4 – 2013 Suzuki SX4 Crossover (74.3%)
Here’s one of the shockers from our compact crossover alternatives comparo drive. When we first lined up the vehicles we all assumed (there’s that word again) that the SX4 would dwindle to the end of the pack, falling behind because of its size, outdated looks and simple interior. Not to mention its nameplate.
However, the 2013 Suzuki SX4 rose above those we thought would do better, perhaps due to the other’s shortcomings because in actual fact the SX4 had one of the worst fuel rating (12.6L/100km), the smallest cargo space (203 litres) and was also one of the least powerful (150 hp and 140 lb-ft of torque from the 2.0L 4-cylinder mill), as well as the slowest in our 0-25m dash thanks to an oversensitive stability control system. Other complaints for the SX4 included too-stiff seats and a dash-mounted nav screen that was impossible to see in the bright winter sunlight.
Yet, somehow, this little alternative compact crossover made it to the middle of the pack.
With fantastic visibility -- best of the bunch according to our panel -- and a competent AWD system, the 2013 Suzuki SX4’s sluggish CVT was forgiven, especially with the available steering-wheel mounted paddle shifters. The SX4’s ground clearance (at 175 mm) is also one of the lowest in the bunch.
So, how did it manage to wiggle its way up in ranks? Perhaps it had something to do with its quirky styling and roomy interior -- headroom up front is quite astonishing and makes for a comfortable ride, despite seats that seem to be pushing you forward through the windscreen. Perhaps it has to do with its simple, unassuming nature which made us fall for it, like a lost and lonely dog. Whatever it was, the 2013 Suzuki SX4 made an impact on a few of our drivers, one of whom even said he’d have one as a second vehicle at home.
Here’s one of the shockers from our compact crossover alternatives comparo drive. When we first lined up the vehicles we all assumed (there’s that word again) that the SX4 would dwindle to the end of the pack, falling behind because of its size, outdated looks and simple interior. Not to mention its nameplate.
 |
| Perhaps it has to do with its simple, unassuming nature which made us fall for it, like a lost and lonely dog. (Photo: Sébastien D'Amour) |
However, the 2013 Suzuki SX4 rose above those we thought would do better, perhaps due to the other’s shortcomings because in actual fact the SX4 had one of the worst fuel rating (12.6L/100km), the smallest cargo space (203 litres) and was also one of the least powerful (150 hp and 140 lb-ft of torque from the 2.0L 4-cylinder mill), as well as the slowest in our 0-25m dash thanks to an oversensitive stability control system. Other complaints for the SX4 included too-stiff seats and a dash-mounted nav screen that was impossible to see in the bright winter sunlight.
Yet, somehow, this little alternative compact crossover made it to the middle of the pack.
With fantastic visibility -- best of the bunch according to our panel -- and a competent AWD system, the 2013 Suzuki SX4’s sluggish CVT was forgiven, especially with the available steering-wheel mounted paddle shifters. The SX4’s ground clearance (at 175 mm) is also one of the lowest in the bunch.
So, how did it manage to wiggle its way up in ranks? Perhaps it had something to do with its quirky styling and roomy interior -- headroom up front is quite astonishing and makes for a comfortable ride, despite seats that seem to be pushing you forward through the windscreen. Perhaps it has to do with its simple, unassuming nature which made us fall for it, like a lost and lonely dog. Whatever it was, the 2013 Suzuki SX4 made an impact on a few of our drivers, one of whom even said he’d have one as a second vehicle at home.
 |
| Other complaints for the SX4 included too-stiff seats and a dash-mounted nav screen that was impossible to see in the bright winter sunlight. (Photo: Sébastien D'Amour) |
