To a non-enthusiast this little Suzuki in the junkyard is no great loss. Just another little tin box disposed of after its useful life has come to an end. But for those of us who know better the loss of this special little car deserves to be mourned. While the MINI brand has done brisk business in recent times feeding off the image of the iconic Mini Cooper this little Suzuki GTi was more of a spiritual successor.
The original Mini Cooper was created in 1961 after John Cooper lobbied BMC to create a performance version of its Mini. The standard Mini 848cc engine was stroked to increase displacement to 997cc and together with dual SU carburetors horsepower was boosted from 34 to 55. Front disc brakes and a close ratio gearbox completed the performance package. Improvements were added over the years to boost horsepower as well as improve braking and handling but the recipe remained the same; a light weight and toss-able package with a useful increase in power over the standard car. The Mini had an impressive racing record with wins rallying at Monte Carlo in 1964, 1965 and 1967. The Minis technically came in first, second and third for 1966 but a questionable disqualification by French judges raised the Mini’s profile perhaps even more than any other race.
While the Swift GTi/GT perhaps lacks the high profile racing successes of the Mini Cooper I’d say it hits the mark on light, toss-able and, perhaps most importantly, the fun factor. Like the Mini Cooper a more humble car provides the base platform. In this case the Suzuki Swift (Cultus) hatchback which was fitted with a 1.0L three cylinder engine. In order to spice up the economical Swift platform Suzuki added a lusty 1.3L four cylinder motor. The G13B engine benefited from Suzuki’s motorbike technology as the DOHC engine had a very robust bottom end and revved to a 7,500 rpm red line. An even 100hp @6450 rpm and 83 lb-ft @ 4950 rpm was the result. The torque curve was surprisingly flat offering unexpected flexibility and excellent fuel economy. Aftermarket tuners have been able to double or triple this rating with the addition of a turbocharger.
Suzuki initially named its hot hatch GTi with a lowercase i in an (unsuccessful) attempt to stave of Volkswagen’s lawyers while channeling the success of the Golf GTI. The Suzuki GTi arrived in North America in 1989 at the time when the Volkswagen GTI was rapidly “growing up” with much more emphasis on refinement than raw performance. Suzuki positioned its GTi/GT as a smaller, more elemental hot hatch. What carried over from the base Swift was minimal sound deadening, a plain and basic interior with an almost complete lack of luxury extras. No power steering, no power locks and even power windows were unavailable on the earlier cars. It paid off however with wonderfully alive chassis feel and a feather weight of under 1,600 lbs initially.
Suspension was all independent MacPherson Struts with coil springs. Anti-roll bars were fitted to both ends. Steering is via an unpowered rack and pinion steering rack. Braking duties were handled by a four wheel disc system upgraded from the front disc, rear drum layout of the normal Swift.
Unfortunately the interior of this GT looks a bit grim with some missing and broken parts. The GTi/GT specific buckets seats still look sporty and supportive. The three spoke steering wheel is another GT/GTi upgrade. The rear with its bench seat looks just as much of a penalty box as the more pedestrian Swift. Only available with a precise five speed manual gearbox this shifter has been fitted with a slightly phallic looking knob. The interior saw a facelift late in the 1991 model year.
I would have been tempted to pull the 1.3L wonder motor for a future project except that empty oil bottle under the hood was a rather ominous sign. These engines can be converted to rear wheel drive by bolting to a Suzuki Samurai five speed although distributor placement can be a problem in some applications. I’ve always thought they’d be a fantastic motor to swap into a MG Midget or a Lotus Seven style roadster.
The no frills theme continues around the back with hubcaps rather than alloy wheels. At least the wheels and tires are a size larger than the base car. A factory fitted body kit gives it a bit of a sporty look. In addition the Twin Cam 16 Valve script lets you know this is no ordinary Swift. The poor little car looks well used up however. The VIN puts this one as a 1989 model but it must have been a late year build as Volkswagen forced Suzuki to rename the car from GTi to GT late in that year.
These days the Swift GT/GTi has a bit of cult following but for those in the know it offered the most raw hot hatch thrills. While the first Mini Cooper wasn’t a hatchback I’d argue its more of a spiritual descendant of the cheeky, fun and light original than the plus sized namesake that BMW sells today.
I seem to recall there was a minor furor over these when they came out. Kind of popular in the St. Louis area for a time.
Never checked one out, but earlier, the Samurai was certainly the rage.
On occasion I see a Suzuki vehicle in the West Chester, OH area where I live.
