1989 Suzuki Swift GTI (Reaction) Motorweek Retro

[@christopherconard2831]

I caught the "first Suzuki" comment too. I think they were referring to Suzuki badged cars. They have an older review of the Samurai, technically a truck.

[@k4106dt]

I remember looking at a Chevy Sprint at the local Chevy dealer in 1985. The Suzuki three cylinder econo box was initially badged as the Chevy Sprint. This was before the GEO division was created.

[@danielreigada1542]

Suzuki started selling vehicles in America in 1986 with the Samurai.

[@NoBucks777]

I bought one new in black. Was a lot of fun to drive!! Biggest problem was with the speedometer cable….pumped fluid into the instrument cluster and dripped onto the mat. A real bummer, dealer couldn’t fix it. No wonder Suzuki left the US.

[@davinp]

The body style side view looks just like the '89 Dodge/Plymouth Colt. The Colt is a rebadged Mitsubishi Mirage

[@jeffking4176]

Suzuki Swift started production in 1984. SO, it was a couple years old when it started being sold in North America.. And it was not specifically designed FOR North America. Rather, as a “world “ car. They weren’t necessarily the most refined, but were well built, mechanically. 🚗🙂

[@johnnymason2460]

You are correct. The Civic Si was larger than the Swift GTi. However, the horsepower numbers are pretty close to each other(108hp in the Civic Si, 100hp in the Swift GTi).

[@AllCarswithJon]

Makes that Swift even more impressive. :)

[@royperry2859]

First car i bought on finance plan was a 1991 Geo Metro 5 door automatic with black bumpers it was a😅

[@larryschmerbeck2159]

Had one; it weighed 1769lbs. Not bad for 100hp.

[@MyHumanWreckage]

I took a look at this car in 1991 to replace my 1981 Corolla. This car handled like a slot car with incredible power and handling for the time. In the end I found the car way too tight and cheap feeling. I don’t agree with the plastics being a notch above “Korean imports”. This car felt just as cheap. I ended up buying a 1991 Excel SE.

[@stevemorris270]

The 3 cyl. Metro version was 70hp.

[@bikingD]

Regular 1.3 4 cyl Swift was 70 HP. The 1.0 3 cyl was 55 HP . The 3 cyl Turbo was 70 HP.

[@jackphillips3512]

I had the GEO version of this (well, non GTI). Great gas mileage but absolutely horrible on power and build quality. I think I had it for 2 years.

[@ksjlb2612]

I had a "version" of this vehicle sold under the Chevy nameplate. It was an '86 (I think) Chevy Sprint and it was an absolutely horrible vehicle. I bought it used, and soon found out that the transmission was known to lose first gear after just 60,000 miles.

[@mrgurulittle7000]

As a more sensible buyer than me, you probably think the Swift was a little too cheap for its competitors, but I’d gladly take one just because it’s so cheap and unusual, being a Suzuki. I think Suzuki was a little underrated because they never had a proper halo car like the other JDM brands did. Yeah, the Samurai was Suzuki’s halo but CR tore that idea to shreds. I think this Suzuki Swift is more comparable to the Toyota Starlet or VW Polo/Derby than the Honda Civic and VW Golf. And compared to the Starlet or Polo, I think Suzuki did well. Great review as always, and quite honestly, I wasn’t expecting a Suzuki on your retro review reaction video. And Sprite, I didn’t see that coming either. Really nice combo.👍

[@danielreigada1542]

I remember seeing s Swift GTI in a mall parking lot back then and really liking it as a 16 or 17 year old. It would be very hard to find one these days but would be perfect for a Radwood show.

