Skip to content
Suzuki models, news & reviews
4
Handling
Performance
3
Usability
Feelgood factor
Readers' rating
By Stephen Worthy
First Drives
28 September 2010 07:00
Don’t adjust your computer screens – yes, this IS the all-new 2010 Suzuki Swift. Rather than being put a through rigorous makeover, first impressions hint at the briefest of tweaks, as if Suzuki’s arty types have done a Design While-You-Wait. But experience tells us that first impressions are often wrong.
The Swift is a hugely important car for Suzuki, who now have VW to impress after the chaps from Wolfsburg bagged 20% of the Japanese company last December. There’s a lot riding on their award-winning supermini. As a result, the new 2010 Suzuki Swift has received plenty of love. Refocus for a moment and you will see a raft of improvements. Starting, as you’re about to find out, its size.
Certainly is – and by a not-insignificant amount either. The new Swift is 9cm (3.5 inches in old money) longer than its predecessor with the wheelbase extended by a further 5cm. It’s half a centimetre wider too.
We spent the time we had with the Swift looking out for old models to compare it with (not difficult, as they sold 56,000 of them in the UK between May 2005 and July 2010, or 38% of Suzuki’s overall sales here) and the 2010 Swift is notably brawnier in its proportions. And that equates to more room inside and a whole lot more on-road fun for what was already an entertaining little bundle. McPherson struts on the front and a new rear torsion beam on the rear equates to a stiffer but more compliant ride and while it’s no Swift Sport (you’ll have to wait until 2011 for the real thing), chucking it into a corner won’t have you uttering a few Hail Marys. Keep it smooth on the throttle and you’ll be rewarded by a grippy and progressive turn-in.
There are just two – yes, both all-new – engines available at launch, a 1.2 petrol and 1.3 diesel. We drove the former in fully-loaded SZ4 spec and manual form. Please don’t opt for the auto box. It’ll cost you a £1000 premium and you’ll miss out on the fun of the neat, precise five-speed manual. True, the Swift 1.2 petrol could do with a bit more punch lower down the range, but a hefty stint of motorway driving proved it can handle that with aplomb – having cruise control helps. And despite being significantly bigger than its last incarnation, CO2 emissions drop from 140g/km to 116g/km, so that’s just £30 vehicle tax in the UK.
Too right. Sat-nav aside, it’s a pretty exhaustive list and includes 16-inch alloys, Bluetooth (both for your phone and to stream music), iPod/USB port, electric windows throughout, keyless start, rear privacy glass on five-door models and cruise control. Even three years ago, such a spec on a car costing £12,245 would be unimaginable. Yes, you’re surrounded by acres of hard, black plastic, but you can almost call it classy – although that’s what a bit of added faux-aluminium trim does for a car.
The comfy but supportive seats? A cheekily-pleasing exhaust note? Minimal engine noise at high speed? Economy of 50.4mpg? Hey, we’ve covered them now. There is one ‘but’ – a boot so small, you’d struggle to get more than an wafer-thin overnight bag in it. Verdict Aside from the small boot, there’s little to moan about. It undercuts its Ford rival, the Fiesta 1.25 Zetec, by £350 and the Vauxhall Corsa SXi 1.2i by £1900, while it has bags more visual and driving appeal than its South Korean foe, the Hyundai i10.
In boxing terms, the new Swift has all the credentials to be a pound-for-pound champion. This is a gutsy little street-fighter with plenty of panache.
Add your comment
Sign in You must be signed in to submit a comment.
Suzuki Swift 1.2 SZ4 (2010) CAR review
Subject
Your comment
By submitting your comment, you agree to adhere to the CAR Magazine website Terms and Conditions
Cancel
You must be logged in to subscribe to a topic
Login or register now
robinstp says
RE: Suzuki Swift 1.2 SZ4 (2010) CAR review
Forgive my ignorance but the 1.3 (1299cc) petrol in the GTi model of 15 years ago gave out well over 100BHP so why do we go backwards with all the technology available?? Yes its all about Co2 emmissions, but surely that should not be at the expense of performance. This car being 4wd is also heavier and hence the dawdling time of 0-62 which is a serious yawn. I loved the old swift - used on the occasional asphalt rally where there were more mountains than normal (we used the old faithful rwd Starlet in most events)- because it had more power and the fwd was more efficient than the rwd Starlet. Technology? where?
04 October 2010 08:06
newfavorite says
Hooray, a new design/facelift that actually doesn't ruin the looks! This is actually quite tastefully done, kudos to the chaps at Suzuki. Now where is that Sport model??
01 October 2010 19:05
carfocus says
The service costs of the New Suzuki Swift is expected to be between £140 and £190 for the first service and around £275 to £330 for subsequent services depending on the dealer making it similar to the outgoing model. This makes the servicing costs cheaper than the Alpha Romeo Mito and the Fiat 500. If you shop around for servicing costs you are bound to get the cheapest end of the service costs stated above. All round this car will be cost effective to run with road tax around £30 per year and fuel efficiency around 50 miles per gallon. The Norfolk Motor Group quoted £14.79 for a 1 year service plan and £20.39 for a 3 year service plan, both based on 10,000 miles or 1 year whichever comes first. This car is a winner on both its green credentials and running costs.
The service costs of the New Suzuki Swift is expected to be between £140 and £190 for the first service and around £275 to £330 for subsequent services depending on the dealer making it similar to the outgoing model. This makes the servicing costs cheaper than the Alpha Romeo Mito and the Fiat 500. If you shop around for servicing costs you are bound to get the cheapest end of the service costs stated above.
All round this car will be cost effective to run with road tax around £30 per year and fuel efficiency around 50 miles per gallon. The Norfolk Motor Group quoted £14.79 for a 1 year service plan and £20.39 for a 3 year service plan, both based on 10,000 miles or 1 year whichever comes first. This car is a winner on both its green credentials and running costs.
29 September 2010 17:51
bertandnairobi says
Good use of statistics, Wittgenfrog! I approve. "It is wonderfully light and frugal, but not hugely more practical than a Panda, which is a significantly smaller ( L3538mm, W1578mm,) and much lighter (860Kg) car anyway.and costs "only" £9500...."
Good use of statistics, Wittgenfrog! I approve.
"It is wonderfully light and frugal, but not hugely more practical than a Panda, which is a significantly smaller ( L3538mm, W1578mm,) and much lighter (860Kg) car anyway.and costs "only" £9500...."
29 September 2010 09:23
kkirkou says
After the Grande Punto went all Evoed, this has been my sole favourite supermini. Glad to read they improved it and kept its character intact. But, hey, is really a similarly equiped Corsa 1900 more expensive than this in UK??? Oh, what a laugh...
28 September 2010 22:37
Upload stories, photos or videos direct to the site, or email newsdesk@carmagazine.co.uk.
Alternatively, call 01733 468 485 (+ 44 1733 468 485)
Seen a secret new car, fabulous exotic or have news we should publish? Then get in touch now.