Spiritual successor to the Mini Cooper may be a bit of a stretch, but I must appreciate your enthusiasm towards a car that to me says “I’ve given up on life”.
Regardless of opinions, great write-up.
So if I enjoy driving sub-2000 lb cars with stiff suspensions and high revving engines, people like you think I’ve given up on life?
This car follows the EXACT same formula as the much loved Mini Cooper, VW GTI, and countless other hot hatches. It is nothing at all like the base model Swift/Metro with which it shares a body shell.
I’d take a mint condition Swift GT over just about any of the domestic land barges featured on this site. Elitist comments like yours have no place on a car enthusiast site.
Easy does it. I may not agree with Brendan on this either, but there’s no need throw adjectives around like that. He has a right to his opinion, and as such it does have a place here. That’s the whole point here….
I think there are plenty of ways to express an opinion without insulting everyone who drives a certain type of car. I would edit the last line of my post if I were able. I didn’t need to include it.
Love the site, by the way. I rarely post but I’m a longtime reader.
I agree 100%.
Having had the three-cylinder version badged as a Geo Metro, that car is far from the “I’ve given up on life” category. If you don’t mind living with a sub-100mph top speed, the car is as close as you’ll ever get to the joy of a motorcycle while still having four wheels and weather protection around you.
Where I really appreciated my (actually, my live-in girlfriend’s although I paid for it and it was titled in my name) Metro was 80mph scampers down Philadelphia’s Schuylkill Expressway during rush hour. That little bastard could do just about anything short of lane-splitting.
The car went with the ex-. I still miss it.
1,600 pounds and 100 horsepower? Sounds like something I’d keep forever if I could find one that hasn’t been h00ned to death. That low weight is why the 1.0 three cylinder ones were able to get such high MPGs.
The later ones packed on a few pounds but they are all pretty light relatively speaking.
Even with 55 h.p. it could be fun. What made the Metro not the “given up on life” car that so many think it was, is the fact that there were so many crashed Suzuki Swift GTs from which you could pull brakes, stabilizer bars, seats, instrument panels, wheels, and on and on. I ended up with a really flingable car that got 50 mpg.
Just to tell you,I have one that is near perfect condition and I’ll be putting it for sale come spring time,if your interested,it’s a 1989!!
Indeed. I bought my ’94 Swift GT new and with just a tick over 200k miles on it I’m still driving it occasionally today. About 15 years ago I started looking for a replacement and it didn’t take long to discover there weren’t (and still aren’t) any. So I keep it.
Not sure where you’re based but the current (pre hybrid) 2018 Suzuki Swift Sport still carries the flag for lightweight, chuckable fun for very reasonable money – especially second hand. 0-60 in 8 secs, top speed of around a 130mph and, if you drive it reasonably, 50mpg too. I know these aren’t stellar numbers but the thing that was always cool about the Swift Sport was that you could use nearly all the power on offer and have fun whilst doing it.
Wasn’t there a Geo metro version of this? I could be wrong but I thought the Metro had a performance version as well.
At least in Canada there was a Metro turbo. It didn’t have all of the chassis upgrades, though.
There was a three cylinder turbo model. It has less power than the DOHC four. It sold for a number of years in Canada but I believe only one in the US and in the Chevrolet Sprint. Canada got the turbo in the Pontiac Firefly, Chevrolet Spring and the Suzuki Forsa but I don’t believe the Geo.
David thank you for a great write up on the SSGT. Where is this junkyard located? I could use those fog lights even with that broken lens.
I bought my ’94 SSGT 13 years ago with 70k miles on it. It is now showing 80+K miles. It has been a very reliable car after we installed a relay on the starter circuit. The PO sold it because of this problem but he didn’t know of a fix and kept replacing the starter.
My car is very much as you describe them except I have power mirrors, a/c, and there are blanks where power window switches would have gone. I have done a complete upgrade od the suspension: Suzuki Sport alloy wheels, H&R coil springs, Koni Sport struts all around, body bracing front and rear, bigger sway bars, Falken street legal racing tires. The engine is stock except for a K&N filter and Magnecor wires.
I also installed a stereo system (with remote CD) from a Grand Vitara and installed infiniti speakers all around.
I have three mods waiting: Euro spec glass headlights, racing headers, and individual throttle bodies from a GXR750.
The one thing I wish for is a limited slip diff but the ones from Suzuki Sport are n/a and aftermarket units exceed the market price of the car.
Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada. Its probably still there but under two feet of snow. I might be able to pull the parts if the weather is somewhat reasonable.
