2010 Kizashi Problem & Suzuki Customer Service

Anything related to the Kizashi can go here, but please look at the other headings first. Your topic may fit better under something else.
Stuhr
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:50 am

Ronzuki wrote: Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:22 am
KuroNekko wrote:These ZQuiet benefits are some of the many reasons why I think pushing the internal combustion engine and their transmissions to achieve more efficiency is coming to its ceiling.
Agreed. I'd go so far as to say the ceiling has come to them...crashing down on their freaking heads with all this unreliable non-sense. I fear my Kizashi is the last 'fun' reliable vehicle of any type I'll ever own. Hopefully its weak link holds up for another 8 years, or more, for me.
I had no idea EPA manual stats are that "padded," so to speak. This should be illegal imo.
Last edited by Stuhr on Sat Oct 15, 2022 12:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
KuroNekko
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:08 pm
Location: California, USA

Woodie wrote: DCT's are manual transmissions with a clutch and gears with teeth. They're faster because they're computer controlled and hydraulically actuated, but at heart it's a manual, actually two manuals with two clutches.
I know many people consider them "manuals" but they really aren't if you think about it. They are literally automatics by function and literally not manuals by general definition. I think many people think of them in the traditional mechanical sense of manual = a clutch and gears while an automatic = torque converter. However, transmission designs have evolved so much that there are more variations of automatics and even hybridized designs that combine different transmission component types. For example, Acura has a DCT with a torque converter. Toyota's new Corolla has a CVT with a cogged 1st gear to help the car get going from a stop.
The main reason I don't consider DCTs as manuals is because they don't require the input of the driver therefore are by definition "automatic". Also the word "manual" isn't a technical term but a general one meaning "by hand". Hence, the term manual labor. Therefore, a DCT that shifts on its own by computer that doesn't actually require the driver's input by hand controls shouldn't be considered a manual transmission. It's literally not. It's really an automatic that simply uses similar components to a standard transmission or what we generally call "manuals" in America. They are really just a different type of automatic transmission as modern designs no longer necessitate a torque converter in all applications.
Woodie wrote: This is smoke and mirrors. Anytime you see an automatic listed with better mileage than the manual version of the same car, it's because the automatic was programmed to do well in the EPA test, not in real world conditions. That's why manuals usually get what the EPA predicts (accomplished drivers can often do better) and automatics very rarely can achieve what the EPA predicts.
I would have totally agreed several years ago but the EPA has since revised their fuel economy measurement methods for more real world validity. Automakers have also progressed with automatic trans designs to make their vehicles more efficient. Now, I'd actually believe some automatics get better fuel efficiency than their manual counterparts. This would actually be possible considering that many automatics these days are CVTs that optimize their ratios at all times for fuel economy and many conventional automatics now feature more cogs than manuals.
My issue with them isn't their fuel economy validity but reliability. It seems to me as these autos got more sophisticated, their reliability tanked. CVTs have all but trashed Nissan's reputation as a quality automaker to rival the other reliable Japanese brands. Acura has suffered a reliability hit with their DCTs with torque converters which they were the first to implement. Ford had so many complaints with their DCTs in the Fiesta and Focus that they went back to torque converter autos before giving up on these cars completely. FCA is notorious for their 8 and 9 speed transmission woes. My brother's Pacifica doesn't even have 25,000 miles and it's having occassional stalling issues which the dealership is shrugging their shoulders about and suggesting he contact corporate.
These issues are some of the many reasons why I think pushing the internal combustion engine and their transmissions to achieve more efficiency is coming to its ceiling. Automakers are so desperate, engines are burning up thin oil and transmissions failing prematurely all to get fuel efficiency not matched by supremely more reliable hybrids, PHEVs, and EVs. If efficiency is the goal, I'm not going to mess around with an engine that uses 0W-20 and has a 9 speed auto. I'm going to get an electrified vehicle which does what's best for efficiency; use as little or no gas by inherent alternative drive design. Until it's time for that next car, I'm going to enjoy my old school manual trans, port-injection Kizashi and not worry about reliability or longevity issues.
:drive:
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

