RE: Suzuki Swift Sport: Driven

[V88Dicky]

I think I'll stick with a late model Mk2 as my next daily driver. There's plenty of nearly new ones with a couple of years manufacturer's warranty remaining coming in at well under £10k.

[M1C]

Fastdruid said:

Joey Deacon said:

8.1 to sixty, I thought this was supposed to be in the low 7's?

Is it maybe a typo? The 0-60 calculator gives an estimate of 7-7.2s (depends on if 0-60mph or 0-100kph) for that power and weight.

On the 'Swift Swift' thread i created, i put a link to an aussie test where they recorded 0-100 in 7.39s for the manual and 7.01s for the auto, so much closer to what the calculator says.

I think Suzuki have been a little bit conservative, as are many manufacturers.

[culpz]

Mackofthejungle said:

It's not competing with the ST really is it? It's competing with the standard zetec Fiesta's, which are very fine cars with far more interesting engines than this.

Agreed.

However, the comparison is not really about the car itself, but more of it's pricing. There's also the fact that Ford will basically give away the new Fiesta on cheap lease/pcp deals no doubt, whereas i'm yet to see this being the case for this new Swift.

The car itself looks pretty good. The weight saving is impressive and the standard spec is amazing, but Suzuki needs to give incentives to get them out there from new. If they do, in fact, do just that, then great. However, sadly, i'm not sure that'll be the case.

[TheFinners]

On what planet is a 5500rpm power peak and 6000rpm soft rev limiter 'very un-turbo like'!?

[JLC25]

16/66 Plate MK2s now under 10k - Is this 8k better?

Used MK1s getting silly cheap for higher mileage.

Both are probably a more grin inducing steer than this. I think the Turbo has taken away the charm. Not Suzuki's fault really, but still a shame.

[s m]

jzakariya said:

I have no quibbles with the looks. But an 8.1s run to 60 isn't really hot, is it?

I'd wait for a proper timed road test of a UK model

Aussies managed quite a bit faster as an interim aside- low 7s

[BricktopST205]

Has anyone specced an UP! GTi to the swift sport levels of kit? It's a shame when a motor company is honest and packs its car full of kit as standard! Yet all people see is the book price.

[Otispunkmeyer]

I like it

I'll pick one up in a year I suspect. Perfect car for me to be honest. I have a 30 miles each way commute mostly cross country on A/B roads. But I do have the flexibility of taking about 4-5 different routes... e.g. I can go nearly all A and M-way if I want or if its a st show, go completely without touching a main road. So a car that is good on the small stuff but can deal with a motorway schlep is ideal.

To add, you can't really go all that fast anywhere on any of the routes. If its not for traffic its because the road and conditions simply do not permit it unless you want to visit a hedge/tree very fast. So 8 second 0-60 is fine.

My Abarth is too hardcore for the job really and my Mazda 3 is a little on the large side for the smaller roads. That said, its actually about the sweet spot; 120 hp, 9-10 seconds to 60, big 60 profile tyres, independent suspension all round and perhaps one of the best pedal-steering-gearbox setups you can have in a family car today. Though it does limit your overtaking ability to be honest.

If the Swift can be like the Mazda but smaller and a bit faster for the overtaking opportunities then it would be perfect.

[andrewparker]

BricktopST205 said:

Has anyone specced an UP! GTi to the swift sport levels of kit? It's a shame when a motor company is honest and packs its car full of kit as standard! Yet all people see is the book price.

It looks like there are quite a few standard fit items that you just can’t spec on an up! Things like adaptive cruise, lane departure etc. though I’d argue that it’s debatable as to whether these things have any real worth on a city car. The up! options list is fairly limited.

[TameRacingDriver]

Esceptico said:

The USP of the previous model was its NA engine - last of its kind. Can't help but feel that this new model will struggle even more to win sales from VW and Ford.

The RS3 is not really a hot hatch as they were known and loved in the 80s and 90s. Far too fast, too complex and too expensive. Ignoring the insurance (which unfortunately at the time you couldn't) a great hot hatch like the 205 GTi was more expensive than a cooking (and really boring) 205 but the price was still affordable for younger drivers.

Have to agree.

I find 99% of modern machines just completely forgettable now, even though they might be technically good, well engineered machines. They are all ridiculously expensive, complex, and just not even that much fun.

I couldn't afford to replace my MR2 at the minute even if I wanted to, but even if I could, I wouldn't bother.

[mooseracer]

BricktopST205 said:

Has anyone specced an UP! GTi to the swift sport levels of kit? It's a shame when a motor company is honest and packs its car full of kit as standard! Yet all people see is the book price.

