2004 Suzuki Forenza Reviews - Page 3 of 4

2004 Suzuki Forenza LX from North America

Model year2004
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission Manual
Performance marks 0 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
2.8 / 10
Distance when acquired12 miles
Most recent distance21000 miles
Previous carHonda Accord

Summary:

Junk

Faults:

Timing belt went up at 19,000 miles in June of '07. I don't put many miles on my car per year, so it was three months out of warranty when it happened. After much dickering and pulling some strings, the dealer rebuilt the cams, replaced the valves, etc. at their cost, but it took them a month to do the work.

In December of '07, I lost my heat. Dealer did diagnosis, and told me it was the thermostat. They wanted $468 to replace, and flush the system. I bought the part from them, and had an independent mechanic install it. I still did not have heat, and my mechanic told me it was the water pump.

I found out from an April post on THIS site, that there were water pump issues with this car. Armed with this information, I returned to the dealer today, and asked if they had replaced the water pump when they did the work in June. The answer was "no". I asked if they were aware of the water pump issues, and if so, WHY had they not replaced the pump when they did the cam work. They told me they had only become aware of this problem in the past several days, (Ha!) and that it was now, in fact, a factory recall.

I am certain that without the information from this site, I would have been bilked out of some big bucks.

General Comments:

It only *looks* good.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 7th December, 2007

2004 Suzuki Forenza from North America

Model year2004
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission Automatic
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 3 / 10
Comfort marks 4 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
2.6 / 10
Distance when acquired3 miles
Most recent distance63000 miles
Previous carNissan Frontier

Summary:

Crap

Faults:

Warped discs.

Odd sounds from linkage/wheels.

General Comments:

The resale value drops like a rock.

Parts are expensive because they don't use standard parts. I have to drive 30 miles to the dealership if I want to change the air filter. call your local tire stores and find out how many, if any, carry 195/55R15 tires.

Build quality is generally poor. my wife's acura is 3 times older and has 2 times more mileage, was half the money, and is.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 22nd September, 2007

5th Jul 2010, 19:41

Terrible gas mileage, it's like driving a 18 wheeler!!! Tires, and parts very hard to find!!! Dealer staff very sucky!!! Do your homework before buying Suzuki!!!.

2004 Suzuki Forenza LX Sedan 2.0 from North America

Model year2004
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.0 Automatic
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired39 miles
Most recent distance3200 miles

Summary:

Great car for the money

Faults:

Nothing yet.

General Comments:

This car has been very reliable, is pretty comfortable and has many more features than most cars in the same price range. The engine performs adequately when driven in normal conditions, but could use a bit more power when trying to pass or get up to speed in a hurry. Fit and finish is very good. So far we are very pleased with the vehicle. We are in the process of purchasing another one (2005 Forenza LX wagon). I will update this review and let you know how both Forenza's are doing.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th May, 2005

12th Aug 2005, 09:27

Update...So far the 2004 Forenza continues to perform very well and nothing has gone wrong with the vehicle. At the moment the car has 6000 miles on it. One thing that we are a bit disapointed in is the "average" fuel mileage. It has been averaging 24 MPG in mixed driving and about 27 MPG on mostly highway driving. Maybe it will improve as the engine continues to "break in". We also purchased a 2005 Forenza Wagon (LX) and I will write a review on it soon. So far the 2005 wagon is doing well.

2004 Suzuki Forenza from North America

Model year2004
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission Don't Know
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.0 / 10
Distance when acquired7 miles
Most recent distance5000 miles
Previous carDodge Dakota

Summary:

Decent car for the money

Faults:

Car is new as of 2/16/05, I here a noise as the car shifts into overdrive between 45mph and 50mph sounds like a rattle in the exhaust or catalytic converter, I will have this checked while under warranty, but it does not affect the performance of the car.

General Comments:

Forenza delivers a good all around car for the price. My forenza gets about 17mpg all around, with the automatic transmission, I enjoy using the hold mode which allows the driver to change gears as needed, bad thing about this mode is it uses more fuel. The forenzas engine has plenty of power for passing and play.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 16th February, 2005

17th Feb 2005, 07:13

You are only getting 17 mpg and you rate performance a "5"?

Sorry, but that does not sound like a very desirable vehicle.

9th Apr 2005, 19:07

If this car has not been broken in yet, the computer adjusts the engine differently for the break-in period. After the mileage goes passed break-in, the gas mileage will improve and go to normal factory specified level.

18th Jan 2011, 19:42

Are you kidding me? Exactly where in the "computer" is the "parameter" for "gas mileage"? 17 MPG out of a subcompact car should be considered utterly shameful.

I drive a 2000 model Dodge Durango with a V-8 and average 19 MPG out of it. That's a vehicle that weighs twice as much as a Forenza, carries 3 more passengers, and can tow its own weight!

Shameful I say, that a small entry-level car can't even beat a ten-year-old old-tech pushrod V-8 SUV with 200,000 miles on it!

Average review marks: 5.2 / 10, based on 13 reviews