KuroNekko wrote:These issues are some of the many reasons why I think pushing the internal combustion engine and their transmissions to achieve more efficiency is coming to its ceiling.
Agreed. I'd go so far as to say the ceiling has come to them...crashing down on their freaking heads with all this unreliable non-sense. I fear my Kizashi is the last 'fun' reliable vehicle of any type I'll ever own. Hopefully its weak link holds up for another 8 years, or more, for me.
Last edited by Ronzuki on Wed Sep 26, 2018 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
User avatar
Woodie
Posts: 1167
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 10:09 am
Location: Laurel, MD

KuroNekko wrote:
Woodie wrote: DCT's are manual transmissions with a clutch and gears with teeth. They're faster because they're computer controlled and hydraulically actuated, but at heart it's a manual, actually two manuals with two clutches.
I know many people consider them "manuals" but they really aren't if you think about it. They are literally automatics by function and literally not manuals by general definition. I think many people think of them in the traditional mechanical sense of manual = a clutch and gears while an automatic = torque converter.
In the way they are operated a DCT is an automatic, but for the purpose of this discussion (reliability, performance, fuel mileage) they are manual transmissions which are operated automatically by a computer. I know Wikipedia is not gospel, but I think this is a good description of a DCT, especially the description "an automated transmission"
A dual-clutch transmission (DCT) (sometimes referred to as a twin-clutch transmission or double-clutch transmission) is a type of automatic transmission or automated automotive transmission. It uses two separate clutches[1] for odd and even gear sets. It can fundamentally be described as two separate manual transmissions with their respective clutches contained within one housing, and working as one unit.[2][3] Although usually operated in a fully automatic mode, many also have the ability to allow the driver to manually shift gears in semi-automatic mode,[1] albeit still using the transmission's electrohydraulics.
From a purely mechanical point of view, what's inside them and how the power flows through, Traditional manuals and DTC's are identical with a solid, lossless power flow. Traditional automatics and CVT's have slip built in where power is turned into heat and wasted, that is why they will never equal a manual in efficiency.
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Should be a convenience store, not a government agency
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

I'd be perfectly fine with a solid and reliable DCT that I alone shifted via stick or paddles. No automated control whatsoever. That's how I pretty much drive the Kizashi anyway. BTW, the Mazda's 'manual' mode blows, least in the 2018 CX5. It doesn't respond precisely to my commands. The 'puters are delaying downshift inputs too much for my liking.
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
User avatar
KuroNekko
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:08 pm
Location: California, USA

The problem with DCTs is that they are rough at low speed shifting. In slow city driving and in stop-and-go traffic, the shifting is often abrupt. It's sort of like being with a driver just learning how to drive a manual. This is the problem Ford had with their DCTs and consumers were not happy about it. I've driven a Ford Fiesta with a DCT quite a bit years ago and experienced this first hand. While it wasn't something that made the car terrible, it was certainly not as smooth as other automatics and experienced manual drivers can certainly shift smoother in the same conditions.
Where the DCT shined was in power delivery in demanding conditions like freeway passing and mountain climbing. I drove that Fiesta from LA to the Bay Area and also up to Big Bear Lake which is about 7000 ft up in the mountains. For such a small car with a puny engine, it drove surprisingly well. In fact, the best of any automatic four cylinder I've ever driven up the mountain. It was in traffic that it suffered from the DCT's antics and drove poorly.
Hence, it's no surprise that DCTs are more commonly found in performance vehicles and other types of autos like conventional autos with TCs or CVTs in more general passenger vehicles. It's a trade-off of priorities. I think many manual drivers wouldn't find it so bad but I think those used to autos would find DCTs rather aggravating at low speed driving. I know Ford's DCTs don't represent them all but I've heard similar complaints about other vehicles with them. You practically have to get a Porsche to get a decent shifting DCT in all conditions.
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
User avatar
rannel.bradley
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 7:15 am

