Suzuki Swift

Debut: 2017
Maker: Suzuki
Predecessor: Swift (2010)

 Published on 6 Apr 2017
All rights reserved. 

Its evolutionary styling approach is so subtle that even Volkswagen might struggle to match...

In the past 12 years or so, European superminis got more and more oriented to comfort, refinement, quality, safety and low emission, but unfortunately also made themselves larger, heavier and more boring to drive in the process. One car worked against this trend: Suzuki Swift. If you compare the 2005, 2010 and 2017 models, you will find them remarkably close to each other. Its evolutionary styling approach is so subtle that even Volkswagen might struggle to match. Its size grew a little from 2005 to 2010, but then the latest generation stays almost unchanged. If you put them on scale, you will even find the latest car undercuts its predecessors by some margin. Time fails to leave any signs on the face of Swift.

That makes the Swift an oddball in the European market though. Measuring 3.840mm long, 1735mm wide and 1495mm tall, it is considerably smaller than the norm of European B-segment superminis, which has exceeded 4 meters in length long ago. However, if you judge the car solely on size, you will be very wrong. Enter the cabin and you will find the Swift actually quite accommodative – not as spacious as a Skoda Fabia, of course, but it will sit a quartet of 6ft tall guys with enough knee and headroom. Compared with the last generation, its wheelbase stretch from 2430 to 2450mm helps in this respect, but miraculously, boot space has increased from 211 to 265 liters simultaneously, even though the rear overhang gets shorter!

Small outside, big inside. How can Suzuki manage that?

Yes, the cabin looks Spartan compared with its European rivals. The Swift has always been modest on material quality or switch tactility, because it is not designed purely for European customers. A large portion of its sales comes from developing markets like India and ASEAN countries which demand practicality rather than frills. This explains why it is built in India and Thailand beside Japan and Hungary – each supplies the nearby region. However, while its cabin lacks showroom appeal, it works just as fine in practice. Fit and finish of the assembly is as good as any Japanese standards. The driver seat is supportive and pretty comfortable, unlike the cheap seats that you would find in Proton or Tata. Moreover, it is mounted low enough to give you a sporty driving position. The steering, gearshift and clutch are nicely weighted. It is very well equipped for the prices it asks, too, although the infotainment system is rather cheap. If you ask what can be improved, that would be more in-cabin storage spaces and some warmer or more colourful trims instead of the dark theme. That said, the Swift does not intend to be a Mini Cooper.

Compared with the last generation, the latest Swift has its exterior design made more organic. The nose looks sleeker and more pronounced, the fenders get more muscular while the tail looks more protrudent. The rear door handles are “hidden” at the C-pillars as in Renault Clio (or so many other cars these days), and the roof is made semi-floating by a inserting a blackened portion at the C-pillar. Overall, it is a funky and characterful design, though I still prefer the simpler and purer lines of the old car.

The base Swift weighs only 840 kilograms, 135 less than VW Polo.

The latest European superminis are enjoying weight saving thanks to the discovery of high-strength steel, but that happens after they have already gained 100 or 150 kg in the last decade. This means, they have yet to return to the kerb weight of their predecessors 2 generations ago. Unlike them, Suzuki is really the expert of weight saving. The base Swift weighs only 840 kilograms, 120 kg lighter than the last generation and 150 kg less than the 2005 model. Its rivals? The base VW Polo tips the scale at 975 kg, ditto Peugeot 208. Most other rivals are heavier still. How can Suzuki achieve that? Part of the answer lies on the “Heartect” platform it shares with Balano and Ignis. Heartect saves weight not only by using more high-strength steel but also resorts to curvy longitudinal members and reduction of connecting points.

Admittedly, another reason is the company’s focus on weight reduction over refinement. The Swift is not uncomfortable to travel along, but it is not as quiet as most other European superminis, blame to the thinner insulation materials and less structural steel and adhesives it used. On highway, it lets more wind and tire noises to be heard in the cabin. On broken surfaces, its suspension does not filter the bumps and irregularities as well as many rivals, although its damping deals with smoother undulations with ease.

On the flipside, its chassis keeps the sporty spirit of its predecessors. Instead of the safe understeer that most of its rivals prefer, it is tuned for agility. It feels lively and responsive to steer from the straight ahead. The steering is light, quick but accurate. Body roll is kept well checked in corners, where the car grips and balances nicely. Don’t expect its alert steering to promote highway stability, but this car will be fun to drive on back roads, which is superminis all about. It should give the forthcoming Swift Sport a solid starting point. Ford Fiesta still has the best handling, but the Suzuki is not far off.

Thankfully, poor drivers can still find some fun in motoring.

With less weight to haul, the Swift can carry over the old car’s 1.2 Dualjet engine without any problems. Although it might lack modern technologies – the only notable mention is dual injectors for the port injection, we have no complaints to its sweet revving manner or its 91hp output, which is good enough to register 112 mph and 0-60 in 11 seconds. However, if you want higher performance and a more relaxing driving manner, the Baleno’s 1.0 Boosterjet 3-cylinder direct injection turbo will be a good answer, as it supplies 110 horsepower and 125 lbft of mid-range torque. Like Ford’s 1.0 Ecoboost engine, it uses unbalanced crankshaft and flywheel in combination with a better engine mount to absorb the inherent vibration of 3-cylinder motor, so there is not much to complain about refinement. It’s neither as strong nor as quiet as Ford’s triple, but it is still a pretty good engine. Performance is quoted at 121 mph and 10 seconds to do 0-60, but it could be a conservative estimation considering its power-to-weight ratio. Both engines could be added with SHVS mild hybrid system to save fuel. It uses an ISG (integrated starter generator) and a 0.37kWh lithium battery stored under the front passenger seat to provide another 3hp and 37 lbft to relieve the burden of the engine.

Sporty, quick, fun-looking, uncomplicated and cheap to buy have always been the core values of Suzuki Swift. Thankfully, the new Swift has kept these values intact so that poor drivers can still find some fun in motoring.

Length / width / height
Valve gears
Other engine features
Max power
Max torque
Suspension layout

Suspension features
Kerb weight
Top speed
0-60 mph (sec)
0-100 mph (sec)
Swift 1.2 Dualjet
Front-engined, FWD
Steel monocoque
Mainly steel
3840 / 1735 / 1495 mm
2450 mm
1242 cc
DOHC 16 valves, VVT
91 hp
88 lbft
5-speed manual
F: strut
R: torsion-beam
840 kg
112 mph (c)
11.2 (c)
Swift 1.0 Boosterjet
Front-engined, FWD
Steel monocoque
Mainly steel
3840 / 1735 / 1495 mm
2450 mm
998 cc
DOHC 12 valves
DI, mild hybrid
110 hp
125 lbft
5-speed manual
F: strut
R: torsion-beam
875 kg
121 mph (c)
10.0 (c)

Performance tested by: -

AutoZine Rating

General models

    Copyright© 1997-2017 by Mark Wan @ AutoZine