Sounds like a recipe for a fun & practical car. Never realized this model was out there.
Somehow, this one escaped my notice back then. Having moved on from my 85 GTI to a garage with a 66 Fury III and a Model A, I guess I was moving on (or back). Cool find.
JP: It is amazing how much we seem to have in common!! I have a ’66 Plymouth Sport Fury, and my DD is a ’12 Fit Sport manual! 🙂
Perfect complements to one another!
These were rapid little cars on racetracks in standard production racing they ate bigger sedans around circuits with ease. Holdens had a version of the Swift badged BARINA it didnt get the hot engine.
The three-pot engine is also a popular homebuilt aircraft powerplant.
And why not? 55 hp is about as much as you see on a Piper or C-150 at 10% of the cost of a rebuilt O-145-A Lycoming. I assume they use a 50% reduction gear like on the VW conversions? BTW, the price below is NOT excessive when compared to other remanned aircraft engines – and you HAVE to get them redone after you exceed the manufacturer’s number of hours, even if the oil pressure and compression are still within limits
Cut & paste from a aircraft website:
Lycoming O-145-B2 (rebuilt)
The engine, including carb and magnetos, has been rebuilt to factory specifications by J.P. Hackenburg Aviation in Pennsylvania.
It has a total of 6h (run-in) time, done as part of the rebuild.
I’ve got all the manuals and logs for it. Specs click here.
All AD’s are complied with. The engine is ready to go!
Rebuild details / history are available. Photos click here.
Asking price is $11,900.
Cessna 150s have a Continental O-200 with 100 hp. The later Cessna 152 have a Lycoming O-235 with 110 hp or so. Either way, quite a bit more than the 55 hp available from the Suzuki engine.
Regardless, going to an automotive engine in a certificated aircraft is a big no-no. You have to get FAA approval for something like that. Installing an automotive powerplant in an experimental is a different story. However, even then, you have to add a reduction gear for the prop (you can’t spin a prop much past 2700 RPM without the tips breaking the speed of sound) and a provision for water cooling.
Also worth noting – you only are required to overhaul an engine by TBO if the aircraft is being operated commercially (for rent, for charter, etc). If the aircraft is being operated per FAR Part 91 (personal general aviation use) you can operate past TBO.
As a private pilot on a budget, I’ve looked pretty deeply into this. Experimentals save you the cost of dealing with certificated parts, but then your insurance rates are out of control because experimentals are, per plane, wrecked much more frequently.
BMW flat twins are fairly common on homebuilts like the Kitfox, although they need to be geared down a lot.
Yeah, the Rotax that powers so many LSAs and experimentals also has to have a reduction gear.
Airplanes aren’t the only things getting Suzuki power at the expense of Swifts and Metros.
My friendly local junk man is currently in possession of my Suzuki 1.0 three, and is fabbing up some custom engine mounts for it as we speak. Meanwhile, a box sits in the garage with an OBD-I intake setup, ECM, and wiring.
Come spring, I’ll be the only person (perhaps anywhere?) to have a fuel-injected gas Jacobsen TurfCat mower. If I can find the time to get it running, that is 🙂
72″ deck, hydraulic everything, leather second-row bucket from a Silhouette van (liberated from the scrap pile, because why not?). It’s a great machine. Mows the six acres around the office in no time. Too bad the little Kubota diesel had to up and die… even more so that no inexpensive replacements were available. Oh well – the price of the junkyard parts and metalwork will still be considerably cheaper than another diesel.
Less weight, many more horses, but a bit less torque too… here’s hoping this experiment will end in success!
Brilliant! You know you’re going to have to share that. Lawnside Classics are a big thing here.
Having spent a fair amount of time with Turfcats – both gas and diesel – I eagerly await a Lawnside Classic post on your machine. Just in time for the spring thaw!
Friend of mine recently sold his. I got to drive it a few times, and it was a blast. Tight little bomb and in the winter he would put 4 studded hakkapeliittas on it and man was it great on compact snow.
The gauge of the sheet metal used – not quite as thin as beer cans.
As an owner of a ’89 GTi I can confirm that that is indeed the factory stock ‘phallic’ shift knob and it is always subjected to much derision from my buddies. Excellent write up and it’s great to see these cars getting the recognition they deserve!
Its original Japanese name was “Cultus”, not Cutlass.
Yes – you are quite correct. Thanks. I’ve updated it.
