2011 Suzuki Swift 1.3 DDiS diesel | Car Advice

Car Advice
  • Home
  • »  2011 Suzuki Swift 1.3 DDiS diesel

2011 Suzuki Swift 1.3 DDiS diesel

By Brett Davis |

Suzuki has announced a new diesel variant of its most popular small car, the Suzuki Swift DDiS. The new model will be introduced into European markets from June 1 this year.

The DDiS features an all-new 1.3-litre turbo-diesel four cylinder engine producing 55kW of power. It may not sound like much but the car will rival many other light diesel hatchbacks available in Europe. It also provides Suzuki with sturdy place in the market.

With an average fuel consumption rating of just 3.5L/100km (European cycle), it’s expected to be more efficient than the 1.2-litre petrol-powered equivalents. It will have an emission rating of 109gm of CO2 per kilometre, and pass Euro five standards.

Acceleration for the DDiS is rated at 12.7 seconds for the 0-100km/h dash, while its potential top speed is 166km/h.

Standard features include 16-inch alloy wheels, seven airbags, air-conditioning, USB connectivity and heated electric mirrors.


 
  • azza

    How much torque does the engine produce?

    • F1MotoGP

      190 Nm from 1750 rpm.

  • Yonny

    Yes, torque please. Also, will it be coming to Oz? I’m guessing not.

    • Sam 300TD

      190NM Apparently. (according to wiki)

  • Darcy Dunbar

    Put a small diesel like this in the SX4 AWD and you would have a top vehicle. The current one is too thirsty with a 2 litre petrol.

  • Steven

    Suzuki Australia really need to bring this in now. It would be a fantastic addition especially as it handles so well. Mini diesels sell very well so this should be a sign for them.

  • Dan

    Sounds great

  • Phil

    It sure looks a lot better than the upcoming “skyactiv” engine for the Mazda 2.

    • what phil

      while one is petrol the other is diesel … apples oranges?

      • Phil

        While one engine powers a small hatchback and the other engine does what….Oh it powers a small hatchback too.

        Whats your point?

        • what phil

          If i were to use ur useless analogy, then the figures of both these engines are pathetic compared to the 1.4turbo in an Audi A1… coz you know that’s a small hatchback too…

          what you smoking?

          must be a simple world in ur head…

          • Devil’s Advocate

            Or the Mini JCW for even more power and torque again… ;-)

          • Phil

            Are they in the same price range? No.

          • Richo

            Have to agree with Phil on this little argument, the method being used (petrol or diesel) is the thing that is irrelivant, what is important is the result, ie small hatch under 20k and how its performance/economy mix stacks up against rivals. If this car was to cost less then the skyactiv 2, uses considerably less fuel, and performance was similar, then why should it be discounted in an argument between the two simply because its a diesel rather then petrol?

    • Devil’s Advocate

      VAG aren’t really doing a very good job with the 1.2TSi WRT power etc either. The FD Mazda RX7 was initially, in Japanese spec, producing 188kw out of it’s 1.3L in the early 1990s and 206kw by the turn of the century. They are even getting 170kw and around 35nm MORE torque than the 1.2TSI out of their 1.3L in the RX8 WITHOUT the power/torque multiplying effect of a turbo and Direct Injection…

      Oh BTW, just remember that you set the precedent for the above comparison….

      • Pogo

        So the Nissan Leaf getting 80kw from a no capacity electric engine is even better? :P

        • Devil’s Advocate

          Very good point Pogo, not to mention maximum torque is available from 0 rpm. Seeing as we can compare apples with oranges, we could even use gas turbine engines etc in this power comparison!

      • Phil

        Oh I did, did I?

        I was comparing one small hatchback with …guess what – another small hatchback.

        Your the one comparing a 20 year old sports car to a brand new small hatchback – but without mentioning the fuel economy…

        • Devil’s Advocate

          You sure did Phil, as your original post just mentioned the engine only and not the complete package and only singling out one particular engine that is not even ont he market or probably never will be in the country. This has been your common theme across multiple threads and all you mention is just the engine. Only usning engine capacity when comparing a diesel with a N/A petrol and a turbo petrol, and then “dissing” the one with the least power and saying it is the worst and “nothing special” etc when not even taking into consideration the methods of aspiration, fuel type, transmission etc shows how little you appear to know. All of these have an effect to the way an engine makes power/torque and transferrs that to the road.

