Kia Picanto 2004 vs Suzuki Swift 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 65 HP | 92 HP | |
| Torque: | 97 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.9 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
|
Suzuki Swift is a more dynamic driving. Kia Picanto engine produces 27 HP less power than Suzuki Swift, whereas torque is 19 NM less than Suzuki Swift. Due to the lower power, Kia Picanto reaches 100 km/h speed 5.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification Kia Picanto consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift, which means that by driving the Kia Picanto over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Kia Picanto consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 500 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Suzuki Swift gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Hyundai Getz, Hyundai i10 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Wagon R+, Suzuki Ignis, Suzuki Jimny | |
| 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: | 3.50 m | 3.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.60 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Kia Picanto is smaller. Kia Picanto is 20 cm shorter than the Suzuki Swift, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Kia Picanto is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 198 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
882 litres | 562 litres | |
|
Kia Picanto has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Suzuki Swift may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Kia Picanto (by 320 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.2 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Kia Picanto is 0.2 metres less than that of the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`350 kg | 1`485 kg | |
| Net weight: | 966 kg | 1`000 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 384 kg | 485 kg | |
| Kia Picanto load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 26 procentiem less than Suzuki Swift. Therefore, Suzuki Swift is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Suzuki Swift has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Kia Picanto has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Suzuki Swift, so Suzuki Swift quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Kia Picanto has
|
Suzuki Swift has
| |