2010 Kizashi Problem & Suzuki Customer Service

[PallyBoy]

My daughters car stopped moving on a busy highway on Sept. 10. My mechanic said transmission - but I hesitated to do anything because I didn't think it needed replaced.
I did a little research (how I found this site) and suspected the control module since her 2010 exhibited the same type of failure as the 2013. However, I read today about the fluid pan modification. I was wondering what fixes have been applied that have worked and what the cost was??
I too called Suzuki in Brea, CA and you are not getting by those reps. After the rep gave me the company speech, I asked for her supervisor, etc., and as you all know, if you have ever called there, you are not getting past the service rep. As I tried to make my point, all she did was robotically tell me the same thing until she eventually hung up on me. That is the worst type of response I have ever received from anyone's customer service department.
Thank-you for the space to RANT a little and I'd appreciate any responses.

[KuroNekko]

What are you trying to obtain from Suzuki Customer Service? Most people call there for warranty coverage but for a model year 2010, you're certainly out of the powertrain warranty (7 years/100,000 miles) so Suzuki is not on the hook for the CVT.

What exactly happened with the car and what is it currently doing? What's your mileage and location?

As for the fluid pan modifications, these were largely newer CVT designs made by JATCO (the company that manufactured the CVTs) to address heat-related failures. The pans apparently held more fluid and/or held it in a way to help reduce the heat-related fluid starvation issues the earlier design apparently had. That's my understanding but I'm not the most keen on Kizashi CVT issues as I'm one with a six speed manual personally.

I think the best thing to do is have a professional determine exactly what went wrong with the vehicle. Locating a former Suzuki dealer or current service dealer would be ideal. However, don't be surprised to hear that the entire CVT needs replacement following a catastrophic failure.

[Ronzuki]

Geez, another one...it's like the Suzuki CVT failure flood-gates have opened up in the last 2 weeks. As Kuro has stated, 2010, out of warranty, ASMC simply does not care. In another 5 years they won't even be answering the phone there any longer. They've vacated the continent and will likely never, ever return. So they really could care less about anything you have to say quite obviously.

There has to be more to the story leading up to 'it just stopped moving'. Excessive noises, whining, loss of power, burnt smells, higher rpms than normal, has fluid been changed lately, by who, etc....info like that would be helpful to anyone diagnosing the failure. These things are not known to simply go bang and stop moving. For the most part, the MO is a gradual decline and presenting subtle signs that something bad is looming. The pan thing was a TSB that all of them should have had done. But it wasn't deemd safety, so good luck with that during warranty. I tried, but at the time mine wasn't demonstrating the signs they were looking for. Hence the dealer wouldn't get reimbursed for the parts and labor. New pan holds more fluid and its design prevented sloshing which intermittently starves the pump, making more heat and frothing the fluid (bad for the fluid and consequently the trans). Combined w/ the deeper pick-up, more fluid = cooler fluid less sloshing, less frothing, less heat, happy trans.

How many miles on the car? Unless it is very low miles, and even at that, it's not likely worth the coin to have the car gutted simply to be able to remove and work on the trans. At this point if you need confirmation it's not worth it, haul it to a reputable transmission shop (if there is such a thing), or an ex-zuk dealer that's still doing service on them for whatever good that may do since they are not transmission experts, and see what they have to say. As in the amount of $$ to make it go down the road under its own power, and, for how long... guaranteed.

[PallyBoy]

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.

[KuroNekko]

Well, this problem is likely beyond a simple fix or something that a larger pan could have prevented, let alone resolve. I hate to say it but major CVT issues aren't that rare for vehicles of this age and mileage across many brands. It's not just a JATCO/Kizashi issue.

Also, many manufacturers deemed all kinds of automatic transmissions as "maintenance-free" including the CVTs in our cars. I asked an independent shop manager about these "maintenance-free" transmissions and why they were sealed designs with no scheduled maintenance. He stated that manufacturers counted on them to last at least 100,000 miles by which time the vehicles would be out of warranty and most original purchasers no longer owning the car. Hence, there was no incentive to keep them reliably operating for longevity beyond what the manufacturer needed out of them. In fact, it can be argued that "maintenance-free" transmission claims helped to sell the car to the original purchaser in the first place.

Sadly, out of all the autos out there, CVTs are just the worst for longevity. As Ronzuki stated, CVT failures are getting more and more reported among owners here. It's just the age and mileage for many of them to start failing and given the orphan status of the car, the low resale value of the Kizashi or any Suzuki doesn't justify spending the high costs in replacing such expensive components.
It's sad to state, but I have no doubt that the Kizashis that will run the longest even decades from now will be manual transmission models like mine. It's been that way for decades for manuals vs. autos for any given car and while 95% of new vehicles sold in America are now autos, these newer autos haven't really improved in long term reliability to rival the simple manual trans. For any given car offered in a manual, a significant percentage of those still running 15+ years from manufacture will be manuals despite the lower rates of sale.

[Woodie]

It's sad to state, but I have no doubt that the Kizashis that will run the longest even decades from now will be manual transmission models like mine. It's been that way for decades for manuals vs. autos for any given car and while 95% of new vehicles sold in America are now autos, these newer autos haven't really improved in long term reliability to rival the simple manual trans. For any given car offered in a manual, a significant percentage of those still running 15+ years from manufacture will be manuals despite the lower rates of sale.

Here's the key. Automatic transmissions are a sketchy bit of kit, CVT's even more so. There's some majik and voodoo going on in there rather than straightforward mechanical bits. They're slower , heavier, more expensive, less reliable, and deliver less fuel mileage. Yet the US consumer buys them almost exclusively.

