Kizashi Club

So its like this
3 weeks ago I took delivery of a brand new Kizz

My first tank fuel economy report is: 21 MPG.
Im really gutted. expected at least 26mpg. I kept first tank on AWD permanently. The next tank test I have turned off AWD, to see if there is a difference

I gave up a 3.2 litre supercharged b*tch (5secs 0-60mph) and one of the main reasons to change was the poor fuel consumption on that (20 mpg)
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_ima ... _large.jpg

So Im pining for my little ripper back. Its a tough call, downgrading power and awesome downchange ROAR for same consumption on slowcoach

Ok Ok shes a sexy lil kizzy. But I REALLY wish it had turbo diesel (umm, and an extra 200 bhp)

Sorry you are gutted but I know what you mean seeing I traded in a couple year old Cadillac STS4 with a 320 hp V8. I miss the raw power of the Caddy but thats all. I like my Kizashi better than the Caddy anyday and still think it was a smart choice.

You did say brand new and you did say 3 weeks ago?
What's the miles?
Engines are known to be off the expected fuel efficiency mark when they are in their break-in period.
I imagine that your car is still in or barely out of the break-in period.
Wait and see if the efficiency gets better.

First 5000kms (cbf working out miles) your economy will be pretty shocking. Mine was more than twice as bad as what im getting now. Also I believe fuel choice DOES make a difference in the kizashieven though many seem to disagree. I did a test which ill post later tonight.

I'm up to just over 4000km and my economy hasn't changed at all from new- still sitting at around 8.8-8.9l/100km in city/ suburban driving. It always seems to be CVT owners who get the bad consumption?

murcod wrote:I'm up to just over 4000km and my economy hasn't changed at all from new- still sitting at around 8.8-8.9l/100km in city/ suburban driving. It always seems to be CVT owners who get the bad consumption?

That economy doesn't sound so bad. Especially for suburban.

missdeeblue wrote:So its like this
3 weeks ago I took delivery of a brand new Kizz

My first tank fuel economy report is: 21 MPG.
Im really gutted. expected at least 26mpg. I kept first tank on AWD permanently. The next tank test I have turned off AWD, to see if there is a difference

I gave up a 3.2 litre supercharged b*tch (5secs 0-60mph) and one of the main reasons to change was the poor fuel consumption on that (20 mpg)
http://carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_ima ... _large.jpg

So Im pining for my little ripper back. Its a tough call, downgrading power and awesome downchange ROAR for same consumption on slowcoach

Ok Ok shes a sexy lil kizzy. But I REALLY wish it had turbo diesel (umm, and an extra 200 bhp)

Why would you buy a Kizashi if you were after great fuel economy?!? You should have gotten a Golf Diesel or Ford Fiesta instead.

Oh and another thing; you can't expect factory specified fuel consumption when the engine is still in the break-in period. Also don't expect to be getting the same fuel consumption as factory claimed, for most cars it's almost impossible to achieve in real life driving conditions...especially if you tend to have a lead foot.

Have you tried re-setting the mpg and then checking to see how it does on a sustained 30-50 minute trip on a highway going 55-75 mph (or kilometer equivalent )

Also is your readout mpg or kilometers per gallon??

Check the tire pressure. When you hit 500 miles, oil/filter change, almost guaranteed it will come up.

I'm 2 months into owning mine, 3500k's on the clock...started at 8.3ltrs/100ks dropped to 8.2 then has gradually climbed to 8.5/100ks. Not driving too madly, and doing regular 20k drives at 80-100kph and a little town driving... Hoping it'll work it's way down again as it wears in! Don't know whether a chat to local Suzuki guys would be of any help.
What's considered a run in period anyway?