[@GabrielSBarbaraS]

Drove a 1986 Suzuki Sprint, loved that 3 cylinder car at 50 miles per gallon on the highway. It sold through Chevy, when my $100 per month lease was done, they basically gave me the car because they didn't want it back. I really loved it. ( From an AI source, " The 1986 Chevrolet Sprint, built by Suzuki, has 48 horsepower. The Sprint also has 77 Nm of torque and a maximum power of 5,800-5,100 rpm. The Sprint gets 44 miles per gallon (mpg) in the city and 53 mpg on the highway for a combined 48 mpg." ) The car was finally stolen and the cop that found it down in WV bought the car from me in New York at the time for about $1000. LOL

[@blue_lancer_es]

Well my wise friend. Gti in 89 had a whooping 105hp from a 1.8. Crx Si had 106 from a 1.6 so 100hp from a 1.3? Yes it was admirable in the era.

[@UncleJoeLITE]

These Suzukis sold very well in Australia, with most ending their lives as track cars. A good, road legal one today is ~$40k AUD. Cheers.

[@seed_drill7135]

I think the Chrysler 318 V8 was down to 125 h.p. In the 1980’s. Ponder that for a moment.

[@blue_lancer_es]

@@seed_drill7135 damn!

[@johnnymason3265]

​@@seed_drill7135 I believe the 318ci V8 was making about 165hp in 1989. It went up to 230hp in 1992.

[@seed_drill7135]

@@johnnymason3265 I just checked, it reached its nadir in 1984 at 130 h.p. 1989 was the last year the 318 went into passenger cars. The 318 was reengineered into the Magnum 5.2 for 1992.

[@muznick]

I remember when a 9 second 0-60 was pretty good. I do miss econoboxes though. It is more fun driving a slow car fast than a fast car slow. Cars are so powerful now, that you can run out of room real fast.

[@johnnymason2460]

Actually, Jon, Suzuki was around in the US with the Samurai in 1985-1986. The Swift and Sidekick was added in 1989. I would love to have the Swift GTi with an automatic transmission.

[@stoneylonesome4062]

I think we got Suzuki Trucks/SUV’s before their unibody cars

[@UncleJoeLITE]

Now you're talking my language Jon! What a legendary race car this little bad boy was here in AU! Very aspirational car. In the 80/90s, this was the new Mini Cooper in racing. Not much good at Bathurst ofc, but on a tight track these could & did kill V8 'Falcodores' regularly. These can be tuned to nonsense levels. Sure, a pretty agricultural vehicle, but the first baby hot hatch from Japan & what a beauty it was. Thanks Jon. _PS: My little Suzuki Alto Turbo RS is the spiritual successor, but much nicer!_

[@2040wagon]

I had a light lime green 4 door 4 cyl base model 5 speed. Just checked: 70 hp. Thought it had 78 hp. 13 wheels and tires were terrible. Got 170 vs the 150 huge handling and tire life difference. Car died in less than 8 years in SF ca. Barely paid off. Heater/Defrost went first then roof liner. Car was stolen twice through side mirror and ignition rigged with screw driver. No power steering. Loved it anyway. Proud of GM. The Tracker and Storm were hard to get back then. Most remember the Prism. 😀

[@stoneylonesome4062]

Love these little Japanese Econo-hot hatches. Mechanic here. These things were (or even are, assuming you can find one in good condition) fairly reliable, with a manual gearbox. But you have to change the oil and service it religiously, and you couldn’t leave it in the elements or drive on salty roads. Suzuki’s greatest reason for failing in the US market was the fact that their automatics were some of the worst in the industry, they are not too bad with a manual, for a hot hatchback, but change the oil twice as much as it says you should, and let the engine idle and warm up, especially if you have a turbo, particularly if it’s cold out.

[@UncleJoeLITE]

'Made in Japan' Suzuki quality is one of the main reason I own 2 of their cars. Cheers.

[@thisdudeisnotin]

My 3-cylinder Metros got their oil changed every 2000 miles with Mobil One Synthetic and they ran really well.

[@JTA1961]

Metro with doors off, bolt pattern matches standard offroad quad so after flipping around the fronts (turning clearance) mine seriously went places that 4x4s struggled to go. Problem was with weak engine momentum was a must yet lack of suspension created issues in the rugged terrain.

[@MrHugemoth]

I had a 93 Swift with the 1.3 4 cylinder 5 speed. It was a fun car to drive. My daughter said it was a tin can on a skateboard.

