TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 SUZUKI AERIO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TURN BOTH AXLES FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO DECIDED TO REPLACE THE TIE ROD, FRONT SUSPENSION, THE DRIVE SHAFT AND THE ENTIRE FRONT AXLE SYSTEM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE WHO DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THEFIRST FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 81,970 AND THE SECOND MILEAGE WAS 94,653. UPDATED 12/28/12 *CN UPDATED 1/14/2013 *JS
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 SUZUKI AERIO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE A TURN BOTH AXLES FRACTURED. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHO DECIDED TO REPLACE THE TIE ROD, FRONT SUSPENSION, THE DRIVE SHAFT AND THE ENTIRE FRONT AXLE SYSTEM. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE WHO DID NOT OFFER ANY ASSISTANCE. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THEFIRST FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 81,970 AND THE SECOND MILEAGE WAS 94,653. UPDATED 12/28/12 *CN UPDATED 1/14/2013 *JS
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 SUZUKI AERIO. WHILE DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE TEMPERATURE GAUGE BEGAN TO FLUCTUATE. ANOTHER INDICATOR ILLUMINATED WHICH INDICATED THAT THE VEHICLE HAD OVERHEATED. THE CONTACT ADDED WATER TO THE RADIATOR. AFTER ADDING THE WATER, A WHITE CLOUD OF SMOKE EMITTED FROM THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER. THE VEHICLE HAD NOT BEEN INSPECTED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 79,042 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 79,142.
2005 SUZUKI AERIO SX, UNIT 1 TIRE BLEW OUT. UNIT 1 MOVED INTO RIGHT LANE STRIKING UNIT 2. UNIT 1 DROVE OFF THE LEFT SIDE STRIKING THE MEDIAN BARRIER BOUNCED OFF THAT INTO THE RIGHT SIDE STRIKING THE GUARDRAIL. *BF (OHIO TRAFFIC CRASH REPORT # 10-0503-91)*JB
Crash
1 injured
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 SUZUKI AERIO. WHILE THE CONTACT ATTEMPTED TO PARK THE VEHICLE, THE FRONT AXLE UNIVERSAL JOINT BROKE CAUSING EXTENSIVE DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE FRONT END. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE GARAGE DIAGNOSED LOCATED A DEFECTED DESIGNED THAT CAUSED THE AXLE TO FAIL. THE MANUFACTURER FILED REPORT 2-236606323 AND WASN'T SURE IF THE REPAIR WILL BE COVERED UNDER THE WARRANTY. THE VEHICLE WASN'T REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND THE CURRENT MILEAGES WERE 70,235. UPDATED 12/22/10 *BF UPDATED 12/2910
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 SUZUKI AERIO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING AT APPROXIMATELY 65 MPH, THE VEHICLE ACCELERATED TO 80 MPH. THE CONTACT THEN APPLIED THE BRAKE AND THE VEHICLE DECELERATED AND CAUGHT FIRE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT IT WAS AN ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE, BUT FLAMES CAME FROM THE REAR END OF THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED BY THE OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN TO THE DEALER FOR DIAGNOSTIC AND TESTING. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE WEATHER WAS NOT A FACTOR. THE APPROXIMATE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN.
Fire
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 SUZUKI AERIO. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH HE HEARD A LOUD JOLTING NOISE. HE STOPPED THE VEHICLE AND OBSERVED THERE WAS A BURNING SMELL UNDER THE HOOD. HE WAS ABLE TO RESTART THE VEHICLE AND HE DROVE IT TO A REPAIR SHOP. THE MECHANIC DIAGNOSED THE VEHICLE AND STATED THAT THERE WAS AN INTERNAL HOLE IN THE DIFFERENTIAL. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 80000.
Fire
FRONT SUSPENSION IS SHOT AND VEHICLE IS INOPERABLE 1 MONTH AFTER 3-YEAR WARRANTY EXPIRED (RECOMMENDED NOT SAFE FOR TRAVEL BY SERVICE MANAGER). ONLY 39,000 MILES ON VEHICLE. SERVICE REQUIRES NEW COMPLETE STRUT ASSEMBLIES FOR BOTH FRONT-LEFT AND FRONT-RIGHT STRUTS, AND 6 NEW TIRES OVER COURSE OF THREE YEARS. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 SUZUKI AERIO. DURING EARLY MORNING HOURS, THE CONTACT'S VEHICLE CAUGHT FIRE AND EXPLODED. THE VEHICLE WAS THROWN TEN FEET INTO THE AIR. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE ARSON INVESTIGATOR STATED THAT THE FIRE ORIGINATED IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THE CONTACT CALLED SUZUKI, BUT HAS NOT RECEIVED A RESPONSE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 36,000.