          I just want to know how long you are going to continue this “hate campaign” on an engine/technology that is not even released yet and hence can’t be driven to see how it performs as a whole. It doesn’t even contain the full gammut of technology that range of engines contains and most likely won’t even make it to Australia. So your comparisons are pretty pointless at this moment. As I have said many times, I agree that it is the most disappointing of the skyactiv engines, but it doesn’t mean it is “nothing special” and if they do release it here, I will reserve judgment until I actually drive one… :-)

      • richard

        LOL… yes it was “1.3L” yet it used fuel as fast as a 6L V8 yet wasn’t as powerful. Worst of both worlds it seems.

        • Devil’s Advocate

          Which I never said otherwise. If this conversation was about economy and not power, then it wouldn’t have even been brought up. It is just that Phil appears to have an obsession with power of similar capacity engines regardless of how it is produced!

          However you are falling into the common trap of comparing it to an engine of the same “capacity” and not the same performance. If you do that then the difference isn’t quite as bad, however it is still against the rotary. It is difficult to compare the swept volume of a rotary to a reciprocating engine and I even think they call it a “nominal” swept volume.

          The rotary isn’t very thermally efficient which is one of the main reasons why, but it can be economical in a racing environment. The 787B that won Le Mans in 91 was one of the most economical cars in the field which allowed it to run flat out for the whole 24hrs, whereas most of the others had to back off a little otherwise they would have ran out of their fuel allocation as the race was run to a fuel economy formula back then. It even managed to produce a reasonable amount of torque which is unlike a normal N/A rotary. Around 690nm in “enduro” trim isn’t bad for a “nominal 2.6L” N/A engine that shared many production car components. For information it produced around 700hp in enduro trim with an 8000rpm limit and 900hp in sprint race trim with a 9000rpm limit. Plus the noise it made was like nothing else, not even another “fart in a drainpipe” rotary like you hear the “brap brap” boys getting around in!

          • Phil

            Actually Devils Advocate, I never mentioned fuel economy or power or performance here. I just find that both 2 and swift would be competiting for the same market and on the info provided on both so far, the Swift looks better.

            Please explain why consumers for a small cheapish economical hatchback, wouldn’t be shopping this Swift against the Skyactiv Mazda 2 but they might be shopping both against a 20 year old sports car or a premium Audi?

          • Devil’s Advocate

            You may not have mentioned it directly here, but there appears to be a common theme on other threads where you are constantly comparing the power of a petrol to a diesel and turbo to a non turbo without taking into consideration it’s method of producing that said power. You then say it is “nothing special” because a non-turbo engine is making less power than a turbocharged engine of a similar capacity. I would be more concerned if it didn’t!

            I don’t dispute one bit that these will be “shopped” against each other and in that way it is a fair comparison, however just like this Suzuki, the 1.3L skyactiv is not yet slated for release in Austalia. You can’t really “shop” for a product that isn’t even available! Don’t get me wrong, I too am disappointed with the skyactiv 1.3 when you compare it to the other engines from the range and believe it is a step backwards in all but economy, however there are too many unknowns to make an accurate judgement.
            You must also remember that the skyactiv 1.3 is mainly for the JDM as an economical city car, which in that role there aren’t many petrol powered, N/A cars that aren’t a hybrid that are equal and even gives some turbo diesels are run. You don’t need huge amounts of power in places like Tokyo because you can never go fast enough to use it!

          • Phil

            Why does a engine’s method of producing that said power matter when the said engine produces similar power as another but with a more favourable delivery and better economy?

            If you agree these two cars will be shopped against each other, why are you so opposed to people comparing them? Both these cars are being released overseas next month. Regardless of whether they come to Australia, some people around the world will be comparing them and why shouldn’t they?

          • Devil’s Advocate

            I am not against people comparing economical hatchbacks, it is more the fact that you say that engine “A” isn’t very good because it produces less power than engine “B”, even though engine “B” has a turbo charger, or engine “A” has less torque even though engine “B” is a diesel. It has nothing to do with the engine being ordinary, it is because each different engine has different strengths and weaknesses. You definitely should compare the cars as a complete package, but not “bag out” a single N/A engine because it doesn’t produce as much power as a turbo petrol or as much torque as a turbo diesel. Don’t forget that “skyactiv” is not just engine, it is also more efficient transmissions and car weight reduction by the use of more high strenth steels etc etc. Some of these weight reductions and more efficient transmissions can make up for some of the power reduction.