[@davedelarosa319]

You talking about the "only 100hp", but that's not taking in to consideration the roughly 1800lbs (by my very foggy recollection) it weighed. I wanted one of these desperately back in the day. Would love to have one now too.

[@johnnymason3265]

I would like to have a Swift GTi as well(I want the automatic). It would make an interesting first car. I have to have the air conditioning.

[@johnnymason2460]

I would consider a Suzuki Swift over the Geo Metro and Subaru Justy. The Swift had four cylinder engines; the two other cars have three cylinder engines(which I never ever want).

[@randallringwald5059]

I had the 1.0 3cyl Geo Metro. This translates to 55hp. Great gas economy! Underwhelming engine perfomance. It served us well as a young married couple!

[@johnnymason2460]

I would never ever buy a Geo Metro with a three cylinder engine. A 1995 version with the 70hp four cylinder engine will suffice for me.

[@bikingD]

Civic was not great back then. This Swuft had 100 hp a Civic Si had 105 hp then was heavier. These were way way way more fun then a Si. Were better track cars then an Si. Civics rusted and went through valve seals like crazy back then. Thing that hurt this car was size. I had a 91 was a blast. You keep bringing up Metro a 1.0 3 cyl 55 HP vs 1.3 4 cyl 100 HP different world almost double. 12 inch wheels on a Metro. Cheap seats and sound insulation on a Metro. Only thing they really share is the shell. Think about it 100 HP 1,500 lbs, independent suspension, 4 wheel disc brakes if I remember. Sport buckets, tach, so much more car than a Metro. Heck only thing I didn't like was the light clutch if I remember.

[@mrgurulittle7000]

The only reason Civic was seen as better was because Honda had a better reputation than Suzuki in the US. The Swift was somewhat underrated.

[@stoneylonesome4062]

Honda had the advantage of better automatic transmissions, better build quality, and, while still susceptible to rust, less likely to rust than a Suzuki (all three of those reasons are part of why you don’t see Suzukis driving around the USA these days other than the occasional ratty SUV.

[@bikingD]

@@stoneylonesome4062 actually Suzuki out sells Honda in Japan by a country mile because of reliability and build quality. It strictly didn't survive in the US because of size of their products. They came in too small. Heck even today maybe the most reliable SUV in the world could be a Suzuki Jimny just too small for North America

[@mrgurulittle7000]

@@bikingDThat’s very true. Suzuki is Japan’s second largest car manufacturer by a large margin and mainly due to their strong know how in the small car segment. Suzuki in the US was smeared by CR and the brand became underrated.

[@jeffatturbofish]

I owned a 1990 one and the way I would describe it as Geo Metro on steroids, same vehicle as the Geo but with twice the HP. 100 HP at around 6400 rpm, in an 1800-pound vehicle makes for a fun vehicle. Yes, it wasn't all that reliable, A/C quickly died, and I usually had tires pre-ordered since it got flats all the time, but it was fun. My ex-wife made me get rid of it, perhaps I should have kept the car and not the ex-wife.

[@jjojo2004]

The Suzuki Samurai SUV was 1987, and it was called a Suzuki. So they sold vehicles in the USA before 1989. 😎😎😎

[@hq21]

Rather unfair to compare the roominess of the CR-X against the Swift as the Honda didn't really have a backseat. To be honest, for it's price I never found the CR-X particularly impressive. While with this car you're pretty much getting what you paid for.

[@2040wagon]

Market for small sub compact commuter distance pocket rocket was there target. Remember it was difficult to to finance a Honda and Toyota. They got over sticker here in California quite a bit.. They could also require a large down payment. Even the Sentra, Colts, and GLC could be hard to get. GM and Suzuki were trying to grow the younger starting out market. I will always be grateful to GMAC financing for refinancing me. I thought about getting a new Trax for that reason.