That having to pull over and let it cool down thing was a sign, probably foaming fluid accompanied by whine. A long term exposure to foamy fluid has damaged the transmission, and no one fixes them. The standard fix is to replace the entire thing.

If you really love the car then do a junkyard search.

[DiggerDerrik]

Geez, another one...it's like the Suzuki CVT failure flood-gates have opened up in the last 2 weeks.

It does seem to be a hot topic as of late. The cars are aging and so are the CVTs. I will say every day I get in mine to drive the 34 miles too or from work I expect my belt to pop.

She bought the car new and FAITHFULLY had it serviced where it was purchased (and has every invoice).

Does this mean the fluid and filters have ever been changed? I may be wrong but I coulda swore Suzuki initially said the CVT fluid was a lifetime fluid.

I’d be curious if you dropped your pan if your belt isn’t in 1000 pieces at the bottom of it.

Good luck dude. I hope it’s a simple as a sensor.

[KuroNekko]

They're slower , heavier, more expensive, less reliable, and deliver less fuel mileage. Yet the US consumer buys them almost exclusively.

If you're talking about the Kizashi's CVT vs. the Kizashi's manual, then yes on all points. For the rest of all automatics out there, yes and no, in my opinion. Modern automatics have caught up in some regards and exceeded manuals in some ways but not all. In performance vehicles, DCTs are faster in shifting and thus have better track times. This is the main reason why nearly all exotics and ultra high performance vehicles are no longer offered in manual or have higher sales with autos. As for more expensive, generally yes and typically around $700 to $1000 more for an auto over a manual. However, some brands offered them for the same price. I think fuel economy is where they really caught up. Now, nearly all vehicles have better fuel economy ratings with autos than their manual versions, at least on paper. CVTs have really made the difference here given their inherent efficiency in operation. Even some conventional cogged autos like from Mazda are now more efficient than their manual counterparts. However, it seems from actual driving and owner experience that there is greater fluctuation in fuel economy among autos than manuals. Some CVT owners here get a wild range of fuel economy while manual owners get more consistent and predictable fuel economy, it seems. I get nearly exactly what the EPA estimated for my vehicle in city, mixed, and hwy driving though the hwy figure can be greatly improved with an ideal speed at long distance travel on the freeway. 34 MPG was the highest average I've achieved and I recall you got that same figure on your manual in a long trip.

The main thing about the auto for the Kizashi and many CUVs is that the AWD system is exclusively mated to it and not offered with the manual trans. For many consumers, the AWD system is among the top reasons why they are buying a particular model. Even many owners here got into a Kizashi due to the unique AWD offering given most competitors like the Accord, Camry, Sonata, Optima, etc. don't offer AWD. Even Subaru killed off their manuals in the Legacy, Outback, and just recently the Forester so you need to get an Impreza-based vehicle to row your own.

I think many Americans just don't see manuals as practical or worth it anymore for most cars. Automakers have noticed the trend and started killing off their manuals. This trend has affected models ranging from the Audi A4 to the Honda HR-V. Both are losing their manual offerings for the next model year despite being very different cars. Ironically, as manuals face extinction, they are still the diehards of longevity. While automakers may think 100,000 miles is a good expiration point for their products, many consumers would like to see their vehicles go on for much much longer. I think the manual trans is great insurance for that given the items that need replacement over time are replacement items anyway and manuals seldom need entire transmission replacements unless someone really messes one up from misuse. They hardly ever fail from normal driving but CVTs do like they have some expiration date. I believe the OP and many other Kizashi owners with failed CVTs that it just suddenly failed despite normal driving and routine vehicle maintenance (yeah, that "maintenance-free" claim for the CVT did no favors for it). 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.

I've said this many times, but as long as a car has an internal combustion engine, I see a manual trans as an ideal transmission. It's engaging, supremely reliable, and will last the life of the rest of the car. Some people in ideal driving conditions even have their clutch last that long. I really wanted an AWD Kizashi but when I found out AWD was exclusive to the CVT, I valued the manual trans over the drivetrain, even in a region that snowed. Now that I live in So Cal where it literally doesn't even rain for months at a time, I'm glad I have the MT. I can actually run Summer tires all year long and the MT is great for a lot of the canyon driving to do around here.
For me to move on from a manual, I'll need a vehicle that actually makes them mechanically obsolete such as a hybrid, PHEV, or EV.

[Ronzuki]

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 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

[Woodie]

They're slower , heavier, more expensive, less reliable, and deliver less fuel mileage. Yet the US consumer buys them almost exclusively.

If you're talking about the Kizashi's CVT vs. the Kizashi's manual, then yes on all points. For the rest of all automatics out there, yes and no, in my opinion. Modern automatics have caught up in some regards and exceeded manuals in some ways but not all. In performance vehicles, DCTs are faster in shifting and thus have better track times. This is the main reason why nearly all exotics and ultra high performance vehicles are no longer offered in manual or have higher sales with autos.

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.

As for more expensive, generally yes and typically around $700 to $1000 more for an auto over a manual. However, some brands offered them for the same price. I think fuel economy is where they really caught up. Now, nearly all vehicles have better fuel economy ratings with autos than their manual versions, at least on paper. CVTs have really made the difference here given their inherent efficiency in operation. Even some conventional cogged autos like from Mazda are now more efficient than their manual counterparts. However, it seems from actual driving and owner experience that there is greater fluctuation in fuel economy among autos than manuals. Some CVT owners here get a wild range of fuel economy while manual owners get more consistent and predictable fuel economy, it seems.

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.

On top of all that, nothing compares to the visceral joy of a well done heel and toe (involving neither the heel or the toe in most cars) downshift. For people who truly care about driving, the manual transmission is the only way to go. Unfortunately the drones who simply want their car to be an appliance are ruining it. I wish they'd all just bugger off and take the bus.