            Plus in the very first post on this thread you were NOT comparing small hatchbacks with small hatchbacks. You just changed your story later on. Remember you said, and I quote, “It sure looks a lot better than the upcoming “skyactiv” engine for the Mazda 2.” To me that says you were comparing only engines with engines and hence diesel engines with petrol engines. Don’t forget that the engine is only PART of the overall package. You could have the best engine in the class, but if the tranmission/chassis etc is not up to the same standard, the whole package suffers. The Swift does have a very good chassis though!

            Once again however both of the cars you are comparing are not available and most likely will not be available in Australia so the comparison is pretty pointless for us over here! :-)

          • Phil

            I’ll say this part again as you didn’t answer it.

            Why does a engine’s method of producing that said power matter when the said engine produces similar power as another but with a more favourable delivery and better economy? You say the cars may have other strengths…well why don’t you mention them?
            Basically you seem to be saying that you cannot compare engines now? Why not? Why can’t people compare the engines? What if the people who were shopping these two cars against each other, were perfecting happy with both the body/interior/kit etc on both cars, but were undecided on which economy/performance/power delivery they preferred? Wouldn’t they then compare engines? – oh wait your not allowed to do that!

            Furthermore, both this article and the Skyactiv article basically only focus on the engines, why would we start talking about interior flexibility or trim quality when there are no mention of that in the article for us to base our comments on? It’s impossible to make a complete comparison of both cars simply based on these articles, hence I’m only commenting on what information as avaliable – the engines!
            You say I wasn’t comparing small hatchbacks with small hatchbacks because I only mentioned the engines. Excuse me, but isn’t the engine part of those hatchbacks?

          • Devil’s Advocate

            But you said you were comparing small hatchbacks with small hatchbacks and that includes things like interior flexibility or trim quality. So are you telling me when looking for a car you only look at the engine and not take into consideration all of the other things???!!!! :-)

          • Phil

            You’ve still failed to address what I said.

            But never mind, I’ll say this just to make you happy; Not only do I prefer this swifts engine, I prefer the interior flexibility and trim.

            I must also lodge a protest with caradvice on your behalf: Caradvice, how dare you produce a article which has information based almost entirely on the engine of a car. You made it very hard for me to decide whether I prefered this car’s interior flexibility and trimming over another car. I cannot much a basic judgment on a cars engine without considering it’s other atributes or I might offend someone (well one single person).

        • Whitbomb07

          Phil

          What are your thoughts on the Mazda 3 hatch versus the Hyundai i30 1.6 CRDi?

          Disregard the fact the 3 also has an MZR-CD engine (which would be a better comparo as they would then both be diesel variants) and a 2.5lt petrol aswell (which does come close to the 1.6 CRDis torque). Also disregard the i30 2.0 engine aswell (as that would just be a direct comparison between two 2.0lt petrol engines) because we couldn’t have that………..

          Regards

          Whitbomb07

          • Phil

            I take it, your saying I should compare a different swift engine to the Mazda skyactiv 2?

            In that case, please advise which engine you think would be the direct comparison to the skyactyiv engine or why you think people would not be shopping a swift ddis against a skyactyiv 2.

            I do appreciate you asking my actual thoughts on the engines though. I never actually said why I thought the swift looked better and “Devil’s advocate” never actually asked why – which is strange, you would think any normal person who disagreed would ask why, but instead he kept breaking into a rather random personal rant that made no sense.

  • K20A

    I’ve got diesel stains on my underpants already.. bring this car here asap Suzuki Australia!

    This is the Cooper D for the masses.

  • ScottT

    Would this be the first product of the agreement between Volkswagen and Suzuki? if it is its not a new engine. Anything they get from VW will be a generation behind what VW are currently using…

    • sina

      i dare say this is a Fiat engine. the previous gen Swift had a fiat engine and this could be a reworked version of the same. the VW and Suzuki agreement was signed rather late in the product development of this car, so most likely it will be a few years before we seen any “Real” collaboration. Also the VW Suzuki agreement was mainly for VW to be able to break into the Indian market, when Suzuki is a sales leader with an elaborate dealer network.

  • bangel

    My lady has had her swift sport for a month now and iam mighty impressed with the build quality , goes pretty well for 1.6l, and handles better than i expected .

    • Devil’s Advocate

      Plus Suzuki reliability is one of the best out there.

      • Phil

        Devil’s Advocate, every single reliability/satisfaction survey I’ve ever seen has Suzuki at, or near the bottom.

        Caradvice won’t let me post links, but look up;

        “J.D. Power and Associates 2009 vehicle dependability Study”

        Out of 38 brands, Suzuki ranked bottom. They achieved similar results in other years.

