2003 Suzuki Aerio problems

“TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 SUZUKI AERIO SX WAGON. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUAL TRANSMISSION DISLODGED FROM THE FIFTH GEAR WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER AND THE CONTACT WAS INFORMED THAT THE TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPAIRED. THE VEHICLE WAS THEN TAKEN TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP AND THE FIFTH GEAR OF THE TRANSMISSION WAS REPAIRED. THE CONTACT WAS ALSO INFORMED THAT THE FIFTH GEAR WAS EXTERNALLY HOUSED, CAUSING THE FAILURE. THE REMAINING GEARS WERE ALL INTERNALLY HOUSED AND OPERATED AS NORMAL. THE FAILURE RECURRED APPROXIMATELY ONE WEEK LATER. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE REPAIR SHOP AND REPAIRS WERE AGAIN PERFORMED. THE FAILURE HAD SINCE CONTINUOUSLY RECURRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE AND OFFERED NO ASSISTANCE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 82,000.”

“THE RIGHT FRONT RIMS HAVE BEEN REPLACED THREE TIMES. THE CONSUMER STATED THE RIMS BEND EASILY AND ALLOW AIR TO ESCAPE UPON THE SLIGHTEST IMPACT ON ROAD SURFACES. PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS. *JB”

“DEVELOPMENT OF "BRAKE SHAKE" UNDER NORMAL CONDITIONS, I.E. USAGE UNDER 15,000 MILES ANNUALLY; WARPED FRONT DISCS DUE TO INFERIOR MANUFACTURE/MATERIALS; ATTEMPTED TO RESOLVE UNDER WARRANTY; ADVISED BY SEVERAL DEALERSHIPS TO HAVE BRAKE PADS CHANGED AGAIN, NORMAL BRAKE PAD SEATING REACTION, OTHER LIES, ETC. *NM”

“THE REASON IS THAT I BOUGHT ONE USED GOOD YEAR TIRE BUT I JUST RUN ON HIGH WAY FOR FEW MILES ONLY IT WAS SERIOUSLY FLAT ON LAST SATURDAY (MAY 9, 2009). I DID NOT KNOW WHY AN INFERIOR TIRE WOULD BE SOLD IN THE STORE, WHEN I PURCHASED IT SEEMS VERY GOOD LIKE A NEW GOOD YEAR TIRE, AND I WAS NOTICED I NEED TO PAY FOR REPLACE IT. I NOTICED THE INSIDE OF THE TIRE SOMETHING WAS MELTED---A FLIMSY PIECE OF MATERIAL. COULD YOUR OFFICE INVESTIGATE THOSE PROBLEMS, BECAUSE IF THOSE TIRES WERE EQUIPPED TO THE FRONT OF THE CARS WOULD CAUSE SERIOUS PROBLEMS ON THE HIGH WAY?. COULD YOU INVESTIGATE WHY THEY HAVE/SELL THOSE INFERIOR TIRES? THE USED TIRE STORE INFORMATION: AFFORDABLE TIRE & WHEELS; 12099 BALLAIRE BLVD, HOUSTON, TX 77072. *TR WENLUO ZHANG”

“TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2003 SUZUKI AERIO. OVER THE COURSE OF A FEW DAYS, THE CONTACT HEARD A NOISE COMING FROM THE ENGINE. THE NOISE INTENSIFIED AS TIME PROGRESSED. WHILE DRIVING 55 MPH, THE ENGINE NOISE BECAME LOUDER AND THE VEHICLE GRADUALLY LOST POWER AND STALLED. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER WHO STATED THAT THE ENGINE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. THE VIN AND ENGINE SIZE WERE UNAVAILABLE. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 73,000.”

“APPROXIMATELY IN JUNE 2005 A NOISE AND VIBRATION DEVELOPED WHEN RUNNING THE A/C AND IT TURNED OUT TO BE THE S-BELT TENSIONER, WHICH WAS REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE, AT CRAWFORD SUZUKI ON AIRWAYS BLVD. IN EL PASO, TEXAS.ON JUNE 12, 2006, WHILE RETURNING FROM TUCSON, AZ, MY WIFE NOTICED A VIBRATION AND NOISE. I TOOK THE CAR TO CRAWFORD SUZUKI ON 6/15/2006 (SMCS345882). AFTER THE CAR WAS EXAMINED BY THE TECHNICIAN I WAS TOLD THAT THE PROBLEM WAS A MISALIGNED, FACTORY INSTALLED POWER STEERING BRACKET. ACCORDING TO THE SERVICEMAN ABLE AGUIRRE, I WOULD HAVE TO FULLY PAY FOR THE REPAIR AS THE CAR IS OVER THE WARRANTY PERIOD.ON SATURDAY 17, I SPOKE TO JAVIER, THE OWNER OF THRIFTY CAR SALES AND HE AGREED THAT SUZUKI SHOULD REPAIR AT THEIR EXPENSE WHAT IS OBVIOUSLY A FACTORY DEFECT. AT CRAWFORD THEY AGREE THAT THIS IS A MATTER OF A FACTORY DEFECT AND THEREFORE THE MANUFACTURER IS RESPONSIBLE FOR IT.ON FRIDAY 23, I SPOKE TO A PERSON WHO IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS ''MANNY'' THE SERVICE MANAGER TOLD ME THAT ALL HE COULD DO WAS TO CONTACT THE SUZUKI DISTRICT MANAGER AND HE WOULD GET BACK TO ME. HE ALSO, STATED THAT THIS SPECIFIC PROBLEM WAS ADDRESSED IN A ''SERVICE BULLETIN'' THEY HAD…”