When I put in a request for a car with some cargo capacity to take to San Diego last night, I won't lie to you, the SX4 wasn't at the top of my list.
The situation was, I bought a car last Friday -- the 2001 Prelude mentioned here
-- and the only thing wrong with it was the ridiculous HKS Drager
cat-back exhaust.
You know, the kind that makes a deafening fart-can roar when you're trundling through town at 3,000 rpm and then quiets down once VTEC hits. That's unacceptable, so I started looking around for alternatives on Monday afternoon, and conveniently enough, a guy in San Diego had just put up a Craigslist ad for an OEM 2001 Prelude exhaust (it's in the Greddy box in the picture). We agreed on 40 bones and a Tuesday evening pickup -- and I needed a car that could carry something six feet long.
Enter the SX4, a car I hadn't yet driven, and didn't really care to. I knew it had an '05 Jetta TDI-like 0-60 time without the low-end torque, and I knew it was a bargain-bin economy car with a four-speed automatic, and...well, what else did I need to know? A lot, as it turns out. The SX4 is a genuinely likable car. Detailed road trip impressions below.
Biggest surprise: the SX4 is a champ of a highway cruiser. I thought it would be noisy; in fact, both road and wind noise are impressively low. I thought it would have a jittery ride, but no, it's smooth and composed. Throw in a relaxed top gear (3,000 rpm at 80 mph) that somehow squeezes enough out of the wimpy 2.0-liter four-banger to climb most freeway grades without losing speed, and what you've got is maybe the most pleasant long-distance runner in the econocar class. I can't remember the last time a budget box like this lulled me into thinking 80-85 was 65-70, but it happened repeatedly in the SX4.
In other words, the cool and collected SX4 is the antithesis of the high-strung Honda Fit
. I like its steering better, too: there's a pleasant weightiness to it at speed, and it's remarkably responsive, evincing negligible yaw delay. Pity, then, that it lacks the Fit's combination of relatively eager acceleration and good fuel economy and range. That's clearly this car's Achilles' heel -- it just doesn't have enough power, and the fuel economy and range are pathetic
(gas light came on after 215 highway miles, and eight miles later it drank 9.5 gallons for an average of 23.47 mpg).
Still, the SX4 was an unexpectedly pleasant road-trip companion, and of course it swallowed the old Prelude exhaust without issue once I folded the rear seats and reclined the front passenger seatback. Give this thing a motor and a manual transmission, and I'm sold.
Josh Sadlier, Associate Editor, Edmunds.com @ 4,637 miles
dougtheeng says:
12:46 PM, 04/15/09
Love the Prelude - good choice!
Glad to hear the SX4 is a decent highway car. I agree that the mileage is really, really sad. As far as looks go, I think its much better styled then the Fit.
firstwagon says:
12:57 PM, 04/15/09
If I were buying one, it would be a 2wd with a manual. Same good car but lighter, faster, better mileage and lots cheaper.
mikeolan says:
12:59 PM, 04/15/09
@Firstwagon : But worse in the snow. Plus it's a suzuki. But WOW, what terrible mileage!
_carrera says:
01:00 PM, 04/15/09
I always thought the SX4 was very underrated. I wonder how well it fares in the snow with the AWD?
wobbly_ears says:
01:03 PM, 04/15/09
Suzuki makes good quality cars the world over. Suzuki is much appreciated everywhere for their economic cars which are fuel efficient, quality & reliable cars.
However GM ha sullied the Suzuki name in US when they forced the abominations called Forenza on the Suzuki America.
Why Suzuki agreed to put their name on GMDAT POS like Forenza is beyond me.
firstwagon says:
01:04 PM, 04/15/09
"@Firstwagon : But worse in the snow. "
True but I live in Vancouver where we just don't get that much snow. I have a 4wd Legacy now but I really don't need it. My next car will likely be 2wd.
louiswei says:
01:07 PM, 04/15/09
Should've gone with the SC300... The Prelude is a great choice but with that SC300 you mentioned now it's only a good choice.
But whatevers, wish you lotta happy miles with your Prelude in the future.
SadButTrue says:
01:23 PM, 04/15/09
@louiswei,
It was a '96 SC400 that I looked at. Great engine, but I didn't like the four-speed auto. If I could have found an SC300 with the manual transmission and low miles for the same price as the Prelude, I probably would have gone for it -- but as you probably know, SC300s fitting that description are pretty much nonexistent.
