain inside the cargo area.  Nice bit of design work, that.

I've never observed the side windows "sucking in".  What's that about?  As for the small hidden fuel flap release, it would be nice to have one at all since earlier years didn't have one.

My biggest concerns with it are: poor dealer support for minor build quality issues (like the leather seat bottoms going baggy immediately), the expensive occasional valve lash inspections, delicate paint, the total lack of provision for carrying long objects, and a growing undertone of rattles.  I get a sore ass in it after a few days of long drives.  And the leather-wrapped steering wheel is too hard.  On the other hand, everyone who rides in it or drives it is very impressed. 

The GV has earned a number of consumer/vehicle awards, and is sold all over the world.  Even the merciless www.thetruthaboutcars.com had a very positive review of the GV.

A few owners, whose numbers only Suzuki knows for sure, have had intractable tire wear/alignment issues, and drivetrain vibration issues.  So if you're buying a used one, be on the lookout for the rare lemons.

[Demosthenes X]

^ Interesting reading.  Sounds like it would make a great weekend vehicle for those that enjoy "real" camping off the beaten track.  Is there much aftermarket support for turning GVs into true trail-hunting machines?

[X-Traction]

^ Interesting reading.  Sounds like it would make a great weekend vehicle for those that enjoy "real" camping off the beaten track.  Is there much aftermarket support for turning GVs into true trail-hunting machines?

All they lack are more clearance and skid plates.

There are a couple of lift kits available.  One just uses spacers, while the other replaces the struts etc.  A few places are selling skid plates.  But most of this stuff is not available in North America.  Suzuki should make an off-road version with these factory modifications.

(They should also make a 2wd 4-cyl version with soft suspension and lots of sound insulation, to appease those who pit the GV directly against the other cuv's)

If you check out suzukiforums, you'll find that some people are modifying them for fairly serious offroading.  Putting oversize tires on them, snorkels and things like that.  People in Malasia have been doing some amazing stuff with them.

The independent suspension limits wheel travel and makes traction control essential.  But the traction control system relies on ABS, and it's tuned to limit stress on the drivetrain and avoid overheating the brakes. 

So far as I know, no one's put lockers on them yet, but I bet when they do, they're going to break things.  In the meantime, if you unload diagonally opposite wheels while needing lots of throttle, the traction control will allow the unloaded wheels to spin, and you'll be stopped just like having a crude old 4wd system.  Because the testers do their "elephants feet" test on level ground, they don't detect this problem with any modern 4wd's with this setup.

Edited to remove non-functional links.  There are interesting videos on YouTube of GV's doing off-road stuff, including a couple pitting a GV against a Forester in snow.

[carcrazy]

To equate the GV to the Tucson and Sportage is just uninformed. 

Actually it is my observation after researching the segment for quite some time before I purchased my 07 Outlander. If you'd like to call my opinion "uninformed" so be it.

My "butt-meter" told me that the interior space is smaller than the RAV4, CRV and Outlander. I did not check the numbers though as they wouldn't matter much against what I feel sitting in the car.

My "eye-meter" told me that the cargo space is smaller too. Pretty accurate too and I could follow up with numbers if needed.

The exterior dimensions don't matter too much to me.

Going by these "readings", the GV came closer to Tucson/Sportage than the trio mentioned above.

I wanted a little more pep from a V6 SUV than what the GV offered and I did not have drag-racing in mind, but just to be able to move resonablly (by my standards) faster when needed. This is one of the reasons I ruled out any I4 SUV.

I have to agree with you though that, although no first-hand experience and no data to back it up, the GV has the best "off-road" capabilities out of all small SUVs.

EDIT: I did check some numbers, especially for the rear seats where I looked closely due to the car seat and frequently having passengers there, and they indeed back up my butt-meter readings.

EDIT2: This is not to say that the GV is a bad or not competitive vehicle by any means. I was just saying that it's on the smaller side of the class and the engine was not as powerful as I would like. Plus, I don't like the swing door in any SUV other than perhaps purpose build off-roaders, which the GV and RAV4 are NOT. My 2 cents only ...

[drederick]

When Suzuki attempts to pitch one of their stores to a potential franchisee they continually proclaim "Japanese quality at Korean prices".  I think that is debatable.  IMO, Suzuki dealers, like their Korean counterparts, will require "zero %" financing to move units indefinitely.

why bother to even offer the same postion for every non-toyota product? its pretty sad.

Better yet don't respond, just be quiet - everyone knows your opinion already, and those that don't know it, why subject them to it?

A family member has a previous generation xl-7 with the 2.7 5speed manual powertrain and it is very nice indeed..... made me wish I had a standard again in the driveway.

[gosteelerz]

When Suzuki attempts to pitch one of their stores to a potential franchisee they continually proclaim "Japanese quality at Korean prices".  I think that is debatable.  IMO, Suzuki dealers, like their Korean counterparts, will require "zero %" financing to move units indefinitely.

Yep, interest rates are definitely higher on appliances.

[articsteve]

Better yet don't respond, just be quiet - everyone knows your opinion already, and those that don't know it, why subject them to it?

I'm just telling ppl here what the Suzuki folks say when their pitching a franchise because I sat thru one of their presentations.  I thought it was the best part of the whole thing. 

"Japanese quality at Korean prices".

You're getting a tad snotty lately and I can understand why after reading what you drive.   

Check out my new company Tundra TDR, and the one before that    hmmm ... I wonder how that happens since I don't attend to a JOB.  Oh ya, forgot about the FJ. 

[articsteve]

Yep, interest rates are definitely higher on appliances.