        • Devil’s Advocate

          Well there you go. Thanks for the updated information Phil, they must have gone down hill a bit! :-)

        • Hung Low

          Phil, those surveys are based on US spec Suzuki’s which are rebadged Daewoo’s thanks to GM’s stake in Suzuki.

          I have owned one in the past (Gti) for 13 years and the old girl was bulletproof despite a hard life with plenty of track days! Over 300000km and still perfect engine when I sold her!

          • Phil

            Suzuki does not sell rebadged Daewoos. However in the past, GM has sold rebadged Suzukis such as the “Holden” barina from the 80s/90s.
            The Swift Hung Low had, I’m guessing was the one released in 1988 and sold up to 1999. If you bought one in the late 90s it probably would’ve felt like a daewoo – maybe worse, since it was a decade old 1980s design.

            Suzuki’s US range is missing the Swift and has a large “pick up” instead. Otherwise their cars are the same as ours albeit in LHD.

          • Devil’s Advocate

            Phil, Suzuki jointly purchased Daewoo with GM in 2004 to form GMDAT until the more recent changes to the Daewoo brand becoming GM Korea and GM selling most of their stake in Suzuki etc. Up until the last couple of years Suzuki DID indeed sell re-badged Daewoos in the US. As you will see by the list, it was pretty much their whole range in the US other than their 4WDs.
            Examples:
            The Suzuki Forenza/Reno was a rebadged Nubira/Lacetti.
            The Suzuki Verona was a rebadged Daewoo Magnus.
            The Suzuki Swift+ was a rebadged Daewoo Kalos.

            Now VAG owns almost 20% of Suzuki so it will be interesting to see how they go with their next model cycle.

            As a side note I have a Suzuki Motorcycle that is around 11 years old and it hasn’t missed a beat that whole time and still purrs as sweetly as it did the day I purchased it. Other than usual oil changes I have only gone through 2 batteries, 1 choke cable that jammed closed last year and a couple of sets of spark plugs, that is it. I also ride it to work every day since I purchased it brand new.

    • JEKYL & HYDE

      so bangel if your impressed with the suzuki,at suzuki is consistantly at the bottom of the reliablity survey’s as phil suggest’s,what does that say about your beloved vw.i’ll tell you…love is in the eye of the beholder,and your comments are all crap…

      • bangel

        Darling you do get upset if any one buys anything but a crummer or falcoon .

        Yes i have seen the j D POWER uk survey 2010, guess whch is bottom THE CRUDE , and the mighty focus is down there too , so what do we believe

        Her last car was a pug 206gti , which according to mr lemon guide is to be avoided like the plague , yet up to 56000k until it was totaled by a VS crummer which came off 2nd best , was totally reliable , no claims no breakdowns .

        Like VW i trust suzuki’s quality , not so any GM or FORD product .

  • Eric V

    I took a test drive in a Swift GL last week and was seriously impressed. The Fiesta LX diesel is on the top of my list at the moment, also a very nice drive, but if Suzuki announce they’re bringing a Swift diesel to the Australian market then I’ll be holding off.
    A Swift GLX, manual of course, with 190Nm sounds like a sweet deal.
    C’Mon Suzuki Australia, bring the diesel over here.

  • JBHI-F

    Bring it here and put other cars to shame!!!

  • Valet Dabess

    what’s so great about heated mirrors?

    • K20A

      Valet Dabess,

      Depending on where you live, it will either be completely useless or a godsend.

      Here in Melbourne where we have cold winter mornings, your mirror will be foggier than Kate & Leo’s carriage in Titanic.. whenever your car is parked outside.

      At one stage (where I had to park my car outside all the time), this feature was high on top of my priority list when looking for a new car.

      This feature used to be a Euro only exclusivity (along with remote window close/open, ext.temperature display, headlight levelling, etc). Lexus and some Hondas have had this features also.. but generally speaking, is not available in mainstream Japanese/Australian/American/Korean cars.

      I used to live in Asia where this is a standard fit on all BMWs. On BMWs, this feature stays permanently on (don’t ask me why).. not switchable like in VW/Audi. There are cases of cracked mirrors because of the already hot ambient temperature + heating elements! and it costs a fortune to replace because the heating element is an integral part of the actual mirros / glass.

      • TMG

        The Focus has had this in LX and above spec from LT-07 onwards…..

        maybe its a Ford so it didn’t make your list?

  • Octavian

    Will sell well in Europe, but here i just don’t know. The very efficient Econetic Fiesta has sold at just OK levels. People in Australia don’t care about fuel economy as much as Europe or some Asian countries. No Bluetooth for iPhone?