What's Veeky Forums opinion about the new Suzuki Swift?

You forgot
>has no trunk space because of this
>has a 90hp 0.9l engine
>the only advantage is a small turning radius

what is it with the nips and jags?

it crassy as fuk
fuk u round eye

my gf drives a 2006 swift. It's a brilliant econobox for what it is. Mom drives 2013 swift sport, that thing is probably one of the purest simple fun cars I ever driven. As their car philosphy goes, I think they'll refine it further and will give a 1.4 turbo from my vitara s to sport. It will probably be the fucking bomb.

Suzuki is a small company with measly range and it just cant afford to drop the ball with any of their models. I do enjoy their simple pure approach

ayy lmao

The Swift existed first.

It doesn't exist at all in the US market.

Veloster wins again.

Suzuki sucks on all levels.

Who cares about them though

>suzuki
>literally the greatest of all time motorcycle manufacturer
>legendary 1.3L i4 busa engine that destroyed the competition for 10+ years straight
>can't make a single fucking decent car

pigfat trash

the top engine available in the twingo makes a tenable 150 horsepower.

Also, the previous poster forgot to mention the smart fortwo which is also RWD, but that's essentially the same platform as the current generation twingo.

I've taken a look at one firsthand and it has enough trunk space to carry a week's worth of groceries for a 2 people household so I don't know what your deal is, all shitboxes in that class have the same issues.

My biggest complaint however would be the lack of headroom. Other subcompacts are already bad in thus regard, but the twingo was an exercise in masochism. At 194cm (6ft3 for the amerifriends) my head shirked against the ceiling every time I pushed on the brakes, needlessly accelerating my hair loss.

That's it, don't forget to rate and subscribe! :^)

>All these faggots talking shit about Suzuki cars

Protip: they're pretty damn awesome for econoboxes.

They aren't. A lot of them sound cool on paper (for example, they make some decently interesting stick hatchback that is AWD) but the fuel economy is complete shit. their cars are just very out of place in the American market

>American market
>Fuel economy

Oxymorons and paradoxes everywhere

the point is that they have no redeeming feature. there are competing cars with the same specs and have better fuel economy. there is no reason to get the suzuki

That's fine, I'm just happy that the SX4 exists so I can get cheap AWD vehicles that are simple and reliable with plenty of cargo room for my mountain bikes.

the last twingo has 110hp max dude
the only available engine is the 0.9L

Suzukis are the cheapest and also the ones with better total cost of ownership cars in their segments ... only thing it's that they're not as fast, modern or prettier than their counterparts on the same price segments, but they kick ass on fuel economy, reliability and maintenance costs.

>being this retarded

but vitara s for example looks and drives way better than cx3, juke, 2008, hrv etc. And it is cheaper considering it's a top spec model

>no redeeming features
research, burger, research

Is that the new Swift?

I want to like it, Immediate impressions tell me that its gonna suck. It'll probably be 1.3-2.0l with a turbo, and it'll probably have a r spec type rs version that isn't quick just lile the sentra nismo or civic si or gti. God I fucking hate small cars, if automakers want to utilize turbos so badly they should atleast make some 6cylinder turbos

They are more known for their motorcycles

Are Suzuki and Mazda the only good japcrap left?

Hey I've got a 2016 Suzuki Swift 1.2 and it is a nice car. Sure, it is not roomy and you will never fit a family in there, but is quite agile for the city and it has nice aesthetics.
I couldn't afford the sport Japanese one, with the 1.3 with like 130hp. But I like it... They could awd it, or at least turbo it to keep the low displacement.
Maybe it's because I live in a 3rd world shithole but I like it.

Have you ever heard of the KP61 my dude?

the new 1.4 turbo of suzukis own design is exeptional. In real life it propels the relatively roomy and boxy vitara like a decent warm hatchback. I believe the swift will recieve this type of engine and will be fast as fuck.

Have you heard of the year 2016?

that looks funky

Suzuki make the lightest soft roader/compact SUV out of all them,1075 kg for the 2wd model and 1200 kg for the turbo 4wd.

The TURBO 4wd compact SUV vitara is lighter than a normal Mazda 3.

If 8l/100km isn't good enough for you maybe you should take the bus... They're low compression torquey engines driving a AWD system, what do you expect? Subaru's are just as bad.

>their cars are just very out of place in the American market

I don't know. There's still a lot of them left in Canada, Especially the Vitara's/trackers, they sold pretty well. I still see more old Suzuki's than old Nissan's and Mazda's combined.

based. And still there are anons who are desperatly trying to tell cool stories about how suzuki doesnt know how to into cars.

>6.6L / 100 km
>0-100 in 8.4 (not bad for a family car SUV thing)

carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/2016-suzuki-vitara-s-turbo-review-first-drive-40823

Why are people deliberately lying to make a car that doesn't affect them seem worse than it is?

Is this a joke?

woah slow down you dumb nigger

Did you just say they have bad fuel economy?

>it would be cool if it was RWD but it's no
>M-muh RWD

Fuck off retard.

It'll probably be a great cheap econobox but I'll be sad if it's not as adorably happy as the current one.

Badgewhoring and ignorance. Suzuki doesn't deserve the pleb hate. But then again, plebs gonna pleb.

No, a Veloster.

Same thing.

Not really.

>Subaru's are just as bad.

Nah, Subarus are worse... in more ways than one.

Taylor Swift should write a song about it.

Kek so stupid

What is that, I want one

wait.....holy fuck

Is that why Veeky Forums has a giant obsession with the twingo?? Because its an absolute madman shitbox that's rwd and rear engine?

Everything is making sense now

Let me explain this groundbreaking feature.

no, it's because the car is as cheap as a car can get to buy and run, is incredibly roomy for such a tiny car and it seems to smile which is really rare nowadays.

it just keeps getting posted because its "face" is always pure reaction image material

>wait.....holy fuck
>Is that why Veeky Forums has a giant obsession with the twingo?? Because its an absolute madman shitbox that's rwd and rear engine?
>Everything is making sense now

Veeky Forums is obsessed with the old Twingo which is front engine, FWD and has plenty of storage space.

>its "face" is always pure reaction image material

i had a suzuki swift sport as a courtesy car. I think it was a 2009 model or something.
It was a really nice little car.
Very fun.

Last one was a bit more cute imo.

>all these fags that have never driven a 1.6 five speed go kart

suzuki is best nipponese

Baleno/Esteem

Veeky Forums loves the old Twingo, that one is top tier. The post you quoted is talking about the new one.

Fuck yeah, that looks sweet. It's sold in my country and I couldn't be more hyped

I really like the Ignis and am considering buying one.

I really wish we got the Jap alto as well, and not the Indian Maruti Alto/A-star/Celerio.

>actually owns a Suzuki Alto (Maruti A-star kind)
>Cheap econobox
>Good build and fun to drive for absurdly cheap cost
>800kg

The only downside I've noticed with Suzuki's has been their carpets. If you don't have mats you are going to have no carpet left after a year or two.

Oh and the Alto's paint and panel durability...
>look at car, paint scratches
>sneeze, panel dents
>drive faster than 60mph, paint evaporates
>drive in rain, rain droplets reshape panels

>New Ignis with 1.4 boosterjet for dem 5 second 0-60mpr sprint
Come on Suzuki, you know it's worth it

To be fair, Americans have been saying that long before Suzuki actually pulled out of the U.S. market, because their advertising campaign was so awful.