You know it.  Interest rates on this appliance higher as well. 

08 Street Glide    Brand spanking new

[gosteelerz]

Yep, interest rates are definitely higher on appliances.

You know it.  Interest rates on this appliance higher as well. 

08 Street Glide    Brand spanking new

That Porsche 944 looks interesting, always had a soft spot for those.  Some of the best racing I have ever seen (on TV) was the old Porsche Turbo Cup with 944's at Mosport.

[articsteve]

It's a 1990 S2.  US car.  Always wanted one and finally a unit came up on the Upper Canada Porsche Club BBS at a reasonable price, but more importantly with a brand new 968 short block with a rebuilt S2 head.  Factory rebuilt transaxle with LSD.  Clutch and torque tube iffy.    Hope they last a few seasons as I only out about 4k a year on now that I got the Harley.  Pulls hard.

Son says somebody swiped my camera so I have no good pics of the S2, but here are a few. 

[drederick]

Better yet don't respond, just be quiet - everyone knows your opinion already, and those that don't know it, why subject them to it?

I'm just telling ppl here what the Suzuki folks say when their pitching a franchise because I sat thru one of their presentations.  I thought it was the best part of the whole thing. 

"Japanese quality at Korean prices".

You're getting a tad snotty lately and I can understand why after reading what you drive.   

Check out my new company Tundra TDR, and the one before that    hmmm ... I wonder how that happens since I don't attend to a JOB.  Oh ya, forgot about the FJ. 

\

a tad snotty lately eh? your a joke.

[articsteve]

 

[initial_D]

I like the Porsche and the bike ... the Toyotas, pass.

Thought there was a Porsche of vintage  '88 924 S2?

[articsteve]

Thought there was a Porsche of vintage  '88 924 S2?

There was only 924S model in 87 and 88.  88s have a slightly higher compression ratio so rated at 160 hp v. 150 hp.  Other wise identical and essentially a combo of parts from the "early" 944 and the "later" 944.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

CanadianDriver's news section mentioned the 2009 Grand Vitara would have the 4cyl available, but can't find the article. Wing, CD should really allow searches of the News section.

I kind of like the Grand Vitara myself, despite often forgetting about it. The enhancements MWQA lists are substantial, but a 2.0L 4 and 2.4L 4??? A punchier 6 is needed, but too bad if it's relegated to luxury model only... but seems Suzuki is selling features at lower prices than competitors and getting away from base spec volume so even a loaded GV should be a good value.

[wing]

Hey you can, the super secret way.

put in canadiandriver.com/thenews/search you get a 404 with a search box

That said I couldn't find it...

[sirAQUAMAN64]

Hey you can, the super secret way.

put in canadiandriver.com/thenews/search you get a 404 with a search box

That said I couldn't find it...

Hmmm, was pretty sure I read it there but must be mistaken. Okay, good to know for the future 

[X-Traction]

There have been a variety of opinions about the roominess of the GV's back seat.  Both the numbers and the comments of adults who've ridden in the back of ours indicate that there is at least average legroom, probably more than average.  This has come at the price of some cargo volume.  I have ridden in the back of ours, and there is plenty of legroom.  Whereas, a Forester is quite cramped by comparison.

However, the hip width is another matter.  The number in the specs is an oddly low 44".  This is because the rear wheel enclosures intrude on the back seat, resulting in the seat itself being narrowed.  I guess the measurement is taken at the narrowest point.  The wheel bulges, however, are about even with the seat cushion.  With three adults in the back seat, you're only aware of the wheel bulges if you think about it.  In very cold weather, you'll notice there's something cool next to your hip.  But with two adults in the back seat, it's a non-issue.  Perhaps Suzuki should have put a flap of cloth over the wheel bulges just to avoid this negative specification.

We've also discussed how roomy the GV's cabin is.  I think that a bright interior will always seem larger than a dark one, and a sunroof makes an interior seem larger.  Because of that, I think one should go by the numbers rather than an impression, especially when all these small suv's are within an inch or so of each other on most of these dimensions.  (The 3-seater Rav4's wheelbase is only an inch longer than the GV's.)

It's worth mentioning that the GV's front footwells are both wide, deep and flat.  Other vehicles with the same legroom specification can have very awkward and narrow footwells.  It's also got fantastic access to the guts of the dashboard/instrument panel.

The GV has a saddle-shaped gas tank that takes some gadgeteering to maintain the fuel levels in the two sides.  This can also affect the fuel gauge.  And when it shows empty, it still has a quarter tank.

Another thing I don't like about the GV is the hood opening seam does nothing to stop road crud, such as winter slush spray, from fouling the engine compartment.  I added foam weather stripping to stop this nuisance, but it makes you wonder if they test these things.

[mikcan]

I had the opportuntiy to drive a GV for a week and found it to be a great vehicle and excellent value, moreso than my former CRV.  I hear they'll have a 2.4L 4 for 2009 (like CRV) and a bigger 3.2L V6, which will make 220+ hp and be more economical than the 2.7L.  Good strategy, as they'll attract the gas conscious and those who want power.
I ended up buying the XL7, as the price couldn't be beat after rebates at $23K.  Love the 250+hp 3.6L Cadillac CTS derived engine built in Japan by Suzuki.  Strong smooth and economical.  Believe it or not, my 7 passenger 3.6L XL7 gets about the same gas mileage as my 4 cylinder CRV got.

[jww]

I think the Grand Vitara is a bit long in the tooth now. It had some snappy options when it come on the market, but not enough to sway public opinion.