Fire
MODULE FOR THE AIRBAG SYSTEM LOCATED A FOOT AWAY FROM A CUP HOLDER WHICH IF THERE IS A SPILLED A MODULE WILL NOT WORK. *TR
2005 SUZUKI AERIO WITH LIGHTING PROBLEMS. CUSTOMER STATES THAT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE LIGHTING IN THE VEHICLE. *KB
AFTER I BOUGHT MY CAR (IN LATE DECEMBER 2004), I NOTICED THAT THE REAR-END TWITCHED (VERY SLIGHT SWINGS TO THE LEFT & RIGHT THAT QUICKLY RE-GRABBED THE ROAD AFTER LOSING TRACTION). THIS OCCURRED EVERY TIME THE ROADS WERE WET OR SLIPPERY, AND I USED IT AS A SIGNAL TO SLOW DOWN. THIS TWITCHING GOT WORSE AS THE TIRES WORE DOWN, AND I HAD REPLACED THE REAR-TIRES 8 MONTHS AGO, AND GOT AN ALIGNMENT AS WELL. I WAS DRIVING SOUTHBOUND ON MINNESOTA HIGHWAY 77, APPROACHING THE MINNESOTA RIVER BRIDGE (MILE MARKER 7). A RAINSTORM HAD GONE BY EARLIER, SO THE ROAD WAS WET. I HAD SLOWED DOWN, BECAUSE THE CAR'S REAR-END WAS TWITCHING AGAIN, AND IT STOPPED TWITCHING, AND IT WASN'T TWITCHING AROUND WHEN I GOT TO THE BRIDGE. AS I CROSSED THE BRIDGE, THE REAR-END LET GO, AND THE CAR (AND I) CRASHED INTO THE BRIDGES SAFETY MEDIAN, NOSE FIRST. THE CAR DIDN'T DO ANY TWITCHING FOR THE 3 MINUTES PRIOR TO GETTING ONTO THE BRIDGE. AS A RESULT OF THE REAR-END LETTING, THE CAR IS TOTALED, AND I WAS INJURED. *TR
Crash
1 injured
I HAD TO REPLACE ALL FOUR TIRES WHEN THE CAR ONLY HAD SLIGHTLY MORE THAT 20,000 KM. *JB
WHEN MY VEHICLE HAD 11,295 MILES ON IT I HAD TO REPLACE THE TIRES AS THEY HAD EXCESSIVE WEAR. THE VISCOUS COUPLING WAS REPLACED AND THE ALIGNMENT WAS CHANGED PER MY WORK ORDER AS RECOMMENDED BY THE TS BULLETIN 11225. NOW MY CAR HAS 30,000 MILES ON IT AND I HAVE TO REPLACE MY TIRES AGAIN. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE MANUFACTURING OF THE VEHICLE ITSELF AS TO CAUSE TWO SET OF TIRES TO BE WORN BARE AFTER ONLY 30,000 MILES. DEALERSHIP WORKED WITH ME ON FIRST SET, THEY ARE UNSURE ABOUT WHETHER THEY WILL HELP WITH THE SECOND SET, ALTHOUGH THE VEHICLE IS STILL UNDER ITS 36,000 MILE WARRANTY. I AM VERY WORRIED ABOUT KEEPING THE VEHICLE IF I WILL HAVE TO GET NEW TIRES EVERY 10-20,000 MILES AND THE CAR MANUFACTURER IS NOT WILLING TO FIX THE VEHICLES. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE DRIVING MY VEHICLE KNOWING THAT THE TIRES ARE WEARING DOWN EXCESSIVELY AND NO ONE SEEMS TO KNOW THE CAUSE. *NM
I PURCHASED MY AERIO 2005 SUZUKI DEC 2004, IN NOV 2005 TIRES WORN PREMATURELY ON 10,503 MILEAGE, FRONT BRAKES PADS AND ROTORS HAS TO BE REPLACED. I TOOK CAR TO DEALERSHIP:REPLACED PADS, MASHINED ROTORS AND ALIGNED/REPLACED ONE TIRE. MONTH LATER I COME BACK TO DEALERSHIP WITH THE PROBLEM TO STOP THE CAR ON THE SPEED 15ML/H: PUSH THE BRAKES PEDAL TO THE FLOOR, CAR DID NOT STOPED. MECHANIK DRIVE CAR, CHECK THE BRAKES AND SAID BRAKES WORKING FINE AS IT IS HAS TO WORK AS ABS SYSTEM, BUT MY CAR DOES NOT HAS ABS SYSTEM. SEP.2006 I DID INSPECTION WITH CHANGE OIL SERVICE. RESULT OF INSPECTION THE SAME AS WAS IN NOV 2005: ALIGNMENT, TIRES WORN OUT, BRAKE PADS AND ROTORS NEED TO BE REPLACED AND IT IS AFTER 7,000 ML I ADD AFTER THE FIRST REPLACEMENT. DEALERSHIP ALGNED AND BALANCE, REPLACED ONE TIRE AGAIN, ABOUT BRAKES DECLINED, SAID IS NOT WARRANTY ISSUE. MY CAR HAS ONLY 18,000 MILEAGE AND 100,000 WARRANTY. BRAKE SYSTEM IS FAILED AND ALIGNMENT COST THE TIRES PRIMATURE WORN OUT. *NM
Crash
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THE VEHICLE'S FRONT END VIBRATED AND PULLED TO THE LEFT AT VARIOUS SPEEDS, ALTHOUGH THE PROBLEM WAS MORE NOTICEABLE WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH. THE PROBLEM MAY HAVE CAUSED THE BALD SPOT OF THE OUTSIDE OF THE FRONT TIRE. THE SERVICE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE NOTIFIED.
