Kizashi: changes in years

Anything related to the Kizashi can go here, but please look at the other headings first. Your topic may fit better under something else.
kizashiwanter
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2019 2:40 pm

Hello,
Do you have information about what Suzuki changed in Kizashi in the years 2010 to 2013? Such information is usually not publicly available. After my problems with the CVT gearbox (2010 here) I got the information:
- changes in the construction of the oil pan from 06.2011
- changes in TCM software in CVT from 06.2012

Do you have any other information about the quiet changes Suzuki made in Kizshi in the years?
rossirob73
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 11:06 am

What was the issue with the transmission

Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

I believe most all of the relatively minor and subtle changes have been covered on this forum over the years in many different threads. I know one discussion regarding steering wheels revealed quite a few differences. Many were simply trim level differences between models. Normal type stuff.

Mechanically, the trans was probably the most notable. And, that wasn't necessarily a Suzuki thing, more likely the trans' manufacturer, Jatco, who provides CVTs and conventional ATs for many other makes and models.
The transmission pan change was an attempt at combating heat related issues, fluid frothing and the like. Not so sure that really solved anything more than if they'd have just provided a normal fluid maintenance regimen. There was a TSB (not a recall) issued about that listing and showing the parts that could be replaced. I believe that is why the aftermarket pan filters that are used in 2010s early 11s don't come up as "will fit your vehicle" on the various auto parts joints' websites. The pan filter had a longer suction side pick-up, the rounded rectangular throat on the metal filter. It also included a longer dipstick as I recall.

Not sure what the software update was for, or about. Rest assured, if it was a recall, it was to cover their asses for liability and loss of life one way or another or else they wouldn't have issued a recall. Manufacturers of anything rarely like to fully air their dirty bad coding laundry...when we have to do processor firmware flashes on industrial equipment, they're generally a result of what is known as a MNeRF pronounced "Me-Nerf"...which is a Major Non-Recoverable Fault. In automotive terms, that means someone could die or be badly injured. And yes, they are usually as bad as they sound. I just had a potential MNeRF patch (PCM re-flash) completed on my Mazada CX-5 yesterday which actually was a recall that eventually followed two separately issued TSBs (which I never saw nor heard about until I received the recall and did some digging). This is a classic attempt to fix an inherent mechanical design flaw (read minimize the number of occurrences of the MNeRF) with software. Rarely, if ever, works out well in the end. Alas, get used to this phenomenon as more and more over-priced questionably implemented tech gets piled in to your cars. Lots and lots of MNeRFs are in our futures.

So, what Suzuki did w/ the TCM re-flash back then, and more importantly, the why, is anyone's guess.
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)
kizashiwanter
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2019 2:40 pm

rossirob73 wrote:What was the issue with the transmission
overheating after dynamic driving which results in blocking RPM to a maximum of 3
kizashiwanter
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Jun 05, 2019 2:40 pm

@Ronzuki, thank you for your answer.
User avatar
Ronzuki
Posts: 2382
Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm
Location: Lancaster County, PA

Certainly. Not much of an answer, so-to-speak...turned in to a bit of a rant. No surprise I'm not a fan of re-flash fixes for things that shouldn't have been an issue in the first place.

The Kizashi overall was about as well a thought out a design as is possible these days. The car wasn't really in production long enough to warrant the 'generational' model changes creating significant differences we see in other long-lived vehicles.
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

Ronzuki hit on the significant technical changes which only pertained to the automatic transmission. Otherwise, the notable change is that in model year 2011, the Kizashi Sport was introduced and all GTS and SLS models were Sport models from MY 2011 on. The Sport models had lighter wheels, a 10mm lower suspension, and some styling changes on the front fascia, side sills, and a rear "blip" spoiler. This is why a 2010 GTS looks different from a 2011 Sport GTS.
Other changes were relatively minor such as adding or deleting features or options for the trim levels over the model years.
In 2013, I think they dropped the manual transmission for all trims but the base S. Overall, the Kizashi didn't change significantly over its production years.
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
oldjoe
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 8:17 pm

Anyone know if wheel changes were significant to prevent interchanging? I have 2010 GTS with 18" alloys, stolen, need replacing. would 2011 wheels fit?
User avatar
KuroNekko
Posts: 5170
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 5:08 pm
Location: California, USA

oldjoe wrote:Anyone know if wheel changes were significant to prevent interchanging? I have 2010 GTS with 18" alloys, stolen, need replacing. would 2011 wheels fit?
They should fit just fine.
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Black)
oldjoe
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 8:17 pm

THANKS!
Post Reply