Suzuki Alto v Nissan Micra: light car comparison | Car Advice

Car Advice

Suzuki Alto v Nissan Micra: light car comparison

By Anthony Crawford |

Suzuki Alto GLX 5-door hatch vs Nissan Micra ST 5-door hatch


Model overview

Nissan Micra ST five-speed manual – $12,990 (Manufacturer’s List Price)
Suzuki Alto GLX five-speed manual – $12,490 (Manufacturer’s List Price)

The competition in the so-called ‘Light Passenger’ class is as fiercely contested as any State of Origin decider. This hotly contested segment represents a massive 20 percent of the total global market. There is also a significant proportion of the players in this automotive segment which I would class as A-list stars in their own right. Those players include the likes of the Honda Jazz, Ford Fiesta, Holden Barina Spark, Hyundai Getz and new Hyundai i20, the Mazda2 and the Toyota Yaris. As a group, they represent the most popular choice by buyers who are after that small car advantage.

Bang for buck though, it doesn’t get better, or any closer than the Nissan Micra and Suzuki Alto. Both cars have an entry-level price of under $13,000 (for the manual models) and both offer extraordinary value for money.

Light Passenger cars they might be classified as these days, but 20 years ago, they would have been called small cars, given the fact that they are both capable of carrying 4 people as well as the weekly grocery shopping.

If we wind the clock back just 10 years, there was no way on earth that this class of car would have come equipped with standard features such as air conditioning, electric windows, 6 airbags, and a full suite of electronic driver aids including, stability control, ABS, and Electronic Brakeforce Distribution (EBD).

They might be relatively inexpensive to purchase, but the latest light car offerings from the likes of Suzuki and Nissan are more or less a complete transport package that gives nothing away to styling or the fun factor. They also provide buyers with some of the cheapest running costs on the planet as well as excellent resale values when it comes time to trade up.

Nissan is no stranger to the light car category, with this edition being the fourth generation of the Micra. It is currently sold in three grades ranging from the 1.2-litre ST to the top of the range 1.5-litre Ti at $16,990. In the middle sits the 1.5-litre ST-L at $14,990. Australian-bound cars are built in Thailand alongside versions for the Japanese market.


Nissan had some success with the previous iteration of the Micra, which was launched in Australia in 2007, and found close enough to 20,000 buyers during a relatively short life-cycle, despite it’s less than attractive rear end styling.

Suzuki has built a solid reputation for building small cars that, generally speaking, tick all the boxes. The Swift has been a major success story, but the Alto is a brand new car for Suzuki and is available in just two flavours, the 1.0-litre GL for $11,790 (MLP) and the 1.0-litre GLX at $12,490 (MLP). The Alto is built in Suzuki’s award winning Manesar plant in India.

Both the Micra and Alto model range are available with an optional four-speed automatic transmission for a $2000 premium across the board.

For this specific comparison, we drove the 1.2-litre Micra ST with manual transmission, and the 1.0-litre Suzuki Alto GLX with optional four-speed automatic transmission.

Engine and performance

Suzuki Alto Nissan Micra
Engine 1.0-litre three-cylinder petrol 1.2-litre three-cylinder petrol
Maximum power 50kW @ 6000rpm 56kW @ 6000rpm
Maximum torque 90Nm @ 4800rpm 100Nm @ 4000rpm
Transmission Five-speed manual Five-speed manual

Read CarAdvice’s full drive review of the Suzuki Alto.

Read CarAdvice’s full drive review of the Nissan Micra.

Although both the Nissan and the Suzuki are powered by small, ultra-fuel-efficient three-cylinder engines, the Micra is the more powerful of the two, developing 56 kW and 100 Nm to Alto’s 50 kW and 90 Nm. Peak torque comes on song late in the rev range for all cars in this class, but again the Micra is stronger due to its larger displacement.

You can certainly feel the additional displacement of the Micra’s 1.2-litre powerplant, especially noticeable when climbing steep ascents or carrying a passenger or two, although there is a measurable advantage with a manual box under such conditions. I can’t say it’s quick in the true sense of the word, but it certainly gets along.