The home market Cultus had AWD and a more powerful engine thanks to higher compression (11 to 1 vs 10.5 to 1 for the Swift GTi), different cams, intake faced driver rather than passenger and flowed better than the GTi. It also had a better flowing exhaust.
These Cultus items have become the holy grail of GTi enthusiasts and are priced accordingly.
That sounds like a fun little car to blast around in. I wonder if that engine attached to a Sidekick Transmission would fit in a Chevette? The upper firewall on my Chevette seems to have a lot of room due to the lack of A/C and it might accomodate the distributor. 35 more horsepower and an extra forward gear would be nice….and it probably wouldn’t be that heavy.
Anyone who does pull the twin-cam wonder motor for a nice little roadster (a great idea), ought to sell the remaining roller to an EV enthusiast. Lightness and no power anything make Swifts and Metros very popular shadetree conversion targets. Lots of them like this one at the EV Album.
A worthwhile article about a very worthwhile car. These were criminally underrated flyweights.
Thank you for this contribution.
The lowercase GTi spelling was very common in the ’80s and ’90s, and in fact VW rendered it that way at least some of the time in Europe, as did others like Peugeot and I believe even Daihatsu.
I remember the Daihatsu Charade GTti. Tiny car with a 1,0 liter 3 cylinder turbo engine. It was pretty popular in the late eighties – early nineties.
The American magazine Road & Track had a comparison road test of the Daihatsu Charade and the Swift GTi. The editors gave the nod to the Charade when it came to build quality and comfort. The Swift GTi was the winner when it came to performance, but not by much. The Charade is a much harder car to find nowadays than the Swift GTi. I know I have been looking.
I assume that the contemporary non-turbo version of the 1.0 liter Daihatsu 3 cylinder is in the
Toyota iQ and Toyota Aygo~Peugeot 107~Citroën C1.
Daihatsu itself has withdrawn from the European market.
this is the best pizza delivery vehicle ever devised. Love these little cars but are no fetching premium used prices because of the high mpg. I would really love to drive this car for a little months. What a great little beater.
Funny you mention the Mini – Swift GTis are also known to be great donor engines for hopped-up Minis. That’s how I “rescued” mine.
In college in Baltimore in the late-90s, my beloved Valhalla manual Volvo 245 Turbo was really starting to nickel-and-dime me past what I could afford as a starving student. About the same time, my trusty Volvo mechanic (who dabbled in Minis) came across a very clean ’89 Swift GTi with only 38k, its engine slotted for a new Mini project. Having driven a Geo Metro before, I made some smartass comment about why he’d bother swapping in an even worse motor. Then he threw me the keys. Wow, what a car!
That afternoon, a fair deal was reached, and I went from heavy, powerful RWD eurowagon to featherweight FWD econosport (which I immediately removed the tint from). I soon learned that despite their differences, they shared a favorite trait – the Volvo liked to wag the tail out just a bit as the turbo spooled up, while the short wheelbase Suzuki had a penchant for pirouettes when lifting off the throttle.
Interestingly, I drove the Suzuki in exactly the same way I drove the Volvo, but it did not have the Volvo’s ability to fly completely under the literal radar. Something about the Swift’s stock two-piece black wheels on red body and oh-so-late-80s ground effects said, “Look at me, officer!” A girlfriend at the time named it the “Firegnat”.
I seem to recall a steady 33mpg or so, yet it could hang with Integras and CRXs and SE-Rs on the autocross track. The seats were tremendous… the suspension and brakes were remarkable… there was no power steering, so it was the first time I ever truly felt connected to the road in car. It was a low-rent “driver’s car” through and through.
It seemed to have a polarizing effect on the general public. On more than one occasion, I recall a group of people pointing and laughing at it, assumably assuming I had spent a lot of money to kit out a Geo. It was bone stock.
On the other hand, there were many times when car enthusiasts would stop and ask for details. “Are those disc brakes?”, “What the hell engine is in that thing?”, “Did you import that?!” etc.
With the rear seats down, it was a remarkably utilitarian shape, too – swallowing all of my music and computer gear all through school. It even did a few moves, as well as plenty of road trips. I did have the timing belt go prematurely, and it’s an interference engine. Despite its rarity, though, parts could be found – Suzuki’s US operation was surprisingly robust at that time.
Eventually, after college, I moved on to my next enthusiast car – a ’93 Nissan NX2000 that was better, quicker, tighter, and more rewarding to drive than the Swift, but definitely lacked that underdog spirit that made the Swift so charming.
I’ve always kept an eye out for another one, but the ones I find are either ruined or beat… but a great little car that really gave me some great memories.