PallyBoy wrote:Thanks for the responses
First the reason I called Suzuki was because of the 2013 recall on CVT Controp Module. Her car had exhibited same symptoms & I erroneously thought they might help or at least listen. Wrong on both counts.
She bought the car new and FAITHFULLY had it serviced where it was purchased (and has every invoice). A couple months ago, she was about an hour into aa trip when the car decelerated and she had to pull onto the shoulder let it cool down & off she went. She told me the same thing happened to her once before.
Couple weeks ago she was about an hour into a trip - decelerates and then won’t respond at all - stuck half on road half on shoulder. No warning. Nothing. That’s why I’m inclined to think some part failure v catastrophic failure. I can start it up no problem shift into all gears but no movement. I checked fuses & fluid. Fluid was not burnt or have a burnt. I talked to Sevice Mgr where she purchase today & they’ve not sold a lot of Kizashi and had little knowledge of this problem. I’d have to have car towed to shop & then have them run diagnostics. All in all about $150. I did read on this forum about the TEchnical Bulletin for the pan modification & was wondering if that had worked for anybody.
This is the exact same thing that happened to my car, as well as two other people I’ve come across. One here on this forum And another on the Facebook group for the Kizashi.

They both have had to replace their transmissions and I’m afraid I will have to as well. The mechanic has insisted on it being an electrical problem but all his part throwing has not solved the problem. Their mechanics did the same thing.
motosonic
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2017 7:16 pm

Ronzuki wrote:
KuroNekko wrote:Ironically, the manual transmission has a more involved service interval with recommended fluid replacements every 30,000 to 60,000 miles or so depending on the fluid used.
Ironically, I now firmly believe my earlier suspicions (angst at around 40-60k miles) that the CVT very much needs a similar, more involved, service of at least 2 drain and fills every 30-40k. That TSB from last year all but puts an exclamation point on it. Fluid change...very much like every other conventional auto out there despite all this 'life-time' bull-squat hype. So glad I did it, even at 80k. Better late than never. I feel, and am 100% convinced, it definitely helped the trans out and will give me some extended :drive: enjoyment with the Kiz.

To the OP, a long time ago, a couple members here had the very same situation occur early on in their new car ownership, under warranty and long before Suzuki decided to bail from the U.S.. The thread linked below has been on my brain ever since. Unfortunately, the fix was a complete trans and TCM replacement with new. Sadly, your daughters CVT is toast.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=807&p=6912&hilit=PA+Turnpike#p6912
So, what I am getting out of all of this is that CVT fluids should be drained and replaced every 30-60k miles? I don't think this has ever been done on either of my Kizashi, but I can certainly have my mechanic do it/look into it because I need mine to last a good long while.
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

That's my plan...just like any other auto trans I've ever owned. Change the fluid at 30k intervals. Fluid is fluid, heat is heat. Heat wrecks fluids over time/miles, I don't caer what the manufacturers say, or don't, in the case of the Suzuki CVTs. Got over my fear of cracking it open. It has a drain plug and a fill tube, stands to reason it should be replaced. Just purchased 14 more quarts this past weekend to do the wife's SX4 (currently about 52k miles and never changed) and another round in the Kiz...probably in spring before the temps get really hot, since it went far too long on the factory fill.
Ron

2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded :D :D )
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top ( :| sold)
motosonic
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2017 7:16 pm

Ronzuki wrote:That's my plan...just like any other auto trans I've ever owned. Change the fluid at 30k intervals. Fluid is fluid, heat is heat. Heat wrecks fluids over time/miles, I don't caer what the manufacturers say, or don't, in the case of the Suzuki CVTs. Got over my fear of cracking it open. It has a drain plug and a fill tube, stands to reason it should be replaced. Just purchased 14 more quarts this past weekend to do the wife's SX4 (currently about 52k miles and never changed) and another round in the Kiz...probably in spring before the temps get really hot, since it went far too long on the factory fill.
Thank you
There a specific fluid I should tell the mechanic to get? and how much to fill? I thought I read something on here somewhere that said the Kizzy is picky about the fluid and how much you need to put in.
Thanks again!
Post Reply