[@boerde6202]

It was a fun little car in the Netherlands. Probably bought new for the younger wife to do some shopping in. To later give it to little Timmy to abuse it😆 I do even beleve the first models had no cat? Or at least they where not manditory until 1992.. So most of them would do 200kph or a bit over.. Pretty exciting in such a small light car. Not as mutch as a peugeot 205 1.9GTi. But people should need a special licence for that😂

[@Thatdavemarsh]

We ran one of these with the “big block” swap (still sub 2L) in 24Lemons. The car weighed around 2200 lbs and had roughly 120 hp. It was a blast and, with race tires and setup, hung in the corners really well. Drove really well.

[@Hobotraveler82]

Despite the negatives of this car. It's practical and affordable for the times. Plus it's 100 hp engine puts it above the Geo any day of the week. 😊

[@22trident45]

Ill assume this wins on MPG, not much else. 35 average by Motorweek is really good.

[@timking2822]

Having owned two of these, it's one of the most under-appreciated sports sedans of the period. As fun as the Miata, but way more practical.

[@Dkrpan59]

I had a red geo metro 5speed 3cylinder I loved it it was quick nimble and 40mpg great

[@MauiWauiPineappleExpress]

Popular car in Europe!

[@captsorghum]

I rented a Geo Metro once when on a business trip. All I really remember is the "binary throttle" -- I was either full on or full off lol.

[@benchmark3332]

100hp in a 1800lb car is not bad, specially on 89.

[@jeremiahgaskins9127]

This car was well regarded overall, and well above a metro.

[@johnnymason2460]

I agree with you. I would take the Swift over the Metro easily. I would prefer if the Swift was available with power steering, though.

[@johnnymason2460]

Jon, I remembered that you asked what was the BMW L7? Well, Motorweek just gave a Retro Review on the 1987 BMW L7 (simply a limited edition 735i). You need to check that one out.

[@AllCarswithJon]

Thanks for the heads up!

[@dedeborya9015]

The Geo was only a 3 cyclinder .... My sister had one of these - they were FUN, not fast - great campus car.

[@dedeborya9015]

My campus car was an 84 ford ranger - I am sure the auto world hated that truck - but it served me well, never had a problem with it - I sold it for twice what I paid for it ..... and really - I wish I never had sold it.

[@stoneylonesome4062]

One of my current “must-owns” is a Suzuki Swift Roadster, with a manual gearbox. I say Suzuki because I assume that The Geo Version had a gimped engine due to emissions stuff. Used to work at a JDM import place, never saw a Swift Roadster. They should’ve made more stuff like that - I know they have Kei Roadsters in Japan, and all, but they need it for the USA, too. You get a 2 seats, 6MT, 2-4 cylinders, 1000cc, a turbo, a tiny little AC unit, a soft top, and a radio. Preferably RWD. would sell if they marketed it the right way: cheap fun.

[@UncleJoeLITE]

Just drop the fuel injected twin cam 1.3 & you have a baby race bcar.

[@k4106dt]

There was also a version of the Metro that had the 1.3L 4 cylinder.

[@johnnymason2460]

​@@k4106dtThe Geo Metro didn't get the 1.3 liter I4(70hp) until 1995.

[@TruckingShooter]

To put it in perspective with inflation in 2024 9k bucks is getting close to 23k dollars. For 9k this thing looks like a steal but 23k? . . You can get a Mitsubishi mirage today for less and that seems like a much much better car in comparison. Just something that crossed my mind.

[@mrgurulittle7000]

Yeah, but boomers made a lot more money than the gen Zs nowadays. Back then one job could send kids to college and own a nice house in a middle class suburb. Now one job barely gets rent covered and forget about owning a car with the crazy insurance prices. Gen Zs need two jobs and sometimes still can’t buy a house. In that light, 9k for a cheap mobile is not quite equivalent to 23k in today’s money.

[@thatguyoverthere9634]

Pretty much every compact economy/sporty economy car today beats the pants off anything from 30-40 years ago hands down. For that reason it's hard to genuinely compare price points of cars from back then to today because just about every option avalible today is better.

[@jameshastey3058]

It looks like a Geo Metro because the Metro was a rebadged Swift.