Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
SUVs Suzuki SX4 Suzuki SX4 MPG Real World Numbers
103 messages, Last post on Nov 23, 2009 at 7:54 AM
You are in the Suzuki SX4 Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: arkainzeye (Nov 27, 2006 6:06 pm) The electronic clutch pack in this model is attached to the rear differential, so the driveshaft will turn any time the front wheels are being driven. However, this does not mean the rear wheels are being driven - that only happens when the computer detects wheel slip at the front and engages the rear. Subaru's system in all its manual-equipped models is merely a viscous center coupling. This runs all 4 wheels at 50/50 front/rear all the time until slip is detected, at which point power is directed away from the slipping axle. No computer intervention at all. Now I have never owned an automatic Subaru, but I know the autos get a more sophisticated computer-controlled system. The SX4's system is very similar to many of the more popular AWD soft-roaders out there today, including the CRV and RAV4, both of which run in FWD until slippage is detected. The RAV also has a 'lock' mode just like the SX4, with a lower speed threshold - I think it is like 25 mph when the RAV's 'lock' mode disengages (can't recall the exact speed). |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: nippononly (Nov 29, 2006 8:06 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: arkainzeye (Nov 29, 2006 1:21 pm) The "Full-Time 4WD" pickups were like that. You could jack up one wheel and the vehicle wouldn't move. Also if you spun that one wheel, you could explode the tire, because the wheel would spin at 4 times the speed shown on the speedometer. For example if you were spinning one wheel at an indicated 50 MPH, the tire would be going an actual speed equal to 200 MPH (if it hadn't already disintegrated). I have a 4WD Toyota pickup that has an automatic disconnecting differential (ADD) in the front axle. One front axle shaft disconnects when you are in 2WD, and that allows the front driveshaft, and also the front ring and pinion to stop turning. The reduced drag is supposed to improve fuel economy slightly.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: arkainzeye (Nov 29, 2006 1:21 pm) But the interior is not all I would like, I would say the SX4's is marginally better. And of course, not everyone has (or wants to spend) the extra $10 grand. I would think if you are on the highway, in wet or dry but not snowy weather, doing highway speeds, you might want the car in FWD-only. The AWD probably cycles in and out of the rear axle more than you might think, because minor variances in rotational speed between the front and rear would cause short bursts of driving the rears, when the car would be using more gas. Over the course of a long highway trip, that could siphon off 1-2 mpg I would guess. Most of the rest of the time, I think you would probably just leave it in AWD. Anyone think the AWD light on the dash is a bit bright? For me, that would be an incentive to leaving it in FWD as much as possible. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: dudeboy (Nov 30, 2006 9:17 pm) You are perfectly correct about "old school" 4WD like most of the Toyota trucks had up until about the year 2000. It's one reason mine have always had the rear limited-slip, or rear locker (several different trucks over many years). Then at least you need 3 slipping wheels before you are a fish out of water! The downside to the old Toyota system was that while it was good for the longevity of the front axles, hubs etc when the 4WD was completely disengaged, they weren't receiving lubrication in that state, which was hard on them over time if they didn't get very good owner attention and maintenance. That is why the manuals began recommending that you drive in 4WD for 10 miles per month. The SX4 of course has none of these concerns - everything that might need lubrication is rotating all the time, and the electronic clutch pack is maintenance-free (at least, until the day it is fried - wouldn't want THAT repair bill!). |
|
|
|
i was wondering if any Owners out there have seen how far they have gotten on a Full tank of gas till it hit the Big E. i wanted to see how different it is from the specs some of these reviewers said it gets. I think im going to give the sx4 another test ride when the Sport comes out. i was comparing specs of my tracker to the sx4 as far as power is concerned there is a 2ft-lbs more torque from the Sx4 but the sx4 is close to 100lbs heavier. I think on my next test drive i will really test it, more than just a few miles...
|
|
|
Replying to: arkainzeye (Dec 01, 2006 5:36 pm) |
|
I get 21 in town and 25 hwy. I have a little over 2500 miles on it. I leave it in awd. I would like better mileage but that's not what I bought it for. I got it for the awd which is great. I don't think you can expect high milage from the SX4 because it weighs more than others but it's still a fine car for the money because everything comes standard.
|
|
|
The March issue of Car And Driver magazine has a short article on their time with the SX4. They tested a 5 spd. -- and only got 22 mpg. Yikes. That's what I consistently get with my 2004 Suzuki Aerio SX AWD automatic with 2.3 liter engine.
|
|
|
Replying to: bren (Feb 05, 2007 2:14 pm)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
SUVs Suzuki SX4 Suzuki SX4 MPG Real World Numbers
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2010 Suzuki SX4
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
