test car variability - philonenko

I'd like to tap into the collective wisdom of this forum for help with a somewhat disconcerting experience I had whilst test driving a Suzuki S-Cross.

I first test drove the car (petrol, manual, 2WD) a few weeks ago at a dealership near my place of work, and then again more recently another specimen of the same engine and trim at a different dealership near where I live. The ride felt surprisingly different the second time. On the first test drive the car was somewhat bumpy at lower speeds but settled quickly once 30mph was reached, and at motorway speeds the ride quality was pretty good being both smooth and comfortable. On the second occasion, driving on a different route, the ride was rough, and it did not seem to improve at higher speeds (as it had done previously) leaving me painfully aware of all the imperfections on the tarmac.

Admittedly, it was windy the second time and the road surface was a bit wet (though it wasn't raining when I test drove the car), but the ride was rough even at low speeds in densely built up areas, so I doubt it was the wind rocking the car.

Needless to say, I'm rather disappointed by the variability in ride quality between the two cars, and I'm at a loss how to explain it. Looking back at reviews of the car to be found on the internet, I notice that there are some discrepancies in reviewers' accounts of the car's ride quality. For example, one reviewer reports: 'The S-Cross’s firm suspension means you feel patched-up, potholed surfaces in town rather too much. Things improve at higher speeds, though, and the heavier, four-wheel-drive versions ride slightly better than the front-wheel-drive ones'. Another reviewer, by contrast, commenting on the car’s chassis dynamics, suspension and damping, concludes that 'the good chaps at Suzuki have done an exceptional job on the S-Cross as it behaves very well on the road, with very little float and yaw, no matter how "enthusiastically" it’s driven'. HonestJohn's review, on the other hand, stresses that 'suspension can be a little bouncy', particularly on the lighter petrol engine, while David Ross in his Road Test notes: 'The ride is a touch on the firm side, particularly the rear suspension set-up which can be noisy over poor roads, but the majority of the time the S-Cross is comfortable and smooth.'

I appreciate that the same car may behave differently depending on engine choice but is it possible for individual cars of the same engine and trim to vary so widely, and if so, how do I know what I'm going to get if I place an order?

test car variability - doctorchris

Could be that the two different cars had tyres inflated to different pressures.

Different load conditions on some cars require different pressures, so tyres on both cars could be correctly inflated but still be at different pressures. On the other hand, some car dealers can be very lax about correct tyre pressures (assuming they know what they should be in the first place).

Another possibility, though less likely, is the two different cars left the production line with different tyres.

test car variability - gordonbennet

If you were to check the tyre size make and model of each and, most importantly the tyre pressures you would probably find the answer.

Tyre sizes make a huge difference to ride, but so do the make and type and the pressures they are set at.

The demo at one dealer might have had low profiles fitted in order to make it look (apparently) better/blingier, but even if the same size they can vary enormously between types/pressures....indeed one might have been fitted with winter tyres which would have been softer again, i have delivered brand new unregistered Fiat Sedicis (same as previous SX4) so fitted.

edit...indeed the Doc is thinking along the same lines.

Edited by gordonbennet on 27/12/2013 at 18:31

test car variability - philonenko

doctorchris and gordonbennet, thank you both for your replies. I can't be certain but I think both cars had the standard (summer) tyres: Continental ContiEcoContact 5, 205/50 R17. What you're saying about the tyres on the two cars probably being inflated at different pressures makes a lot of sense. But if that is indeed the reason for the difference in drive quality between the two vehicles, the second dealer are doing themselves a disservice. If I'd only ever driven the second car, I'd have rejected it outright as I can't imagine being able to enjoy long motorway journeys. The S-Cross also comes with 16" on the lower spec trim and they're 205/60 so I wonder whether they might in fact make for a more composed ride?

test car variability - gordonbennet

The S-Cross also comes with 16" on the lower spec trim and they're 205/60 so I wonder whether they might in fact make for a more composed ride?

Huge difference i would expect, if its to your liking i wonder if the smaller wheels are a no cost option (unless you would be happy with the lower trim anyway), i imagine the dealer would be happy to play ball to do a swap if necessary, most people would jump at a freebie upgrade to the bigger wheels on the lower spec model...then wonder why their filling were falling out and their wallets considerably lighter at tyre change time..;)

By the way if you nip onto camskill/mytres and punch in those tyre sizes the cost difference might be interesting.

Hmm i wonder if the second garage are running at high pressure to improve the average fuel consumption on the display?

Nice car though.

edit, the most startling difference in ride quality was when i came across a fairly basic new shape Corsa with a magic carpet ride fitted with 14" 80 aspect tyres, hadn't seen that size for donkeys years.

Edited by gordonbennet on 27/12/2013 at 19:23

test car variability - philonenko

Hmm, that's interesting. I'm not sure how popular I'd be with either dealer if I insisted on testing the lower trim. I did tell the first dealer I was interested in the entry-level model, but he said the lower-spec car hadn't been run in and that in terms of how they drive the two models are "exactly the same" (which can't technically be true).

Hmm i wonder if the second garage are running at high pressure to improve the average fuel consumption on the display?

The car is already optimized for fuel economy and to further compromise ride comfort for the sake of making the car appear even more economical is to risk putting off a potential buyer. Indeed, I've gone a bit lukewarm on the car after the latest test drive which is a shame as I really liked it in other respects. Not sure where to go from here. Reading about the car on some French forums, it seems that swapping wheels/tyres on this car isn't particularly cheap or easy on account of the TPMS. A new set of valves+sensors has to be bought for each new set of wheels but even then the TPMS may fail to recognise the new valves and trigger a warning on the dashboard which can only be overcome through the use of a special tool. Apparently, many aftermarket tyre outfits and even some of the dealerships over in France have been caught out by this...

test car variability - gordonbennet

TPMS...hah another line in the sand for me, it joins satans gearbox and electric parking brakes in the 'not on your nelly' list.

I'll end up with another Hilux at this rate.

:-)

test car variability - Brit_in_Germany

I'll end up with another Hilux at this rate.

Are trucks exempt from the EU TPMS Regulation? That might just be a reason to consider them for the next car purchase.

test car variability - gordonbennet

Are trucks exempt from the EU TPMS Regulation? That might just be a reason to consider them for the next car purchase.

Unsure sorry, non of our new lorries have it so i expect so but haven't checked.

test car variability - RT

It may depend on the weight class - the Hilux is under 3500kg like all cars so may still be included.

test car variability - bathtub tom

>> i came across a fairly basic new shape Corsa with a magic carpet ride fitted with 14" 80 aspect tyres

I remember the first time I came across 185/70 x 14 on a land crab. Strewth, what a weight after the 13s I'd been used to!