It’s not that the 1.0-litre Alto is slow, because that’s simply not the case. Its super light weight of just 895 kilograms (Micra – 947kg) ensures that off the line acceleration from the lights or intersections is more than adequate, but it’s no firecracker.

Small cars are naturally suited to manual transmissions, as better performance can be achieved by holding the gear ratios longer before shifting up, as there is almost always insufficient torque to get moving with any urgency unless you are up in the rev range.

That said, I was a little sceptical about the Alto and its optional four-speed box and how it would perform. The fact is you need not be concerned. This is a smooth shifting unit and the gear ratios are well spaced for good all-round acceleration and cruising.

On the other hand, the Micra’s five-speed manual transmission was overly notchy, and required more effort than expected when shifting. It’s by no means a deal breaker, as like most buyers these days, auto transmissions are the popular choice, even in the light car class.

From a ride and handling perspective, it’s the Micra that pulls slightly ahead of the Alto, with one of the best suspension set-ups you will find in this class. The chassis feels very tight and the car is particularly well balanced. You could almost call it a sporty drive; such is the car’s ability to punt through a corner at a reasonable pace with minimal body roll. The ride quality is in between firm and compliant, giving the Micra a very planted feel on the road, while at the same time ironing out uneven road surfaces.

The Alto also corners will little or no body roll, but the ride is slightly firmer than that of the Micra. You wouldn’t call it harsh, but there’s less rebound and therefore less compliance from the suspension. Steering wheel weight is surprisingly meaty on both cars, although the Micra feels the more natural of the two and a little quicker to respond to driver input than the Alto, but there isn’t much in it.

Braking is never going to be an issue with such lightweight cars either, and both the Nissan and the Suzuki stop efficiently and with a solid pedal feel despite both subscribing to vented discs up front, and a drum set-up on the rear wheels.

As far as manoeuvrability goes, it’s a dead heat with both cars needing just 9 metres from kerb-to-kerb, and are incredibly easy to park in tight spaces, although I think all round vision goes to the Alto.

That said, if that extra performance is more important to you than overall fuel economy, then the Micra is the way to go.

Fuel consumption and emissions

Suzuki Alto Nissan Micra
Fuel tank capacity 35 litres 41 litres
Theoretical range (based on combined cycle fuel consumption) 745km 695km
Combined cycle fuel consumption 4.7 litres/100km 5.9 litres/100km
Carbon dioxide emissions 113g/km 138g/km

When you’re shopping in this segment, fuel efficiency and low emissions are automatically guaranteed, but the 1.2-litre Micra can’t compete with the ultra frugal 1.0-litre Alto, which even with the auto box, still manages to sip just 5.3 litres/100km against the manual Micra’s 5.9 litres/100km.

If you go with the manual Alto, then you can expect to consume a miserly 4.7 litres/100km, so if you prefer fewer stops at the petrol station and a few more dollars in your pocket, then the Suzuki is the clear winner.

It’s the same story when it comes greener motoring, the Alto triumphs over the Micra with a count of 126g/km (auto) to Micra’s 138g/km (manual), although both cars subscribe to ultra low CO2 emissions.

Styling and dimensions

Suzuki Alto Nissan Micra
Length 3500mm 3780mm
Width 1405mm 1665mm
Height 1430mm 1525mm
Weight 885kg 924kg

They both look cute, and have similarly styled bulbous front ends, but the Alto has a cleaner looking rear end and integrated taillight assembly than the Micra. It’s a huge improvement over the previous generation car, but the Alto scores slightly higher on that count. Both cars also come in a range of cool colours.

The Nissan is longer, wider, and higher than the Suzuki, but that’s hard to pick once you’re inside the cabin. The Alto rides slightly higher than the Micra with a ground clearance of 150mm against 116mm, although I didn’t strike any issues with driveways etc despite the lower ride height.

Both cars offer more than sufficient luggage capacity with the rear seats in the upright position for several soft bags and the weekly grocery shop.

That’s not all they can carry. Both cars also offer spilt fold rear seats, which means that snowboards, skis and surfboards can be safely carried despite the relatively small, but deceptive dimensions of these vehicles. That said the Micra offers a larger aperture than the Alto for loading and each car provides a full-size spare wheel.

