RE: Suzuki Swift Sport vs. Ford Fiesta Ecoboost
Discussion
Purely on looks I would have the Fiesta. Certainly on the outside it just works (IMO). For me the key difference with these two models is the engine. I've driven these three cylinder engines and they all have the same issue. The engine lets the package down. You need to rev the nuts off the engine around town or to make progress. The other issue is the significant number of failures of the three cylinder engines. Overall, I'd have to take the Suzuki.
By all accounts the Fiesta, in all of its forms, is a very good car, many say by far the best in its class. But there's something about it that just doesn't click with me. Maybe it's that every other car on the road seems to be a Fiesta which, rightly or wrongly, does matter to me when buying a car.
And that's not me being snobby or anything. If that was the case I would have just bought a fancy A-Class or something and not a Swift Sport. Which says a lot in my case as I've been umming and arring for about 18 months about what car to buy after never really bonding with my current car. Out of all the cars I considered, I only ever took the time to go and view/test an FN2 CTR, Megane 250, 208 GTi and the Swift. I chose the slowest, cheapest and least fancy of the bunch.
And that's not me being snobby or anything. If that was the case I would have just bought a fancy A-Class or something and not a Swift Sport. Which says a lot in my case as I've been umming and arring for about 18 months about what car to buy after never really bonding with my current car. Out of all the cars I considered, I only ever took the time to go and view/test an FN2 CTR, Megane 250, 208 GTi and the Swift. I chose the slowest, cheapest and least fancy of the bunch.
Cotic said:
s m said:
Mazda will sell you a Mazda 2 Sport with basically the same stats as that quoted by Suzuki for the Swift. Much the same equipment, mpg and performance.
In my experience of the Mazda 2 it doesn't handle as well as the other two - fairly numb steering.I haven't experienced a 'Sport' version though - only the mumsy ones. But then the bovril Swift and Fiesta are entertaining...
Close enough that it would make a good comparison with a last of the line Swift Sport though. Same weight, same claimed performance, an engine that likes to be revved.
Mazda seem to know a thing or two about handling according to many on here as well
s m said:
Mazda will sell you a Mazda 2 Sport with basically the same stats as that quoted by Suzuki for the Swift. Much the same equipment, mpg and performance.
The most powerful Mazda 2 I can find on the Mazda website is 115ps, do they do something a bit closer to the 138ps (136bhp) of the Swift?kellydk said:
Purely on looks I would have the Fiesta. Certainly on the outside it just works (IMO). For me the key difference with these two models is the engine. I've driven these three cylinder engines and they all have the same issue. The engine lets the package down. You need to rev the nuts off the engine around town or to make progress. The other issue is the significant number of failures of the three cylinder engines. Overall, I'd have to take the Suzuki.
2 common misconceptions with the ecoboost in your post. Max torque is available from 1400rpm. They don't need revving to get anywhere.
I'm not aware of any engine failures. Failures of coolant hoses on early iterations yes, not of engines.
lee_erm said:
kellydk said:
Purely on looks I would have the Fiesta. Certainly on the outside it just works (IMO). For me the key difference with these two models is the engine. I've driven these three cylinder engines and they all have the same issue. The engine lets the package down. You need to rev the nuts off the engine around town or to make progress. The other issue is the significant number of failures of the three cylinder engines. Overall, I'd have to take the Suzuki.
2 common misconceptions with the ecoboost in your post. Max torque is available from 1400rpm. They don't need revving to get anywhere.
I'm not aware of any engine failures. Failures of coolant hoses on early iterations yes, not of engines.
Mr2Mike said:
s m said:
Mazda will sell you a Mazda 2 Sport with basically the same stats as that quoted by Suzuki for the Swift. Much the same equipment, mpg and performance.
The most powerful Mazda 2 I can find on the Mazda website is 115ps, do they do something a bit closer to the 138ps (136bhp) of the Swift?Be a good test as Autocar reckoned it felt as least as fast as the claims....regardless of the figures
An A1 with 122bhp and more weight is pretty much as fast as the Swift from tests
s m said:
Look at the claimed performance figures for both. Practically the same.... I think the Mazda is a smidge faster all out.
