South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
They have heated seats and extra fog lights etc. Unnecessary extras that add to the cost that we don't need in SA
Indeed so - no adaptive cruise control capability buttons on the right side of the steering wheel in the SA models:Steering wheel as well with a lot less functionality.










Pune-based Northway Motorsport has launched an EV conversion kit for the Maruti Suzuki Dzire.
For the Dzire, the company offers two conversion kits - Drive EZ and Travel EZ, with a range of 120 km and 250 km, respectively.
While the Drive EZ kit takes 5-6 hours to recharge, the charging time for the Travel EZ kit is 8-10 hours. The top speed is restricted to 80 km/h (commercial use) and 140 km/h (private vehicles).
The company has not announced the exact price of the EV conversion kits for the Dzire, but it is said to cost around Rs. 5-6 lakh.
Bookings are expected to open soon, and customers will be able to order the kits by paying a token amount of Rs. 25,000.
According to the company, these are plug and play kits and don't require any modifications. That said, the internal combustion engine has to be removed to install these kits.
Northway Motorsport has also partnered with Bhartiya EV to set up charging infrastructure across India. It plans to set up a dealer and charging network in Maharashtra in the next 3-7 months.

The thrill of that new car smell quickly turned sour for André Bosman.
On November 12 he took delivery of a Suzuki S-Presso from the Centurion dealership and had paid for the vehicle in full two days earlier.
It was the GL+ version, equipped with the automated-manual transmission (AMT). According to the website of the manufacturer, the model is priced at R164,900, while the range itself kicks off at R145,900. The S-Presso carries a five-year/200,000km “promotional” warranty. That weekend Bosman opted to apply rubberising under the wheel-arches of his vehicle: the exposure left him concerned. It was a job that necessitated removing the wheels.
What he discovered left him uneasy.
“On removal, I saw that the wheel hubs [were] rusted as well as the exhaust bracket,” he said. Bosman claims he did not bother to seek out further areas of corrosion, before taking the vehicle back to the dealership.
He took the vehicle to Suzuki Centurion on November 19. On November 20, he received correspondence from Jennefer Jackson, customer relationship manager.
An e-mail forwarded to Sowetan Motoring reads: “Surface rust and rust on [the] undercarriage is not a warrantable defect and [is] not covered by warranty.” Jackson added: “This is normal surface rust and [will] come off [in] time.”
Bosman was taken aback and countered with his concerns, expressing disdain at the dismissal of corrosion on a new vehicle as “normal.”
He cited Sections 53 and 54 of the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) and its definitions pertaining to the condition of new products. He alleges he was told in conversation that “this is the way they come off the ship and there is nothing they can do about it”.
“Considering that the vehicle is brand new, I consider it unacceptable that any form of rust anywhere on the vehicle is [acceptable]. Whether it is a warranty issue or not, should in my opinion not even be the subject of discussion. ‘New’ means all parts are new and should literally look same.”
Suzuki Swift owner Michael Stewart said the brand’s service knocked his socks off for all the wrong reasons.
His 2017 1.2 GA is corroded so extensively that an independent repairer recently quoted him R290,101 for refurbishment, which effectively includes a complete overhaul of the chassis and suspension components, in addition to a cosmetic attention.
“One of the panel beaters I showed the car to indicated the car is so bad it is a write-off after just three years,” Stewart told us.
The vehicle was purchased new from Suzuki Bramley in Johannesburg for his son to use to school and university, moving with him to Cape Town in 2018.
Suzuki Auto South Africa (SASA) was unwilling to pay for the fix, but in a statement released to us on June 15, it backtracked on an initial assessment, claiming water damage was the cause.
“We noticed rusting on the outside of the body just before the first lockdown,” Stewart said.
March 2020 saw the model checked into the Suzuki Table View dealership. It was kept for a full day for inspection.
“They never got back to us so I called them and asked about progress, I was informed they were still dealing with it but they would revert back to me. All of the above happened before the lockdown was announced.”
The battle isn’t over for the owner of a Suzuki Swift that became severely corroded.
Michael Stewart purchased a 2017 1.2 GA derivative as a new vehicle from the Bramley branch in Johannesburg. The vehicle was relocated to Cape Town in 2018.
Before the first round of national lockdown in March 2020, Stewart claims he noticed rust forming on the body of the Swift.
He took the vehicle to the Suzuki dealership in Table View – where it had been serviced since moving – for an inspection.
A lengthy back-and-forth resulted, only coming to a head as the first quarter of 2021 drew to an end, when Stewart was told that repairs were not warrantable. They believed the damage was a result of water. Extent of the rust went as far as the undercarriage.
The manufacturer commented that “water damage is from the long standing close to the sea” in an e-mail statement, when this publication initially ran the story in June.
The owner countered by saying the dealership neglected to stay abreast of the annual bodywork inspection, as evidenced by the empty corresponding pages in the handbook.
He alleged that he was asked in February this year to bring the handbook to the dealership, which he did, after taking pictures of the blank sections. He claimed the vehicle was not parked in an area where it would be vulnerable to submersion.
“I also explained I have two other cars in Cape Town under the same conditions, both of which are much older than the Suzuki and neither have rust issues,” he said.
A complaint was lodged with the Motor Industry Ombudsman of South Africa (MIOSA); whose recommendations were released to the owner on September 23. The organisation sided with the manufacturer. Stewart had been aiming for a full refund.
Their report concluded: “According to the information at our disposal, the failure is due to extensive water damage and not due to a manufacturing defect."
“The respondent also confirms that the year body inspections are incomplete and as a result we cannot hold the respondent liable for the necessary repairs and recommend that the complainant must attempt to claim from his insurer.”


