Besides, the rear-seat cushions inside the Yaris (and the Nissan Versa, for that matter) can't be flipped up, so when you fold the seatbacks down, you wind up with an uneven cargo floor, which often prevents owners from making the most out of the available space.
Interesting economy, anemic performance
Under the hood of the 2009 Suzuki Swift+ is an evolution of the 1.6-liter, 4-cylinder engine developed by Daewoo for the original Swift+/Aveo. Its compression ratio has been increased (from 9.5:1 to 10.8:1) and, although power is up by 3 ponies, the engine lost 2 lb-ft of torque this year. Anyway, buyers will be more interested in the fact that fuel economy is improved by 9 percent.
Thus, it doesn't really matter that the engine moans when heavily prompted or that it takes 14 long seconds to send this midget of a car from 0 to 100 km/h (with the automatic transmission). Typical econobox buyers care a lot more about saving money at the pump. The Swift+ shines in this regard, with an average fuel economy of 7 liters per 100 kilometers according to Suzuki literature -- only tenths of a liter more than the segment-leading Yaris and Fit.
Real-world driving adds 10-15 percent to this number, which is based on laboratory tests. In ice-cold winter conditions (-20ºC), my tester posted a walloping 10.5 L/100 km in combined city-highway use. Come summertime, fuel economy should hover somewhere between 7.5 and 8.5 liters.
Buy one?
Is this little Asian import worth considering? Priced at about $3,000 under the base MSRP of the SX4 Hatchback, the Swift+ indeed makes sense. However, my autobox-equipped tester ($16,795) was a mere $600 cheaper than the same SX4. Who would want a tasteless puny apple when you can get a big juicy one? Let me rephrase my question: would you rather like to own a "fake" or real Suzuki?
Within the next year or two, the new generation of the Japanese Swift will have replaced the current Swift+, so my advice is: wait for that one!
photo:Philippe Champoux, Matthieu Lambert
Interesting economy, anemic performance
Under the hood of the 2009 Suzuki Swift+ is an evolution of the 1.6-liter, 4-cylinder engine developed by Daewoo for the original Swift+/Aveo. Its compression ratio has been increased (from 9.5:1 to 10.8:1) and, although power is up by 3 ponies, the engine lost 2 lb-ft of torque this year. Anyway, buyers will be more interested in the fact that fuel economy is improved by 9 percent.
 |
| The Swift+ shines with an average fuel economy of 7 liters per 100 kilometers according to Suzuki literature. |
Thus, it doesn't really matter that the engine moans when heavily prompted or that it takes 14 long seconds to send this midget of a car from 0 to 100 km/h (with the automatic transmission). Typical econobox buyers care a lot more about saving money at the pump. The Swift+ shines in this regard, with an average fuel economy of 7 liters per 100 kilometers according to Suzuki literature -- only tenths of a liter more than the segment-leading Yaris and Fit.
Real-world driving adds 10-15 percent to this number, which is based on laboratory tests. In ice-cold winter conditions (-20ºC), my tester posted a walloping 10.5 L/100 km in combined city-highway use. Come summertime, fuel economy should hover somewhere between 7.5 and 8.5 liters.
Buy one?
Is this little Asian import worth considering? Priced at about $3,000 under the base MSRP of the SX4 Hatchback, the Swift+ indeed makes sense. However, my autobox-equipped tester ($16,795) was a mere $600 cheaper than the same SX4. Who would want a tasteless puny apple when you can get a big juicy one? Let me rephrase my question: would you rather like to own a "fake" or real Suzuki?
Within the next year or two, the new generation of the Japanese Swift will have replaced the current Swift+, so my advice is: wait for that one!
photo:Philippe Champoux, Matthieu Lambert
Article Gallery