2007 Suzuki XL-7 Reviews

2007 Suzuki XL-7 LX 3.6 V6 from North America

Model year2007
Year of manufacture2007
First year of ownership2008
Most recent year of ownership2014
Engine and transmission 3.6 V6 Automatic
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 3 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.0 / 10
Distance when acquired28000 miles
Most recent distance141000 miles
Previous carSuzuki XL-7

Summary:

Was a good car except for the two major failures

Faults:

At about 40,000 miles the power steering pump failed. This was a 700 dollar repair.

Power steering rack became noisy at around 35,000 miles. I never fixed it and it still makes a noise. This is a 1200 dollar repair. That's why I left it alone.

Check engine light for "stretched" (P008) timing chain came on at 105,000 miles. This is a known problem with these engines (GM LY7). Since I was out of warranty Suzuki would not cover the repair. I could not afford the 2000 dollars to replace the chain, so I just kept on driving it with the check engine light on. The timing chain finally broke at 141,000 miles. Note that GM issued a recall on these engines in 2010, but Suzuki did not. The Suzuki engine oil life monitor is too optimistic. If you change oil when the monitor tells you to, you are looking for problems. My car was using a quart of oil every 700 miles. Engine was worn out due to long oil change intervals suggested by the oil life monitor. FYI I have owned cars for over 200k miles without these kind of problems.

General Comments:

The car handled pretty good, and the engine had lots of power before the timing chains started to stretch.

It got decent gas mileage, around 22 MPG on average.

Overall it performed much better than my 2005 Suzuki XL7. It just did not last as long.

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

Review Date: 28th January, 2014

2007 Suzuki XL-7 Luxury Limited from North America

Year of manufacture2007
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission  
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired7 miles
Most recent distance12700 miles
Previous carFord Taurus

Summary:

Fair for a GM product

Faults:

Nothing mechanically.

Cheap leather seats are very hard to keep clean.

Poor gas mileage.

Can't see anything out of the rear window, which is my biggest complaint.

It's fast for an SUV.

Cheap wood grain trim, unusually small inside, uncomfortable on a long drives.

General Comments:

Don't be fooled, this is a GM product. If I had known this, I would not have bought it.

It depreciates rapidly; just traded it in, $10,000 in negative equity already, and it's not even a year old.

In all fairness, it drives remarkably well, but is uncomfortable to drive. Very cramped unless you weigh 105 pounds and are 5'5.

Not a very good family vehicle.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 28th October, 2007

13th Nov 2007, 23:25

For some 25k$, you get a car based on GM Delta platform, and an engine from Cadillac CTS... and why are you complaining about the cheap interior? You get all these marvelous thingies for only $25k! It's supposed to be cheap materials inside.

21st Dec 2007, 11:35

To the previous comment. Everything you said is correct except for the engine. The design was taken from the cts, but it is designed for the suzuki with different internals. That is why I passed on it. Otherwise I would have bought the car in a heartbeat. Pistons, rings and other parts are different than the ones in the engine on the cts, otherwise the vehicle looks very nice and the third row is comfortable.

Average review marks: 6.9 / 10, based on 2 reviews