Comments on: 2009 Suzuki Grand Vitara

By: Phil

Phil — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 10:49:32 +0000

I for one, don’t understand the Australian necessity to have a 10% load on the towball. try to find some specs on some European caravans and see what their ball weights are. They will be less than 90kg irrespective of the caravan weight. Either the laws of physics are different when towing in Europe, or our 10% rule of thumb is a bit iffy. I can’t imagine they would put up with a lower safety standard in Europe when towing caravans and the like.

I have an ’09 Vitara DDiS and have heard a rumour the 85kg is possibly going to be revised, hopefully retrospectively.

By: Phil

Phil — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 10:39:43 +0000

Are you sure? That car only displays kilometres per litre. and 14 kilometres per litre is 7.1 litres per 100km, which is pretty damn good!

By: Jim OLeary

Jim OLeary — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 02:53:08 +0000

Correct it is the new 3.2. But RACQ & others have it as 85 Max ball weight so it appears that the EU registered weight has been adopted here. Dealer also has it as 85Kg. but only when challenged to clear up any doubts & then has lots of suggestions like “well you could put it over a weighbridge & make sure the back axle load is OK.” All hot air as when it comes to the crunch an insurer will dodge a claim in case of accident if loading is not correct.
Suzuki should issue a notice to clear this up – Either it is a structural limit & therefore can’t be altered or adjusted or they could issue a table as Nissan with a reduction of allowable load in car for an increase in Ball weight or a graduated limit as the pre 2005 model which as I recall went to 140Kg with a load WDH. Or a combination of both. This would make their 2000Kg claim just credible as it would be 7% on the ball which is the lowest figure I have seen suggested as being a safe situation.
While this would not satisfy Suzukis own safety recommendation of 10% it would at least give them some credibility & might remove the possibility of some newbie loading their new 1800Kg van with all sorts of things to the rear to reduce the ball weight to 85Kg & then having a fishtail prang & maybe killing somebody not to mention writing off van & car.

With over 100000 in my log towing up to 3000Kg of van behind a Patrol I recon I have seen a lot of stupid & avoidable incidents but the potential in this one boggles the mind. I’m not holding my breath as it seems from reading a lot of web posts over the last few days that this is not the first mention & that Suzuki have had ample time to address a solution or just FESS UP they overstated the towing capacity.

By: Carfanatic

Carfanatic — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 01:08:40 +0000

EU would refer to the Euroepean Model, they probably mean unbraked towing capacity , but that doesn’t make sense because it’s only 750Kg. I assume you have the V6?

By: Jim OLeary

Jim OLeary — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 00:23:23 +0000

Bought one in March been on camping trip to Lake Eyre via Cameron corner,Strez,Birdsville track. Went Great BUT—

On return started to think about a small pop Top Van. with 2000kg. towing capacity on Prestige GV no problem????? NOT SO.

Owners manual carries a warning download on ball should be 10% of towed vehice for stability & safety. It then says Max download 85kG(EU) whatever EU means.
My maths may be a bit rusty but that limits the towing capacity to 850Kg. by my reconing. Whatever happened to the 2000kg. No answer to my queries on Suzuki web site indicates they dont care once vehicle sold.

I am getting very frustrated & starting to think about a complaint to ACCC re False & Misleading claims on their point of Sale Guff.

A pity to get in this situation over an otherwise great vehicle.

By: BoggedAgain

BoggedAgain — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 12:26:23 +0000

I remember our own swift, great little cars, we went to Cairns and back from Stroud, 22 klms per litre, 100 bucks up, 100 bucks back,5 klms from home we hit a kangaroo, unbelievable considering how many klicks we just drove in past fortnight, wipe-out, spun-out into tree, it really needed a bull-bar
I believe the newer GV is what we are looking for,new discs at rear from old drums,1850 kg towing,and a low range, something that the other SUV’s try to make out they are 4 WD’s without LR, wannabees, except forester has also 1.196 LR gear = GV, but is heavier on fuel at 9.3 but subaru cannot make up its mind which fuel the forrester uses, anything from 91 RON to 95, 98 RON, the higher the octane reading the better fuel consumption, go figure.

By: growcanola

growcanola — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 01:46:49 +0000

bogged again

dont fall into the stupid american mentality of bigger engines mean more power

I have a 1.3l 4 cyl swift that out perform most vehicles with an engine 3 times the capacity, it goes down to power to weight and good engineering

look at F1 cars

By: BoggedAgain

BoggedAgain — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 12:03:47 +0000

Our Corolla gets 15 klms.p.ltr which is roughly 6.4l/100

I am trying to find a decent 4WD that comes close to this,excluding Patriot, X-Trail looking good as its tow capabilities is all over Suzuki, after all this time waiting for an updated diesel, Suzuki still can only manage 1.9, unbelievable, while all others have a minium 2.0 ltr

I cannot understand how Suzuki can pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to engineers who can’t get past a 1.9 ltr engine, what a waste of resources.
You must understand my misgivings when I bought the Suzuki 1100 GKE M/Cycle-shaft-drive, the idiots put the rear axle behind the exhaust system, so when you want to change a tyre, either the whole exhaust system or the pannier racks came off to access the axle, and these ppl are the best in engineering, pull the other one.

By: wombat

wombat — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 01:41:20 +0000

K.C you averaged 14/100km ??? i have done 19,000kms in one and have averaged 7.1/100kms 1/3rd town driving 2/3rds country. you must have averaged 150kph or were driving in reverse?

By: Captain Mainwaring

Captain Mainwaring — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 08:47:10 +0000

Irrelevant vehicle in this day and age, especially with a thirsty V6. Outback ranchers need proper trucks, city dwellers need thrifty little hatchbacks. Recreational bush-bashing is history.
Suzuki needs to concentrate on developing the Swift.