Suzuki Forums banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi guys,
My first post, have been browsing for a while, great forum you have here.:)

I recently bought a 2012 Grand Vitara, previously came from a 93 model Vitara or sidekick as I believe they were also known. Loved the old seating position- felt very high above the dash and doors.

So I like to have my seat fairly high in the new GV but I find after driving for 5 minutes especially in traffic, I start to get bad fatigue in my hip and top of my right thigh. It seems I always have to lift my whole leg off the seat to apply the brake and then the underneath of my thigh has hardly any support.

The brake pedal seems much higher than what I have been used to. I thought I would get use to it but 6 months later it is still the same. It is somewhat alleviated if I have my seat in the lowest possible position- But even then its not totally gone and I feel closed in with less than the best visibility that low.
I'm 5'10" 33 years old and fairly fit I would think.

Does anyone else experience discomfort like this with the seat in higher positions?

Thanks,

Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Paul I have a 2013 GV 3Dr 2.4 (manual)
Before I had a 1999 2.0 GV (manual). I always thought that seat position was too low and put 2"x2" wood blocks under both front seat runners.
Well although the new GV has a driver's seat height adjuster I still think the seats are too low and find with the addition of 2"x2" blocks again under the seat frame runners it feels much better.
I can see more of the bonnet, glare from the sky is reduced - seem to be looking from the right angle. I'm 5'9".
Now I never thought the brake pedal too high. But I do think the clutch pedal too high. However according to the manual it is above the brake pedal by the correct amount ( I forget how much, the manual is on CD)
So I am not allowed to adjust the clutch pedal down and must live with it . . .
Andy
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Hi Andy,
Thanks for your input. Nice to know someone else has an issue with the seat height,
great idea with the woodblocks. Can't comment on the clutch pedal though as mine is an Auto. I do actually find the seat is plenty high enough on max height- Just uncomfortable with the straight up and down leg lifting on an off the pedal. Best comfort for me is with it low and all the way back. If only it would move back further in the highest positions..... Oh well pretty comfortable now... Just low, will live with it too.
Paul
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Paul I thought it might be an auto. Well you're pedal will be much larger than mine.
Now when you use the driver's seat raising lever it raises the seat back but leaves the front of the seat down. ie the seat squab becomes too tipped forward. I think when the whole seat is raised with 2"x2" wood blocks you can keep the squab in a more comfortable mid position.

Might solve your concern - I feel GV front seats are too low - they do not have that commanding presence.

When I read the forum I appreciate Australia and the US are very different to here in UK.
So you bolt on massive front appendages, roof racks and other camping gizmos to enjoy all that wild outdoors. Then the 3 1/2 litre V6 engines, which are not available in England, and auto gearboxes - is petrol (gas) that much cheaper in Australia? I know it's much cheaper in the US.
It costs about £1.35 a litre here ($2.27US / $2.44Au) . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Hi All,
I have a 2013 GV3 and found the same issue with the front drivers seat position.
I too like it raised higher but when you raise the seat the front didn't support my thighs as the adjustment only raises or lowers the rear of the seat squab - not the whole seat base.
What I have done is put lambskin seat covers on the seat with a tapered wedge of seating foam under the lambskin covers. Front of foam is about 25mm tapering to about 2mm by the middle of the seat base. Also shaped the sides a bit to fit inside the raised edges of the seat. The foam is well held under the seat covers and is very secure as well as being easy to adjust to be comfortable. This has fixed the seating position for me which is now very comfortable and with the lambskin covers also cool in summer and warm in winter also clean easily.
To answer the latest comment / question yes we bolt on all sorts of heavy bull bars, driving lights, bash plates, roof racks, raised suspension, larger size tyres to our Australian GVs and I yes I also run an Auto transmission which on the current GV3 is only the 4 speed version.
On the freeway at a steady 110kph cruising speed using cruise control my "little GV3" uses between 10.5 and 11.8 litres per 100ks - the current version 2.4 litre petrol motor.
This is definitely not as economical as a small / medium sedan which will do much better in regard to fuel used.
But then a GV it is not a small / medium sedan - mine is a very capable off road tourer.
I also prefer the Autos as they are far more capable and easier to drive off road than a manual, virtually no chance of stalling even on the steepest or roughest hills.
I also do quite a lot of city driving so the auto make life much easier in stop start driving.
A 3 door auto diesel would be great for me but they are not sold in Australia.
Petrol costs at present about AUD $1.50 per litre and I do a 90K round trip to work every day - so my GV3 is not really cheap to run - but in my mind worth every cent when you compare it's true capability and relatively low new car purchase price - with other real 4x4s vehicles.
I know that whilst I pay a bit more in fuel my depreciation cost is less.
Still works out cheaper overall to own and run than virtually any other new dual range off road capable 4x4 available in Australia at present. Above all it is heaps of fun!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Thanks guys, really appreciate the info.

