mmarshall

Thanks. I lucked out on this one...it was the first Kizashi in, and I got to it before it could be sold.

Down in ATL, where you are, you don't get much in the way of snowy/icy roads, so there should be (eventually) a good supply of FWD models, once Suzuki starts shipping them.

Also, I know you are tall. You may or may not have enough headroom/legroom in front (I did), but, even if you do, you will see that this car is not the forte of tall people, particularly in the rear seat, where it is much like the cramped Lexus IS. The front seat cushions/backs, as I noted in the review, are also too small for large people.

There's actually very little Civic in the styling, but a fair amount of both Corolla and Jetta.


Not as rare as you would think. It's standard on Suzuki's own SX-4 (with a FWD/AWD activation switch). It's standard, of course, on all American-market Subaru Imprezas. It's an option on the Ford Fusion....though the Fusion, granted, is a slightly larger car. It's optional on the Jeep Compass (which, of course, is not a true Jeep, but a unibody compact hatchback). And, technically, it's optional with with the Corolla's mechanicals too, if you are willing to go with the Matrix/Vibe hatchback version.

Quality-wise, I saw very little in the Kizashi that I thought was flimsy, though though the nice-feeling seat fabric seemed a little thin. Four or five years of my big rump and 270-lb. frame bumping up and down and sliding on it might (?) give it some noticeable wear. The thin black fabric-carpet on the trunk floor, though OK, also didn't impress much.

mmarshall

You can't compare the Kizashi's AWD system to that of the Lancer's, which only comes with the turbo Ralliart/Evo models and is generally rally-oriented. The Kizashi's AWD is hooked to a base-level, N/A 4-cylinder, and is intended more as simply a bad-weather aid.

FisforFast

I really hoped that Suzuki would have kept to the concept car a bit more.

mmarshall

If you like it, fine, but two things. First, that grille is a little too droopy for my tastes....IMO, it's worse than even some of the Audis. Second, I don't think that Suzuki could have put huge wheels and brakes on and sold the car in the low 20's, like the price of the SE production model. (Look at the size of those front rotors in the picture, for example......and the red calipers indicate that they might (?) be expensive Brembo brakes). Huge wheels and ultra-low-profile tires like that would also probably have had an unacceptably stiff ride.

Yes, Toyota did use 19 and 20" wheels on the Venza, but not race-car brakes like that, and the Venza's out-the-door-price, especially with the V6/AWD, is considerably higher than the Kizashi's.

FisforFast

A high-performance version to compete with the Evo and STi could have had these features, don't you think? If Suzuki would do this, it might put them on the map.

mmarshall

I discussed that in an earlier post. Suzuki, due to the traditionally low sales of its U.S.-market regular passenger cars (non-SUV's), might have decided, with the Kizashi, to try walking first before it runs. And it is doubtful that the small CVTs and 6-speed manuals used in the current production version could take 300 ft-lbs. of turbocharger torque. There is also not much more room under the current hood for a larger engine or turbo components.

spwolf

My head hurts ;-). It is actually not that complicated. Most of the complication comes that different parts of the world are calling it by different names, so when you look on internet, there are bunch of different explanations for the same term. Official Wiki for that does not help either. But lets disregard terms.

There are two basic AWD/4WD systems:
Full time - All 4 wheels powered at all times. Suitable for performance on all terrains, all speeds.
Part time - 2 wheels powered most of times, optional 4 wheels. 4 wheels only for low speed situations.

Everything else is variation on the same theme, with more or less options.
Forget about making distinction between AWD and 4WD, different parts of world use different ways to call what is essentially full time all wheel drive.

So what you said originally that Suzuki had full time AWD option as Subarus do, is simple not true. It is an part time AWD/4WD system with viscous coupling differential which transfers the power front and back, with FWD being priority. Its base operation is Auto where it decides on its own, but they incorporated extra feature of 2WD for MPG reasons, as well as locking it for the time you already know you are in trouble. By its definition, when it locks the differential, all wheels are running at same speed which does not work well for high speed traction, especially in corners, where different wheels should turn at different speeds to corner properly (i.e. inside wheels need to turn less, outside more during cornering).

I have not tried Suzuki's, but modern part time awd/4wd system in Rav4 provides excellent traction via its automatic part time system as electronic sensors can sense when wheels are going to lose traction so acts ahead of that.

Here is quite simple explanation of types of systems:
http://www.4x4abc.com/4WD101/4WD-AWD-autoAWD.html

You will notice that in the end, it comes down to either full time or part time system, this is where distinction is. You can have full time systems with locking centre and front and rear differentials, but this is for traction reasons, actual AWD/4WD capatibility is provided by transfer case.

mmarshall

Well, you and I simply explained the same thing two different ways. Technically, we are both right....except for one thing.

"Part-time" 4WD, as far as the term is traditionally used, is the old pickup truck/SUV system where the driver manually engages 4WD with a transfer case (really old 4WD systems also had manually-locking front hubs), and the 4WD cannot be used on dry pavement because there is no center differential. The part-time 2WD/AWD system you refer to is better known as "On demand", where the system automatically engages AWD through the center differential as needed.


And, with that, let's move on to another issue. I think we've both made our points here.

spwolf

Original point was that you were wrong in explaining on how Kazashis AWD system work, hence my correction there. It is not the same thing as Subarus AWD, for better or worse. I know you mean well, but sometimes details turn out wrong. Same thing happened when you claimed in ES350 review how facelifted model features better plastic quality and better built interior, which was also wrong.

mmarshall

It IS like Subaru's AWD in that is car-based, with a center differential. Yes, the front/torque-programing may be a little different.....but that is the case among almost all car-based systems, and automakers. I drive a Subaru myself......I know how it operates.

The interior materials did have a minor facelift for 2008, and more so for 2010. Both, IMO, looked and felt a little better for 2008....more so for 2010. Sorry, I respect your view, but my opinion stands on that....it was not incorrect.

However, that doesn't mean that I'm stubborn or arrogant....if I make an error in my reviews, (and, yes, it does happen), I go back and correct it. And I do respect disagreeing viewpoints.

mmarshall

Next planned review (and that will probably be my last one for the year): 2010 Lincoln MKT.