There are 5 stored owner reports matching the powertrain & transmission leading-label group for the 2004 Suzuki Forenza in our NHTSA-sourced dataset. These are unverified consumer reports and may not reflect confirmed defects.
This group counts stored reports whose component label starts with one of this site's matching prefixes, ignoring case. Each matching report counts once within the group. Components mentioned later in the label or only in the narrative are not searched. How component counts work
Loaded 5 of 5 matching reports.
Open the full vehicle complaint log (all categories)TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2004 SUZUKI FORENZA. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH, THE SPEEDOMETER PROVIDED AN INACCURATE READING OF ZERO. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE SPEEDOMETER RESET INDEPENDENTLY BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT MAINTAIN SPEEDS OF OVER 70 MPH. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND THEY STATED THAT THE TRANSMISSION NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT NOTIFIED OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 140,000.
CAR HAS TROUBLE STARTING AND CHECK ENGINE LIGHT COMES ON INTERMITTENTLY. JULY 2007 TOOK CAR IN WITH 'HARD START" PROBLEM. THEY FOUND RESONATOR ASSEMBLY NEEDED REPLACING. THAT REPAIR WAS DONE ON AUGUST 3, 2007. CAR RAN FOR APPROX. 2 MONTHS AND WE TOOK IT BACK IN OCTOBER WITH THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT ON AND THE SAME "HARD START" PROBLEM. THEY REPLACED THE STARTER OCTOBER 18, 2007 AND STATED IT WAS ARCING TO HIGH. TOOK CAR BACK OCTOBER 21, 2007 WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. OCTOBER 26, 2007 THE ECU COMPUTER WAS REPLACED. TOOK CAR BACK TO SHOP OCTOBER 29, 2007 WITH THE SAME "HARD START" PROBLEM. MOVED THE CAR TO ANOTHER DEALERSHIP NOVEMBER 7, 2007 AS NO ONE WAS WORKING ON THE CAR. THIS WAS SUGGESTED BY THE CORPORATION. A REPAIR WAS DONE ON THE CAR. DECEMBER 13, 2007 TOOK CAR BACK TO THIS DEALERSHIP WITH THE SAME "HARD START" PROBLEM. THEY CHECKED THE CODE AND RESET THE CHECK ENGINE LIGHT. DECEMBER 18, 2007 RETURNED TO THE DEALERSHIP WITH THE SAME PROBLEM. THEY REPLACED THE ENGINE WIRING HARNESS. JANUARY 25, 2008 THE CAR IS HAVING THE SAME "HARD START" PROBLEM AND IS SITTING IN THE YARD. *TR
DT: THE CONTACT STATED THE ENGINE REVVED, IT WAS RACING, AND THE RPM GAUGE RAN HIGHER THAN NORMAL. THE VEHICLE WILL HESITATE AT ANY SPEED. THERE WILL BE A LOSS OF POWER, AND THE VEHICLE JERKED WHEN POWER WENT BACK INTO THE VEHICLE. THERE WAS NO PRIOR WARNING. THIS HAPPENED EVERY TIME WHEN DRIVING THE VEHICLE. HE TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER. THEY SAID THE ECM HAD TO BE REFLASHED. DEALER DID THE WORK. THE VEHICLE IS STILL HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM SINCE THEN. *AK ENGINE CHECK LIHT CAME ON, AND VEHICLE SEEMED TO RUN HIGHER WHEN COLD OUTSIDE. *AK
DRIVER NOTICED THAT WHILE SHIFTING THE CLUTCH A LOUD WINDING SOUND CAME FROM THE FRONT. THE CLUTCH FAILED. DRIVER HAD THE VEHICLE TOWED TO DEALER FOR INSPECTION, AND MECHANIC DETERMINED THAT THE CLUTCH HOUSING ASSEMBLY BELL UNIT NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. *AK
DT: CONSUMER'S VEHICLE REAREND. NOISE COMING FROM THE DRIVETRAIN. CONSUMER TOOK VEHICLE TO DEALER TO BE REPAIRED. DEALER COULD FIND NO PROBLEM , CONSUMER TOOK IT BACK TO THE DEALER AND THE DEALER KEPT THE VEHICLE FOR A WEEK. THEN, DEALER SAID PROBLEM WAS COMING FROM THE FIREWALL OR THE ASHTRAY, THE SECOND TIME, AFTER THE VEHICLE WAS PICKED UP BY THE CONSUMER, DID NOT RECEIVE PAPER WORK, WHEN CONSUMER RECEIVED PAPER WORK IT STATEDTHAT THE REAR BRAKES WERE RUSTED. *AK
Complaints are unverified consumer reports submitted to NHTSA. A high complaint count may reflect vehicle popularity, not defect severity. Data sourced from NHTSA public records.
NHTSA source checks for this vehicle year
Checks are recorded separately for each dataset, not for the whole page. Dates use UTC. A missing check date does not mean no records exist.
Vehicle import recorded: Oct 8, 2026. This is the stored import date, not confirmation that every source was successfully refreshed.