Suzuki Swift 2006 vs Ford KA 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 92 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 116 NM | 105 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 15.4 seconds | |
|
Suzuki Swift is more dynamic to drive. Suzuki Swift engine produces 32 HP more power than Ford KA, whereas torque is 11 NM more than Ford KA. Thanks to more power Suzuki Swift reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.3 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Suzuki Swift is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Suzuki Swift consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA, which means that by driving the Suzuki Swift over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Suzuki Swift consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford KA. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 42 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 620 km in combined cycle | |
| 880 km on highway | 760 km on highway | ||
| 680 km with real consumption | 610 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: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Wagon R+, Suzuki Ignis, Suzuki Jimny | Used also on Ford Fiesta | |
| 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: | 3.70 m | 3.62 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.63 m | |
| Height: | 1.54 m | 1.37 m | |
|
Suzuki Swift is larger. Suzuki Swift is 8 cm longer than the Ford KA, 6 cm wider, while the height of Suzuki Swift is 17 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 198 litres | 186 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
562 litres | 724 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 9.4 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Suzuki Swift is 0.4 metres less than that of the Ford KA, which means Suzuki Swift can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`485 kg | 1`265 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`000 kg | 890 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 485 kg | 375 kg | |
| Suzuki Swift load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 23 procentiem more than Ford KA. Therefore, Suzuki Swift is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Suzuki Swift has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford KA has serious deffects in 170 percent more cases than Suzuki Swift, so Suzuki Swift quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Suzuki Swift has
|
Ford KA has
| |