Or a shame you can't buy one for less without all the stuff you don't want or need

[Loyly]

It's a shame to hear that this one seems to have just fallen short of the mark. The first generation Suzuki Swift Sport was a really good car. I loved the zingy, responsive engine and sharp handling. It wasn't fast but it was fun to wring out. No doubt this new Suzuki Swift Sport will be a great little car, no doubt better than that camp little Up! GTi, but that girly city car isn't the benchmark, the new Fiesta ST will take that position. I expect the new Fiesta will be pretty characterful too, as triples tend to be.

[stevensdrs]

The list price is irrelevant really as nobody will pay that. Most are going to be leased or PCP deals and if it comes out at an attractive monthly price then it well sell okay. I don't like the look of it though and the wheels are awful.

[Slushbox]

Suzuki UK haven't announced pricing yet, but they have just knocked £2000 off the Baleno models.

I've driven the 1.4 turbo in the Vitara, and also the 998cc BoosterJet Turbo in my own Baleno, the torque curve feels fairly linear without the all-or-nothing kangaroo-ing you sometimes get in other marques. Feels refined, but is very willing over 3000 rpm.

Also like the cockpit and nav-unit in the current 2017/2018 models. Nav has Android Auto and Apple Car-Pray and is nice to use.

[JLC25]

stevensdrs said:

The list price is irrelevant really as nobody will pay that. Most are going to be leased or PCP deals and if it comes out at an attractive monthly price then it well sell okay. I don't like the look of it though and the wheels are awful.

£249 P/m with no deposit.

[Ron99]

Otispunkmeyer said:

I like it

I'll pick one up in a year I suspect. Perfect car for me to be honest. I have a 30 miles each way commute mostly cross country on A/B roads. But I do have the flexibility of taking about 4-5 different routes... e.g. I can go nearly all A and M-way if I want or if its a st show, go completely without touching a main road. So a car that is good on the small stuff but can deal with a motorway schlep is ideal.

To add, you can't really go all that fast anywhere on any of the routes. If its not for traffic its because the road and conditions simply do not permit it unless you want to visit a hedge/tree very fast. So 8 second 0-60 is fine.

My Abarth is too hardcore for the job really and my Mazda 3 is a little on the large side for the smaller roads. That said, its actually about the sweet spot; 120 hp, 9-10 seconds to 60, big 60 profile tyres, independent suspension all round and perhaps one of the best pedal-steering-gearbox setups you can have in a family car today. Though it does limit your overtaking ability to be honest.

If the Swift can be like the Mazda but smaller and a bit faster for the overtaking opportunities then it would be perfect.

By the start of spring a few weeks ago the minor roads were in such a poor state that I was preparing to let my early-2016 SSS go because it felt like just a matter of time before a large unseen/water-filled/unavoidable pothole destroyed one or more wheels.

Fortunately in recent weeks repair works have started but I always feel stuck between keeping tyre pressures low enough to maintain handling while keeping enough air in them for only 8.5cm of sidewall coupled with firm springs to prevent pothole hits thumping the rim.

[culpz]

JLC25 said:

£249 P/m with no deposit.

Is that for a standard Swift,, i'm guessing?

[Jon_S_Rally]

Why on earth does the engine need to be "un-turbo-like"? A free-revving NA motor is fun, but what is wrong with a turbocharged one? It simply isn't possible for a turbo engine to feel like a proper NA one, so why do we obsess over trying to make it happen? Gone is the anticipation as the turbo spools, the "oh st" as it fires you down the road at full boost, followed by the huffing and puffing as you come off the throttle. We've just ended up in this weird middle ground, where most modern turbo motors feel flat, with good mid range and the personality of an empty carrier bag.

Anyway, rant over. This is one fugly car in my view. As others have said, the Lupo looks great value (not to mention 1000x more attractive), while the Fiesta ST will be faster/nicer/cheaper once the lease/PCP deals appear.

Can't see why anyone would choose one of these. Even in its niche, I'd have a Fiesta ST-Line instead. I would just feel a prat being seen in something that looks like this.

[macky17]

Master Bean said:

mrbarnett said:

Is peak power at 5500rpm so very un-turbo like? The only blown car I've ever owned was a light-pressure 2.3 litre Saab lump and that's just about exactly where its peak power was found.

Indeedy. My Saab is all done by 5500. I expected peak power at 6500 for some revvy action.

Yeah I was going to say, I think virtually every petrol turbo I’ve ever owned made peak power around 5500 rpm...

[the_hood]

kainedog said:

It’s horrific looking from every angle , surely that will put potential buyers off.

+1