2005 SUZUKI AERIO STALLED WHEN GOING THROUGH A PUDDLE OF WATER. MECHANIC RELEASED VEHICLE TO THE CONSUMER WITH A NON WORKING AIRBAG. VEHICLE HAS YET TO BE REPAIRED BY THE MECHANIC. *KB WHEN THE CONSUMER DROVE THROUGH THE WATER, IT DAMAGED THE ENGINE. *JB
I BOUGHT MY 2005 SUZUKI AERIO A YEAR AGO, BRAND NEW WITH ONLY 500 MILES ON IT. IN 9 MONTHS WITH ONLY 21,000 MILES ON IT, I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE 3 SETS OF BRAKES ON THE VEHICLE AND A WHOLE NEW SET OF TIRES.
I BOUGHT MY 2005 SUZUKI AERIO A YEAR AGO, BRAND NEW WITH ONLY 500 MILES ON IT. IN 9 MONTHS WITH ONLY 21,000 MILES ON IT, I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE 3 SETS OF BRAKES ON THE VEHICLE AND A WHOLE NEW SET OF TIRES.
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE SHAKES. IT WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP WHERE THEY DETERMINED THE STABILIZER BUSHING, BRACKET AND MOUNT STABILIZER NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. UPDATED 4/11/2006 - *NM
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED BOTH REAR TIRES HAD EXCESSIVE WEAR AND FLAT SPOTS COMPLETELY AROUND THE TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION. THE DEALERSHIP PERSONNEL DETERMINED THE TIRE WEAR WAS CONTRIBUTED BY THE COUPLERS ON THE REAR STRUTS. THE COUPLERS WERE DEFECTIVE WHEN MANUFACTURED. HOWEVER, NO REPAIRS WERE MADE BECAUSE PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE.
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED BOTH REAR TIRES HAD EXCESSIVE WEAR AND FLAT SPOTS COMPLETELY AROUND THE TIRES. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE LOCAL DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION. THE DEALERSHIP PERSONNEL DETERMINED THE TIRE WEAR WAS CONTRIBUTED BY THE COUPLERS ON THE REAR STRUTS. THE COUPLERS WERE DEFECTIVE WHEN MANUFACTURED. HOWEVER, NO REPAIRS WERE MADE BECAUSE PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE.
BRIGHT SUNNY DAY AND I WAS DRIVING AND A LOUD POP OCCURRED. I PULLED OFF AND DISCOVERED MY SIDE AIR BAG HAD DEPLOYED WITHOUT A ACCIDENT OF ANY SORTS. *JB
1 injured
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THERE WAS EXCESSIVE BRAKE WEAR AT VERY LOW MILEAGE. HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR EVALUATION AND REPAIR. THE DEALER COULD NOT DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM. THE DEALER SUGGESTED A REPLACEMENT OF THE FRONT BRAKES. HE CONTACTED THE MANUFACTURER, AND THEY OFFERED NO REPAIR COST ASSISTANCE. THIS REPAIR WAS NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. NO REPAIRS WERE DONE AT THIS TIME DUE TO EXCESSIVE EXPENSE. *AK
DT: IN MIDDLE OF NIGH,T NO WEATHER PROBLEMS, AND WITHOUT WARNING THE BRAKES FAILED. HAD TO STAND ON BRAKES, AND HAD TO PULL EMERGENCY BRAKE TO STOP. AND WHEN HE GOT OUT HE SAW THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE WHEEL WELL WAS GLOWING AND SMOKING. BOTH MANUFACTURER AND DEALER SAID IT WAS NOT A DEFECT. CALLER FOLLOWED MAINTENANCE ROUTINE. DEALER FOUND THE BRAKE PADS WERE BAD.*AK
DT: IN MIDDLE OF NIGH,T NO WEATHER PROBLEMS, AND WITHOUT WARNING THE BRAKES FAILED. HAD TO STAND ON BRAKES, AND HAD TO PULL EMERGENCY BRAKE TO STOP. AND WHEN HE GOT OUT HE SAW THE FRONT DRIVERS SIDE WHEEL WELL WAS GLOWING AND SMOKING. BOTH MANUFACTURER AND DEALER SAID IT WAS NOT A DEFECT. CALLER FOLLOWED MAINTENANCE ROUTINE. DEALER FOUND THE BRAKE PADS WERE BAD.*AK