I had a 1995 Pontiac Firefly SE with the 1.3 liter engine mated to an 3 speed automatic transmission (the only way you could have the 2 door hatch with the 4 banger that year). It was a great little car. I had it until 2008 with 360,000 km`s on it when I decided it was time to dump it. It was burning oil at that point & needed a ring job. Parts were expensive and not always easy to find. It was like driving a go cart – lot`s of fun, decent power for such a light car and great on gas.
I remember these little beasts back when I was autocrossing our Omni. They were the ones to beat, but really difficult to do so. It was one of the few cars I would have liked to own for myself. I ran across a couple when selling them, but even then the ones I saw were pretty rare, and didn’t stay long on the lots…
Nice find, David and equally nice write up. Neat little car, I like it and the promise of good mpg’s. Hemmings Sports Exotic did a good piece on a rare Metro Turbo in the past year or so.
GM had a way of throwing about the term GT, didn’t they? Still I scratch my head what makes a Grand Am GT a Grand Tourer, let alone this subject car. But truth be told, this little car may have been more in the spirit of what a GT was meant to be then a Grand Am GT or any other of those late and lamented Pontiacs of that particular area…..
Nice article. If it wasnt so far away Id go get the whole car. have been driving metros for 15 years due to a 132 mile round trip commute every day. being the died in the wool car guy that I am, after the first couple of years driving them I started modifying them. My current metro is bored .02″ over, is balanced and blueprinted. The head has been ported and polished by 3TECH out of canada. It has stainless valves and a 3TECH performance cam and 4 degree advance cam gear. It dyno’d at 72 horse power. the chasis has SSGTi sway bars front and back and SSGTi brakes front and back. Inside it has SSGTi buckets up front and an SSGTi rear seat with the built in head rests. It sports the full SSGTi body kit. It is a fun little commuter and can hold its own against most stock Honda’s untill about 70 MPH, then it runs outta pull. I have had it up to 104 MPH (GPS verified as speedometer does not go that high). I have also imported all of the necessary items from a firely turbo car to build a turbo metro. I have the multiport injected head, injectors, fuel rail, intake, throttle body, turbo charger, intercooler, piping, wiring harness, computer, and all sensors. I just need to get some Suzuki Vitara pistons (for lower compression as firefly turbo pistons are virtually impossible to find) and bore the block .04″ over to accept them. A stock firefly turbo is in the neighborhood of 80 HP, but if I turn up the boost and add piggy back fuel management, I should hit my goal of 100 HP fairly easy.
Back to the SSGTi. After I had my first metro for about a year, a friend told me about the existence of the SSGTi’s. I immediatly began looking for one. These are very rare cars, About 2 a year on average come up for sale and are immediatly snapped up before I could even call on them. I did finally get a wrecked, rusted, basket case a few years ago and was planning on a trasplant of all pertinent pieces to a doner Metro. Then last february, over 13 years after I began my search for this elusive little hot hatch, one came up on craigslist. The guy only wanted 1000 OBO. I immediately called him and I was the first caller. I told him I would leave work and be there in an hour. When I got there, I found a stock white 1989 swift GTi. A little dirty, but 100% complete, wiht a body that was 9 out of 10, and a very strong, good running engine. The interior was dirty but no holes could be found in the seats and the dash was immaculate. the only issue with the car was that it would not go into reverse. I rebuild my own metro trasmissions, and knew the problem was a stuck internal linkage rod that I could fix in 10 minutes without even pulling the trans. You just pop of the cover on top of trans, bull linkage out and slide in a good one from one the many metro transmissions I have in my garage. As i spoke with this man, he told me he couldnt believe all of the calls he had gotten. He had no idea what he was selling. I found out the car had belonged to someone who owed him money and he just wanted to sell it to get his money back. So I started playing like the transmission problem was gonna be a big deal and hemming and hawing around. he kept saying he just wanted it gone, so I offered him 750. He immediatly said sold. I should have offered 600. Oh well, I pulled the money out of a couple of cash machines, paid him and drove it home. It cleaned up really nice and I had the trans fixed the next morning. I drive it every once in a while and it is the funnest car I have ever driven. I have built 500 h.p. muscle cars and they just do not compare to this little pocket rocket. The combination of horse power, and agility makes this car worth the 13 year search. I have had many street encounters with my GTi and this little car is very capable of fighting well above its weight. Many high horspower overweight so called performance cars have fallen to the mighty little GTi. The vast majority of people have never heard of the SSGTi and assume its just a metro with a body kit. The most common comment I get is “what have you got in that thing??” . I just smile, tell them its stock, then light the tires for a block and leave them guessing.
