2005 Suzuki Swift Reviews

2005 Suzuki Swift from North America

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2010
Most recent year of ownership2012
Engine and transmission Manual
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 3 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.6 / 10
Distance when acquired70000 kilometres
Most recent distance110000 kilometres
Previous carDodge Ram Pickup

Summary:

Below average, disposable car

Faults:

Bought used, was in good condition when bought.

Interior plastic trim scratches easily. Interior cloth wears very easily, door panels rip easily, very cheap interior quality.

Brakes wear quickly; replaced 3 times since I bought it.

Airbag light comes on. Happened to mine and numerous other Swifts I have seen. This can be very dangerous; means that the airbags can go off at any time. Very costly to fix.

Check engine light comes on. Not sure why I have not fixed it yet.

Oil leaks from engine have started to develop after 100000 kms; requires oil top ups between oil changes.

General Comments:

This is a cheap, disposable car with planned obsolescence.

I have heard that this car is in fact a rebadged Daewoo, which would explain a lot, Daewoos are awful. Too bad you pay a Suzuki price for a POS Daewoo, had I only known...

Positive notes on the car, they are cheap to buy in the used market, manual transmission shifts well, gas mileage is so so, but was expecting better from a car this size.

Drivers seat is somewhat comfortable when reclined in furthest back position. Rear seats are too small for adult passengers.

Interior quality sucks. Plastic panels scratch easily, upholstery rips, tears, wears and stains easily.

I have looked at many other Swifts at used car lots, etc... they usually always have either check engine light or airbag light on. Very expensive to fix, and avoid buying at all costs if either of these lights is on.

Also leaks a lot of oil for a car with only 110k on it.

It still works, so I guess things could be worse, but I still regret buying this car, and would advise others not to buy it either.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 23rd June, 2012

24th Jun 2012, 06:54

These aren't Daewoos, the Firenza was though. Now the Cruze, that's a Daewoo.

25th Jun 2012, 01:57

To the above comment, this review appears to be from Canada where (according to Wikipedia) the Suzuki Swift+ sold since 2003 is in fact a rebadged Daewoo (Chevrolet Aveo).

14th Jul 2012, 14:50

Yep. It's a Daewoo, and twin to the Chevrolet Aveo. Suzuki bought into Daewoos when they were still partners with Chevrolet. The results were disastrous.

18th Jul 2012, 13:00

Isn't Suzuki the very definition of "disposable car"? I don't think they're ever built anything else...

The Cruze isn't a Daewoo (at least in North America).

21st Jul 2012, 16:11

Actually, Suzuki had a good reputation for making rugged, long lasting SUVs, like the Vitara.

Furthermore, the small cars they had in partnership with GM were very good. I had a Suzuki Swift, the twin to the Geo (Chevy) Metro, and it was a very solid, reliable little car.

Finally, to my knowledge the Cruze does have Daewoo DNA in it. I'm unsure of what form, but Daewoo is or was involved in the development of the Chevrolet Cruze.

22nd Jul 2012, 12:25

The Chevrolet Cruze isn't made by Daewoo, but the Chevy Aveo and Suzuki Swift are in USA and Canada.

The Swift/Aveo is not a great car by any means; I have seen some here in Canada with barely 70000 kilometers, and they are already leaking oil, engine noisy and shaking badly, barely even worth $1000.

The only good thing about this car is the OK fuel mileage, and the fact you can buy a recent model used one very cheap, as they are junk and devalue rapidly.

2005 Suzuki Swift S 1.5 petrol from Australia and New Zealand

Model year2005
Year of manufacture2005
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.5 petrol Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired10 kilometres
Most recent distance11000 kilometres
Previous carMitsubishi Lancer

Summary:

No major faults, but plastic on plastic rattles disappointing. First and last Suzuki for us

Faults:

Failed passenger front door locking mechanism.

Numerous minor rattles.

General Comments:

Well build and put together, but hard interior plastics and lack of plastic on plastic insulation make rattles quite common. Most easy to fix (at home after dealer fails too).

Roomy in the front, squeezy rear seat (fine for small kids).

Transmission a little baulky from 1st to 2nd.

Engine quite tractable and enjoyable.

Good ride/handling compromise.

Still the best looks in its class.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 16th February, 2007

5th Nov 2007, 01:40

How do you go about fixing the plastic-to-plastic rattles?

6th Nov 2007, 09:46

It seems EVERY Swift has rattles...

21st Oct 2009, 05:57

Yes, at least they don't seem to get worse after the day you take delivery. :)

24th Mar 2010, 09:56

I've just fixed another three rattles, but overall the car hasn't gotten much worse.

27th May 2010, 08:58

Just fixed another rattle, but otherwise the car is aging very well (nearly 5 years). Economy now 6L/100 km/hr, mostly around town.

Average review marks: 7.9 / 10, based on 10 reviews