Interior and Equipment

Both the Alto and Micra offer surprisingly comfortable seats up front, although the Nissan provides more side bolster. Long drives in both cars won’t be an issue in any chiropractic sense.

I’m a big fan of the Alto’s two-tone interior styling over the Micra’s mostly grey look. Especially cool is the retro-fit style tachometer, which sits atop the dash to the right of the instrument housing.

There’s also plenty of metallic look highlights throughout the Suzuki’s cabin, which gives the car a slightly premium feel over Micra

Both cars offer an excellent suite of standard features including, electric windows (front only on the Alto), air conditioning, MP3 player with 4-6 speakers and remote central locking to name just a few. But it’s the Micra that scores higher with items such as Bluetooth hands-free phone system, steering wheel controls and driver’s power window with auto down function.

You also don’t get power door mirrors on the Alto, which are standard on the Micra. It’s not really an issue, as even a short stack like myself can easily reach over and adjust the left hand mirror in a few seconds. But why should I have to?

Safety

This is where both the Alto and Micra shine brightest, with a full suite of both active and passive safety features including six airbags, Electronic Stability Program along with ABS and Brake Assist (BA), although Nissan and Suzuki use slightly different terminology for what are similar systems.

Both cars are four-star safety rated, the Alto from ANCAP, and the Micra from Euro NCAP.

It’s comforting to know that both these manufacturers place such high value on safety with their smallest cars. It’s absolutely mandatory when you consider that some of our least experienced drivers may well be behind the wheel of either of these two models.

Warranty and Servicing

Suzuki Alto Nissan Micra
Vehicle warranty Three-year/100,000km Three-year/100,000km
Service intervals 12 months/15,000km Six months/10,000km

Nissan also includes a 3 year/24-hour Roadside Assistance Program. Suzuki does not offer a free roadside assistance program on the Alto.

Conclusion

 

The 2011 Suzuki Alto GLX is the car for you if:

• You want one of the most fuel efficient petrol cars in the business
• You want a small car that doesn’t compromise on safety features
• You want a small car with class-leading styling, inside and out
• You want a car from a manufacturer with a proven track record building small, reliable cars that are fun to drive

The 2011 Nissan Micra ST is the car for you if:

• You want class-leading performance and handling in a light car format
• You want premium interior features such as Bluetoooth hands-free and power side mirrors in this segment
• You want class leading interior space and comfort
• You want free three-year/24-hour roadside assistance


 
  • gms

    You’d be crazy to buy the Alto over the Micra. The extra size, capacity, features + the fact it isn’t made in India is got to be worth at least $1500. I don’t know what’s wrong with your eyes. The Alto is fugly and dirt cheap looking while the Micra is good looking and looks more expensive then it is.

    • G

      Well, the Micra is made in Thailand. Big deal.

      • John West

        Call me slack but in 2011 there is no way I’d buy a car with manual mirrors…..that would be a deal breaker for me. Commercial utes are the only vehicles to beable to get away with this.

        • G

          …and the Kia Rio.

      • gms

        I wouldn’t have a problem buying a car made in Thailand. India is a true third world scum hole. It’s like comparing a Mahindra ute thing with a Ford Ranger. Check the side profile of the Alto yuck!

        • figo

          wow,u truly do hate india.

        • Kandan

          I hope my taxes are not paying for your dole. If you are going to get castrated, I am willing to put money into it

    • Kandan

      another first world jackass where nothing is made, but ready to point fingers without stating facts as to what is wrong with the car

  • Ethan

    To me somehow the front of the micra resembles a little too much of the mini…

  • Hung Low

    The torque specs (rpms) do not match what written in the review. The Micra is the go here, better finished especially with the paint in comparison and real world difference that 200cc can make with little cars and engines is amazing!
    But at this price point you cannot go wrong with either I reckon, more reason that the upcoming Chinese light cars need to be priced under $10k to get traction in our market!

  • crouchy

    What about that manual shifter in the Micra! Looks like its lifted from a 90′s corolla!!!

    • j

      What’s wrong with that? I found my late 90′s corolla shifter to be very ergonomically friendly and a joy to use.

