Suzuki Forums banner

21 - 29 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
Cargo index:

Honda Fit cu. ft. rear seat up 21.3 cu. ft. rear seat folded 41.9
Suzuki SX4 cu. ft. rear seat up 9.5 cu. ft. rear seat folded 22.0

How is this any kind of "sport-utility"? The cargo space is pretty sad. That's one of the reasons I got the Forenza wagon -- cargo space. And I know I'd chosen right when I saw some guy in a Vibe with his kid in car seat and wife in the back seat because the stroller wouldn't fit in the cargo area without the seat down - so the stroller got to ride shotgun. Might be okay by some ladies, but mine wouldn't be down with that. :grin:

What good is an awd if you can't even fit your snowboard boots in the back?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
537 Posts
Discussion Starter #22
Originally posted by schoolpsych@May 11 2006, 09:55 PM
Cargo index:

Honda Fit cu. ft. rear seat up 21.3 cu. ft. rear seat folded 41.9
Suzuki SX4 cu. ft. rear seat up 9.5 cu. ft. rear seat folded 22.0

How is this any kind of "sport-utility"? The cargo space is pretty sad. That's one of the reasons I got the Forenza wagon -- cargo space. And I know I'd chosen right when I saw some guy in a Vibe with his kid in car seat and wife in the back seat because the stroller wouldn't fit in the cargo area without the seat down - so the stroller got to ride shotgun. Might be okay by some ladies, but mine wouldn't be down with that. :grin:

What good is an awd if you can't even fit your snowboard boots in the back?

still not evrey one cares about the cargo room

but some do so i guess
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
429 Posts
I'm just really glad to see Suzuki going back to it's roots and building it's own cars. No offense to y'all, but I've never been impressed with the daezuki's. I worked in a Daewoo dealer that also sold Hyundai/KIA/Suzuki, and the Daewoo's were the least refined of them all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
schoolpsych said:
Cargo index:

Honda Fit cu. ft. rear seat up 21.3 cu. ft. rear seat folded 41.9
Suzuki SX4 cu. ft. rear seat up 9.5 cu. ft. rear seat folded 22.0

How is this any kind of "sport-utility"? The cargo space is pretty sad. That's one of the reasons I got the Forenza wagon -- cargo space. And I know I'd chosen right when I saw some guy in a Vibe with his kid in car seat and wife in the back seat because the stroller wouldn't fit in the cargo area without the seat down - so the stroller got to ride shotgun. Might be okay by some ladies, but mine wouldn't be down with that. :grin:

What good is an awd if you can't even fit your snowboard boots in the back?
I think it is fairly obvious that that either the specs are incorrect, or that they are not measuring the same actual area.

The dimensions of the new SX4 would not allow for so much smaller areas than the Aerio SX had. Yes, the storage area might be a BIT smaller than the current Aerio SX, but it will not be this drastically smaller.

From all of the pictures I've seen, the cargo area will not be as deep (front to back) as the SX4, but might be taller, since it looks like that it does not have the cubbyhole area under the rear floor that the SX has. It is the same as the SE model (we have these in Canada, not sure about the States) that comes without the alloy wheels, spoiler, etc. and it does not have the cubbyhole area above the spare tire well.

So, if this is true about the SX4 (no cubbyhole area), then it will at least have roughly the same cubic foot storage area as the Aerio SX we have in Canada, meaning it will not be as deep front to back, but will be taller.

There is now way that those figures are accurate. Do the math!

Greg ........ eagerly awaiting the first look in the dealer's show room!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
http://www.media.suzuki.com/auto/07/downloads/2007_specs_sx4.pdf

This spec sheet says 38.1 cubic ft. with the rear seats folded. That sounds more like it.

I leave the country for 15 months come mid September. I hope the sx4 is in showrooms to testdive before I leave. Right now, as long as I don't hate the way it drives in the test drive, I think it will replace my beloved ZX2. I need to make it to work in the snow (when stateside) so I need the AWD, but I want something almost as efficient and fun to drive (read fast) as the ol' 5 speed zx2. So I am excited for its arrival! I'll be the first guy waiting for the new cars to arrive for a test drive......
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
and an aftermarket

Also I hope there is a decent aftermarket. I really want to be able to buy an intake, short throw shifter, big sway bars, bushings, ECU chips, and maybe even a cat-back exhaust or a shorty header would be great. What would be really awesome would be if Suzuki supported the aftermarket directly. The anticipation is killing me, but at least now I have a board to visit. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
That PDF states that there is only 8.2 cu ft with the rear seats up.

That HAS to be only the area that is UNDER the cargo area cover, or once again, the math just doesn't work. If I remember correctly, the FIT does not come with the option of a cargo cover.

Basically, I would take roughly the same ratio of area that the FIT has for rear seats up vs the Suzuki and apply that if you want to make a comparison.

That would put the Suzuki SX4 at 17.6 cu ft with the rear seats up.

So the comparison would have the Suzuki SX4:
  • 17.6 cu ft rear seats up
  • 38.1 cu ft rear seats down
This is the most realistic comparison to make.
 
21 - 29 of 29 Posts
Top