JS
zcalvert says:
01:34 PM, 04/15/09
Wow, I guess I shouldn't complain when a headwind causes my GTI to "only" get 28 MPG on the highway. That's almost inexcusably bad mileage for something so small/slow.
mikeolan says:
01:35 PM, 04/15/09
I don't think GM was responsible for the "Esteem."
wobbly_ears says:
01:42 PM, 04/15/09
mikeolan, The Suzuki Esteem wasn't bad for the time. Heck, it was a big seller in Asia & Europe during it's first few years in the market there. But then they let it stagnate. Then they had this big product drought )which forced them to source the GMDAT Daewoos)
Bring on the Swift!
firstwagon says:
01:49 PM, 04/15/09
I agree about the Esteem. I have friend with an Esteem wagon that's up to 400,000km now. It's been a remarkably reliable car. Great on gas too with the 1.6 and 5 speed.
louiswei says:
01:52 PM, 04/15/09
"but as you probably know, SC300s fitting that description are pretty much nonexistent."
Can't argue with that, if you can find one I got at least half dozen people on my forums who are willing to pay premium for it...
The 4-speed is a bit ancient but still nice no matter what. For those who want a luxury coupe with at least above average perfomrance they can't go wrong with the first-gen SC, 400 or 300.
SnakeDoctor says:
02:27 PM, 04/15/09
Glad you got rid of the FartCan. All that gets you is unwanted attention from Five-O.
felonious says:
02:46 PM, 04/15/09
Wobbly_ears: Swift GT FTW!
bc1960 says:
03:14 PM, 04/15/09
"But WOW, what terrible mileage!"
"That's almost inexcusably bad mileage for something so small/slow."
Certainly the automatic needs a 5th gear with more extreme overdrive, but a lot of the competition are still saddled with 4 speeds too--although Hyundai, for one, seems to get pretty good mileage with 4-speed autos, but that could be at the expense of acceleration (holding low gear longer) and tire adhesion.
However, an AWD vehicle with EPA highway average of 28 mpg, apparently driven at speeds of 70 or higher mph for extended parts of the trip (plus harder acceleration and braking), 24 mpg is about right. The Impreza 2.5i with a 4-speed auto has even lower EPA average and would probably do as bad or worse under the same conditions--at least it has a bigger tank.
g8gtnorth says:
03:45 PM, 04/15/09
How is 3k RPM @ 80mph relaxed? It might help explain the fuel economy.
Congrats on the car!
dalaw says:
03:49 PM, 04/15/09
I second the notion for Suzuki to bring over the Swift. It is highly rated in the Asia and European market and I am sure it would do well in North America.
bankerdanny says:
03:50 PM, 04/15/09
I rented a 2008 RAV4 4cyl AWD auto over the Easter weekend. Sunday I drove it ~360 mi round trip from the north side of Chicago to East Dubuque, IL in the NW corner of IL.
About 200 miles was rolling 2 lane with a number of lengthy grades in the 8-10% range (Illinois does actually have some hills), about 100 miles of interstate and the balance in town traffic.
I averaged over 27mpg for the round trip even though I was running a consistent 75 on the expressway and 65-70 on the 2 lane.
I was very suprised, my 2007 Forester rarely breaks 25 for the same trip.
SadButTrue says:
04:07 PM, 04/15/09
@g8gtnorth,
Maybe not relaxed for a 6.0-liter V8. :)
For a wheezy 2.0-liter four with a four-speed automatic, though, that's pretty relaxed cruising. Dunno what the Fit's turning in 5th gear at 80, but I'll bet you an HKS Drager exhaust that it's a whole lot more than 3k rpm.
-JS
stephen987 says:
04:28 AM, 04/16/09
That fuel economy is inexcusable. The 4500-lb Grand Caravan would've come close to 24 mpg. Weren't you guys comparing this thing to the Fit last week?
cocarguydj says:
07:08 AM, 04/16/09
I am in complete agreement with stephen987, this fuel economy is atrocious. Even if you account for the all wheel drive, a car of this size, weight and power should get 28+ MPG at the kind of speeds that are discussed in the above post. I have gotten 24.5 MPG out of my wife's G8 GT on a trip (420+ miles) where the average speed was ~72mph with several excursions into triple digits (on a closed course of course). If a small car doesn't even get good fuel economy then what is the point? Or is this a case of "fun to drive a slow car fast"?
stephen987 says:
07:33 AM, 04/16/09
It can indeed be "fun to drive a slow car fast." But the idea is that there should be some reward for doing it. There should be pleasant tactile sensations through the steering and the shifter, there should be nice sounds, there should be good responses from the controls. I've had this experience in everything from an MG Midget to a Fiat 850 to a Honda Civic. A base Mini Cooper, a Fit, a stickshift Focus or Mazda 3i, would all do very nicely driven quickly, even if the drivers around you wonder why you're grinning.
A slug of a station wagon with an outdated automatic simply doesn't qualify. I grimace at the ads comparing it to a Mini. At best, the automatic SX4 is an inefficient but marginally more distinctive alternative to the terminally dull Toyota Matrix or Pontiac Vibe.
Would it be better with the manual transmission? I sure hope so.
lazyhater says:
11:10 AM, 04/16/09
Horay for one less fartCan on the road for less noise pollution!