  • Ross

    I’m surprised you can recommend the Alto, we test drove one recently and it was terrible. The car was very tinny, gutless and every time you go for the brake pedal it felt like it was going to snap off…

  • Sam 300TD

    4 star safety rating sounds ok but it depends what you run into doesn’t it.

    • adrian

      4 stars is pretty good when compared to cars of the early 2000s that cost more

  • http://www.google.com google

    hice one man

  • filippo

    Maybe it’s time for the government body to create a new category for light-light cars, because in Europe the Suzuki Alto competes with the smaller Nissan Pixo and the Swift competes with the Micra.

    What’s interesting too is that when Ford offered a 1.4 litre 4-speed automatic Fiesta, journalists and bloggers wanted to burn down Ford’s headquarters. Yet here we have two cars with an even more gutless engine/transmission combination and somehow it’s barely worth mentioning.

    • Shak

      While the Gov Bodies dont have a classification for this type of car yet, most road testers and journos seem to classify them as sub-light or city cars nowadays.

      • http://caradvice.com.au Anthony

        I’d call a Tata Nano or a smartfortwo sub lights, not an Alto.

    • RickyC

      And do you know how much that 1.4L Fiesta cost? $17,950 when it was first released. Absurd. These are $12,990 cars we’re talking about.

    • RickyC

      Um, the Suzuki Alto doesn’t compete with the Nissan Pixo, because they are exactly the same. The Alto is sold as the Pixo in some European countries, where the Suzuki brand is not as strong, but the two are not sold together anywhere, and don’t compete.

      • filippo

        Ricky, a quick look at the websites of Nissan and Suzuki in the UK, Italy and France tell a different story. In all of these countries, both the Alto and Pixo are sold, so do indeed compete.

      • Karel Smouter

        O yes, they do. Here in the Netherlands Alto and Pixo are both available. As are Toyota Aygo / Citroën C1 / Peugeot 107. Another identical market leading sibbling in this class.

  • Jacob Martyn

    Alto only has 4 seats! How many does Micra have?

  • vti07

    There are now so many players in the light car category. Daihatsu would have had that market almost to itself when they were around.

  • CX7ened

    Thanks, but I’d rather spend my hard earned 12k on a used Impreza, Civic EK or Mazda 3 ….

    • mmmmmm

      for $12k you’d have to go back far enough back in those cars to before stability control was standard and probably only get 2 airbags.
      Is that really a better car for a p plater?

      • imrankhan

        Both are good.I am looking at this same Micra once my current one is fully paid off now to raise the money but will get an Automatic.The Made in Thailand thing isn’t an issue for me.I would buy one over a Fiat 500 as they are charging practically Top of the Range Tiida Money for something I can’t fit into.

  • darkone

    As a former alto owner, an 88 model years ago, I would buy another,the most motoring fun you can have on a budget,and reliable,cant kill the engine with a nuclear bomb,mine had over 200k on it and still ran good,yes it was the same motor in it!!!!.You could also drive it like you stole it and never break the speed limit!

  • nickdl

    I’d have the Micra any day of the week. The Alto hardly has ‘class leading styling’ inside or out. That grey interior actually looks very average. I haven’t sat in one with the lights on but is the backlighting pink? Doesn’t look good at all in the photos.

    The Micra probably has better real-world economy anyway with more torque available at lower revs, especially in a manual. Why anyone would buy either of these in an auto I cannot fathom. Having driven a 63kW Combo in a wide range of conditions, little engines like these need all the driver input they can get, especially out of town. It would be downright dangerous to have an automatic Alto even if it was just in town.

  • Nath746

    I didn’t know Torque was measured in kW Now…

    The Nissan Micra has 100kW of Torque… Just a small error I noticed, but a good review none the less.

  • RickyC

    Heh, funny that Nissan gave you a black Micra, which perfectly hides it’s black plastic door handles and body-colored B-pillars, while Suzuki sent you a silver Alto, which shows off the new standard body-coloured door handles and mirrors :D

  • Ovr40

    “If we wind the clock back just 10 years, there was no way on earth that this class of car would have come equipped with standard features such as …”

    The 2000 model Daihatsu Sirion GTVi had pretty much everything that was available at the time as standard.