Claimed figures are pretty much identical, though the Mazda claims lower CO2 and better mileage. However the RRP for the 115ps Mazda Sport Nav is £16095, so there would need to be some pretty hefty discounts to get close to the Swift.Mr2Mike said:
s m said:
Look at the claimed performance figures for both. Practically the same.... I think the Mazda is a smidge faster all out.
Claimed figures are pretty much identical, though the Mazda claims lower CO2 and better mileage. However the RRP for the 115ps Mazda Sport Nav is £16095, so there would need to be some pretty hefty discounts to get close to the Swift.Having said that, there's hardly a plethora of n/a warm hatches with the same performance etc so I'd say you have to make a bit of allowance on price.
More the point is that I think it would have made a good comparison to put the 2 cars against each other - both similar size 6-speeders with n/a engines that need to be revved to release the performance. Both great handling. Both do a touch over 120, offer 40mpg, both get to 62 in 8.7
Don't know how much closer you can get really
If performance was really a differentiator, then it would be easier to get a bit more power from the turbo.
A nice light car with modest power can be quite a good drive. Look at the MX5.
I cant help but think, in this contest, the Ford gets the win. Not because its dynamically the best (it isn't). But because in the real world, it can be had for less cost through PCP, which a lot of people do these days, and because for me at least, it has more potential to easily get it to a higher level through cheap, simple, cost effective mods.
I wouldn't buy either, mind you, but just saying out of these two, I think the Ford is better long term bet.
A nice light car with modest power can be quite a good drive. Look at the MX5.
I cant help but think, in this contest, the Ford gets the win. Not because its dynamically the best (it isn't). But because in the real world, it can be had for less cost through PCP, which a lot of people do these days, and because for me at least, it has more potential to easily get it to a higher level through cheap, simple, cost effective mods.
I wouldn't buy either, mind you, but just saying out of these two, I think the Ford is better long term bet.
big_rob_sydney said:
If performance was really a differentiator, then it would be easier to get a bit more power from the turbo.
A nice light car with modest power can be quite a good drive. Look at the MX5.
I cant help but think, in this contest, the Ford gets the win. Not because its dynamically the best (it isn't). But because in the real world, it can be had for less cost through PCP, which a lot of people do these days, and because for me at least, it has more potential to easily get it to a higher level through cheap, simple, cost effective mods.
I wouldn't buy either, mind you, but just saying out of these two, I think the Ford is better long term bet.
I agree with you here, you can mod the Ford to be more than the sum of it's parts.A nice light car with modest power can be quite a good drive. Look at the MX5.
I cant help but think, in this contest, the Ford gets the win. Not because its dynamically the best (it isn't). But because in the real world, it can be had for less cost through PCP, which a lot of people do these days, and because for me at least, it has more potential to easily get it to a higher level through cheap, simple, cost effective mods.
I wouldn't buy either, mind you, but just saying out of these two, I think the Ford is better long term bet.
However the new Suzuki Swift can be got with , guess what, a 3 cylinder turbo engine, and weighs very little. If Suzuki do the sport version right then they will be ahead of the pack again. First driving reviews are pretty complimentary for the standard model.
Looking forward to the reviews.
I enjoyed reading this head to head also, good topic Matt.
I have a fiesta 140 stline & my OH has a 13 swift sport. Both cars are good but very different. My fiesta has tq and power restrictions in first and secind gear so in town the swift is much quicker and more useable. 60 mph + though the fiesta is much quicker and will accelerate pretty quickly on the motorway even in 5th. The swift is a lot louder when going down a b road which I personally prefer but probably slightly less refined overall.
Just my 2 cents
Just my 2 cents
DanQyou said:
I have a fiesta 140 stline & my OH has a 13 swift sport. Both cars are good but very different. My fiesta has tq and power restrictions in first and secind gear so in town the swift is much quicker and more useable. 60 mph + though the fiesta is much quicker and will accelerate pretty quickly on the motorway even in 5th. The swift is a lot louder when going down a b road which I personally prefer but probably slightly less refined overall.
Just my 2 cents
I have the st, which also has restrictions in first and second gear, its really annoying, my friends old shape swift sport feels just as nippy up to 40mph ishJust my 2 cents
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff