Suzuki Swift review - MPG, CO2 and Running Costs
The Suzuki Swift should be cheap to run, thanks to strong fuel efficiency from both of its engines, but key rivals will hold their value better
There’s no denying that the Suzuki Swift’s lightweight construction helps both of its core engines to achieve some strong fuel economy figures. Go for the most basic unit of all, the 1.2-litre Dualjet, and you’re buying a car with CO2 emissions of just 106g/km and official fuel economy of 55.4mpg. At the other end of the scale, the 138bhp Swift Sport returns 47.1mpg and emits 125g/km of CO2 – excellent numbers, considering the performance.
They’re figures that stack up in the real world, too: our long-term Swift Sport returned low-fourties mpg over the course of our nine-month run. The turbocharged 1.0-litre three-cylinder Boosterjet should be able to get similarly close to its official numbers - which are almost as impressive, at 51.4mpg and 110g/km. Add the SHVS hybrid system, and the Boosterjet manages 98g/km and marginally better fuel economy of 51.8mpg. While the six-speed auto takes the strain out of driving, you pay a penalty at the pumps. The Boosterjet only manages emissions of 121g/km with it fitted, while fuel economy is 46.9mpg.
The Suzuki Swift 4x4 uses the 1.2 Dualjet engine with SHVS, and courtesy of its part-time 4WD system manages an impressive 101g/km emissions (better than the standard Dualjet), while economy is 49.7mpg.
Ratings for the Suzuki Swift are surprisingly high. The 1.2 SZ3 starts in Group 22, while the SZ-T is in Group 25 and the SZ5 is in 27. Even higher is the Swift Sport in Group 35. Go for an SHVS hybrid-equipped model, and insurance groups jump to 23 and 27 for the 1.2 and the 1.0 Boosterjet.
In comparison, the pricier VW Polo only goes up to Group 26 for the Polo GTI, while the standard Ford Fiesta range sits in groups 2-15 (even the attractive-to-thieves Fiesta ST is only in Group 29).
The only explanation for these ratings must be the relatively small number of Suzuki dealers and repairers, as well as the hassle of sourcing parts for the Swift from Japan if you have an accident.
Our experts predict the Suzuki Swift range will retain 37-43 per cent of its value after 3 years. The best performer is the SZ-T, while the Swift Sport retains around 38 per cent of its value. Those figures are similar to those achieved by the Ford Fiesta, although the Fiesta ST is a slightly better performer than the Swift Sport.
In this review
- 1Suzuki Swift reviewThe Suzuki Swift offers a decent drive and reasonable practicality, although rivals are more refined
- 2Engines, performance and driveHandling is deft, the turbo petrol is strong and the steering is nicely weighted, but the ride is unsettled and refinement is so-so
- 3MPG, CO2 and Running Costs - currently readingThe Suzuki Swift should be cheap to run, thanks to strong fuel efficiency from both of its engines, but key rivals will hold their value better
- 4Interior, design and technologyBuild quality feels good, but the finish of even higher-spec cars is durable rather than plush
- 5Practicality, comfort and boot spaceRear space is fine if you’re under 6ft tall; the boot is a decent size, but there’s a big lip to load items over, and the rear seats leave a big step in the floor when they’re folded down
- 6Reliability and SafetyThree-year, 60,000-mile warranty is just above average, customers are pretty happy with Suzuki’s reliability and there’s plenty of safety kit as standard