The Reno boasts a much smoother design, and if the word "Italian" crosses your mind when looking at it, give yourself a pat on the back. Penned by Italy's ItalDesign studios, the Reno's smooth shape is its best asset. Sleek headlights sweep into the body work, the fenders are nicely arched, and a strong character line runs along the top of the fender, over the doors, and to the tail. The arched wheel wells give the same 15-inch wheels a little added dimension, so they don't look as tiny here. It's one of the nicer five-door hatchbacks on the road, better than Suzuki's own Aerio and several others.

Fit and finish on these cars is good, but not class leading. Still, we couldn't find any assembly problems or anything that pointed to a slapdash effort on the part of the Korean builders. Word is that Suzuki's engineers taught Daewoo a little something about fit and finish, and the lessons seem to have taken hold. The paint was nicely sprayed, with our Forenza wagon a very pretty medium blue color. Silver is a tough color to get right, but the Reno's paint job was without blotches or other cheap-looking touches. The only quirk, and we've noticed this in all the Korean-built Suzuki models, were doors that required a strong effort to slam. We're not talking blast-door weight here, but we frequently found ourselves staring at the "door ajar" light.

Interior Features

The interiors of the Reno and Forenza LX models we've seen were virtually identical, with the only exceptions being the shape as dictated by the bodywork. The dash is trimmed in black and metallic-look plastic, and it's a harmonious and integrated design that eschews gimmickry for common sense. If you've driven any Japanese car in the past 20 years, you'll be immediately familiar with the control layout. Hard plastic is kept to a relative minimum, and the dash top, door pulls and virtually anything else you'll touch on a day-to-day basis feel as good as comparable Korean or, as the case may be, Japanese competitors.

Gauges are big and clear, with a central speedometer flanked to the left by the tachometer and the right by the fuel and temperature gauges. The stereo in both cars sounded only mediocre, but both had clear controls and were easy to figure out.

The front seats were comfortable, with adjustments for fore, aft, and height. Engine noise gets intrusive the higher you rev it, but wind and road noise is well controlled for this price point. As long as you don't expect Lexus-levels of silence, you'll be happy.

Rear-seat room is among the best in the class. On paper, the Forenza sedan offers more rear hip room, head room and leg room than the Toyota Corolla, Honda Civic, Mazda 3 and Nissan Sentra. And Reno offers more rear legroom than the Mazda 3 and Toyota Matrix. Still, this is a compact, so the back seats are tight. Although five belts are available, we recommend squeezing three people in the back only if they still want cookies and milk before naptime. Back seat roominess is mostly identical for sedan, wagon and hatchback, though the wagon offers more rear headroom than the Reno does.

Trunk space in the Forenza sedan is about average for the class, 12.4 cubic feet.

With five doors, both the Reno hatchback and Forenza Wagon lean heavily on utility to get them through the day. All Forenza and Reno models share the same 102.4-inch wheelbase, the norm for the class. But the Forenza Wagon is 10 inches longer overall, so it's able to carry more stuff. With the seats up, the Forenza Wagon can swallow more than 24 cubic feet of cargo, while the Reno manages just under 9 cubic feet, less than the sedan. Fold down the seats, however, and the Reno really opens up with 45.4 cubic feet of cargo space compared with 61 cubic feet in the wagon. Neither car's rear seats fold completely flat, but they're good enough for temporary storage. Also, the cargo covers on both cars deserve special mention for the total lack of reflection they cast on the rear window when in use.

Driving Impressions

The driving experience in the Suzuki Forenza and Reno is about what you'd expect in a value-oriented compact. The Reno and Forenza share the same platform, including suspension, engine and transmission. So we weren't surprised when all three body styles shared similar driving characteristics.

Power comes from a 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine. It's not particularly powerful nor is it particularly fuel efficient. With 16 valves, double overhead cams, direct ignition and most of the other modern engine tricks we see today, its 126 horsepower at 5600 rpm are somewhat disappointing. Torque is a bit better, at 131 lb-ft at 4000 rpm, but no matter how you slice it, this is not a very sporty engine, a fact reinforced by the unhappy noises it makes when pushed hard.

EPA-estimated fuel economy is just 22/30 mpg City/Highway (manual transmission, all models). That's distinctly sub-par for the class. On the plus side, they meet ULEV Ultra Low Emissions Vehicle requirements, meaning they're relatively clean.