Chevrolet Spark 2013 vs Suzuki Swift 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.2 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 81 HP | 94 HP | |
| Torque: | 111 NM | 118 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
| Chevrolet Spark engine produces 13 HP less power than Suzuki Swift, whereas torque is 7 NM less than Suzuki Swift. Despite less power, Chevrolet Spark reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.1 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Swift is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Chevrolet Spark consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Chevrolet Spark could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Chevrolet Spark consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 840 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 540 km with real consumption | 700 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki Swift gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki Baleno, Suzuki Ignis | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Suzuki Swift might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.64 m | 3.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.60 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.52 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Chevrolet Spark is smaller, but slightly higher. Chevrolet Spark is 21 cm shorter than the Suzuki Swift, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Chevrolet Spark is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 170 litres | 211 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
873 litres | 528 litres | |
| Chevrolet Spark has 41 litres less trunk space than the Suzuki Swift. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Chevrolet Spark (by 345 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Chevrolet Spark is 0.4 metres less than that of the Suzuki Swift, which means Chevrolet Spark can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`360 | 1`480 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Suzuki Swift has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chevrolet Spark has serious deffects in 150 percent more cases than Suzuki Swift, so Suzuki Swift quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | no data | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Suzuki Swift has
| |