Now that I have been blasting around in it for nearly a year, I am going to stick it in the garage and do a 100% restoration. This is one car that I will never sell. After all, it took me 13 years to get it. Attached is a picture on my GTi. trhanks again for the nice article.
I had no idea so many people are as impressed with this little car as I was. I traded my heavily thrashed mud racer/street driven ’79 Ford Bronco straight up for a friends black ’89 Suzuki Swift GTi back in 1993. Identical to the junk yard car pictured except mine had the i after the GT and was in great shape (at the time). I made a few changes in the 6 years I had it. While at a Suzuki dealer looking for performance parts, the guy behind the counter asked if I was interested in A/C for my car. A previous customer ordered but didn’t pick up a factory A/C conversion in a box. I did. Some 4 cylinder cars fall flat on their face with the A/C on, not this one! Smoke tinted window vent shades (available back then) were installed along with window tint. Yes the weird shifter handle got replaced with a hurst tee handle.
A aftermarket electronic cruise control was wired in followed by a Alpine stereo with a 10″ sub in a box in the area previously occupied by the spare.
Larger front and rear sway bars with polyurethane bushings were sourced from a popular mail order store in Chicago.
I knew the car had the power to tow but no one made a hitch for it. I found a universal class 2 hitch and proceeded to design a custom mount wrapping around the whole back of the car sandwiching the reinforced unibody points using more than 20 5/16 bolts to spread the load (it was over engineered). The receiver hole was inside the ground effects (air vent), flush to the recessed surface. You had to be looking for it to see it.
I wanted to put air bags inside the rear coil springs but the inside diameter tapered from small on one end to larger at the other. A little research showed that Ford Escort wagon springs would fit after modifying the spring perch in the control arm and Airlift listed a air bag that fit.
With the wide summer tires and alloys swapped out for winter tires on steel rims I’ve moved a friends band equipment in a open top dual axle trailer large enough to fit the Suzuki into on winter roads. That car could tow a Artic Cat ext 600 like it wasn’t even there on a small 4′ x 8′ trailer. The car and the sled both had 100 hp engines as I remember.
My other (car) for a portion of the time was a black Suburban (2wd, not by choice). It was quite the contrast going from driving one of the largest light trucks to one of the smallest cars. Made the Suzuki feel even more like a go cart.
I’m so happy to see enthusiasts all over the world still appreciating the pocket rocket. I’m 48 and still drive the car of my twenties. I had 2 lexus is200, and a toyota pickup too, but when I sit in the gti I still feel at home. Nowadays italian laws are making the property of old cars more expansive, but I will do all I can to hold it. It’s simply the greatest enimy of mechanics. No issue with it in 20 years! I also get a 4wd and it’s in stunning conds!
What a beautifull car! Do you still own it?
Suzuki Swifts (too me) are nice cars. The base (3 cylinder) is a Suzuki G10A engine. The sake one my car has. It’s a 1989 Chevrolet Sprint. I found it parked behind the firehall (to be practiced on with tools) and my Dad was the Fire Chief, so he let me have it. Sadly, the previous owner still has the keys, so the only thing I can do is sit in it, turn in the hazards, brake lights and low beams. (Don’t know why, but they work) I used to he Ave I honk the horn, but that stopped working. Even though I haven’t even driven it, and I can pretty much do nothing with it, I tbink it’s a great car and I love it.
I had a black 1991 Suzuki GT great car baught it in 1999 when I was 17. Drove it with my wife and 4 kids in 2006 from South Carolina to Texas and back with not one issue.
That sounds pretty nice. I really want to get mine up and running again, but my family says I should get a car that runs for sure. I’d rather have my Sprint
I used to wash cars at a dealership when I was in high school in ’89. Wow, almost 30 yrs later and for some reason that car just crossed my mind. I decided to look for it on Google and found this article. I would take this car for a spin whenever I could while at work. So much so that I eventually got in trouble. I do own a Cooper S today. They both have a similar fun, throwaround feel. Thanks for the write up.
Thanks for the information.
I have a very similar challenge with my 89 Suzuki Swift GTi.
Try to start it and it “CLICKS”…Roll the car in reverse, dump the clutch to turn the crankshaft position and fires up every time. The click is not constant..but this is my workaround.
Can you share what you did to your..put a switch in the starter circuit?
Hi im looking for a swift gti 1.3 crankshaft turbo