Philip great to hear the foam wedge does the trick, I'll give it a go, was planning on getting some seat covers soon anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I subscribe to Suzuki4U.co.uk.
What a load of Moaning Minnies.
Completely different outlook to the attributes of the GV. I think they would all like a top quality Range Rover - but can't afford it! How they can complain about that exquisite 2.4 engine I can't imagine. It is more economic than the previous 2.0 petrol and with continous 4WD. I assume some sort of miracle is assumed in their expections or a proper off road car is not really required. I think most of the later GV's here are purchased in the northern parts of the UK for the fear of winter snow and ice. I purchased my old GV to tow and with memories of my Series 1 Land Rover.
Being extremely old I don't drive to work; my GV has not covered 1300 miles yet. But I am aware of the petrol consumption (tight bugger). Life is too short to compare MPG with litres per kilometre but I think I get the manufacturers stated average over 30MPG.
You are probably as well without the diesel option. They cause most of the complaints. Suzuki use an elderly Peugot 1.9 turbo which suited it's previous life in a FWD car better with it's original gearbox. And we have been instructed by the European Union from Brussels to require now all diesels to have DPF's (diesel particulate filter) fitted before the catalytic converter in the exhaust. These block up and cause problems unless used for high speed. They have the guts cunningly removed and the ECU rechipped to compensate by those who know . . .

Don't forget you can disconnect the yellow activator cable to the seat airbag as you alter things. (and remove the other driver's seat cable permanently which actuates the seatbelt dash warning beeper if you wish)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Hi Reid, I agree with your comments in regard to people wanting a RR but at the price of the Suzuki. I am not complaining about the fuel consumption - yes it is a bit high at times but this is as much to do with the bull bar, higher suspension and bigger wheels etc than the car itself.
I too really like the 2.4 as it is very smooth and has plenty of get up and go and have also heard about the issues with the diesel DPF filters especially with cars that don't go far enough to heat up the exhaust system to the temperature required to keep them clear.

In regard to disconnecting the cable for the side airbags under the seat - yes you can do that but it would most like void most Australian insurance policies and the question is why disconnect something that is a true life saving features to save a few dollars when buying seat covers?
I have also owned (and done a huge amount of repair and modification work on series 11 and series 111 model Landrovers) and also owned a 1976 Range Rover.
In my humble opinion the current GV is a far superior vehicle in fuel use, comfort, on and off road performance, reliability and all at a fraction of the cost of 60s and 70s Landrover / Range Rover in CPI adjusted $s.
Technology has definitely come a very long way to make our cars better and safer and in real terms much cheaper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Philip sir, I said:-

'disconnect the yellow activator cable to the seat airbag as you alter things.'
- I removed both front seats to fit 2"x2" wood battens under the runners.

It was only the seatbelt warning beeper cable under the driver's seat I suggested a more permanent demise . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Reid,
My apology - read your message too quickly. Yes off course remove the activator cable whilst removing the seat to fit the block and then refit when done.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
I also prefer the Autos as they are far more capable
Sand driving, absolutely. Steep ascents, almost always. Descending steep muddy and/or rocky terrain or reversing back down a steep track blocked 1/2 way up, I'd always take the engine braking and lower overall gearing of a manual compared to an auto.

Good example is the Macilster River track up to Howitt Hut in the Vic High Country after a lot of rain. Getting up to and crossing the mud plains is much easier in an auto, river crossings, neither makes much difference, but heading back down is far more difficult in an auto. Believe me, I've done it in both.

Just my opinion but I think autos really come into there own when you need to maximise forward momentum through gear changes. Manuals where gearing and engine braking are critical to controlling speed.

Cheers
Wes
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Yes agree that muddy down hill will be more difficult with an auto.
I tend to use an approach whereby I use the left foot to control the braking whilst keeping the right foot on the gas to provide a "very small" amount of power to ensure that no wheel locks up and thereby retain better traction. I have found this works well in pretty much all situations - even going backwards.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top