  • Warren

    Good Review.

    These are simple, budget buying vehicles with some unexpected features and safety. Remembering that there are a myriad of things that go towards the owning and running cost of a vehicle – and in 2010, the NRMA found the Alto to be the most affordable to own and run in Australia. For mine you buy a vehicle of this size, fundamentally for fuel economy. Alto clearly has the edge and by memory, reviews at the time of release, had road tester’s economy sub 4L per km.

  • Warren

    Good Review.

    These are simple, budget buying vehicles with some unexpected features and safety. Remembering that there are a myriad of things that go towards the owning and running cost of a vehicle, and in 2010 the NRMA found the Alto to be the most affordable to own and run in Australia. For mine you buy a vehicle of this size, fundamentally for fuel economy. Alto clearly has the edge and my memory, reviews at the time of release had road testers economy sub 4L per km.

  • ryan bane

    interested in this reviews assertion of the nissan having a capable (perhaps class leading) chassis. UK Autocar has recently described the nissan’s chassis as “mediocre”.
    (in fact the whole car as a step backwards from the previous Micra – a car they were generally positive about, so dont think it is the general anti-non european car thing)

    Does Oz get a different state of suspension tune to europe?

    • nickdl

      Well it was runner-up in Wheels COTY as well and they were complimentary of the chassis, especially because it’s priced so low (not sure if it’s comparatively as cheap in Europe). Most cars do have a different suspension tune in Australia to Europe.

  • Jacob Martyn

    How about a diesel engine for both of these cars then.

  • megod

    Suzuki Alto GLX is a great car. Recently drove a Auto GLX from Singleton to Dubbo and back. It is Brilliant. I would not have known it was a 3 Cylinder unless I looked under the bonnet. Driving position is great, brakes are great. I am used to driving a 1.8 litre car and loved the 1 Litre 996cc engine.

  • http://caradvice OSU811

    I have driven a couple of new Alto’s and found
    the rough idle hard to accept!
    The performance and character of the engine to be terrible,
    The build quality to be very average compared to the Japanese built other Suzuki models (The swift is worth every extra cent and more)

  • ra

    where is toyota yaris?

    Exterior nissan micra is better but interior suzuki alto is better . so equal !!!!hehe^^

    • James

      Toyota Yaris is also very good, My friends mum and also my Grandma have them, I think The Barina Spark would win if there was a compition called Nissan Micra V.S Holden Barina Spark,LOL

  • James

    There the same but i prefer Nissan

  • Makes

    Hi i have owned an Suzuki Alto manual for around 12 months now and have been very happy with it. No problems and very good value for money. I can vouch for the fuel economy claims, I am getting just under 5Lt/100km in real world conditions driving normally with aircon on regularly. Biggest downside i have found with this car is fairly small size of the boot and high loading lip, but once rear seats fold down flat carry space is pretty good.

  • franz chong

    I haven’t driven the new Micra yet but based on this report it’s the one to have I have the previous model though which as an automatic would have costed me the same as the Alto but get this I have a 1.4 in there whereas the Suzuki is only 1 Litre or about the size of a milk carton.I had a Tiida before that which explains why I chose to go back to nissan

  • Maca

    In my country the Alto GLX costs $17.000 while the extra full version of the micra (built in mexico with airbag but without ABS) costs $19.600. I think its not worth the difference of price.

  • James

    Well in My Opinon, The Micra is bigger and alot cheaper where i come from but anyway If i had the chance if I wanted to buy a Micra or The Alto, Id say the Micra it has more room inside it and a fairly good engine.

  • myo aung

    I bought an auto transmission alto about 6 months back, hoping to save running costs and maneuver easily. However, I regret my decision to choose alto. the fuel economy is quite close to 7/100, and what’s worse, when parking, the power steering is very much unresponsive and sluggish, very much similar to using a non-power steering car when turning left and right. the power steer just starts to act a few seconds later when the motor gets revved up. Apart from that the car drives fine. I’m very much disappointed by the power steering issue, as I find it annoyingly hard when parking the car in a tight spot. I ever had it looked at by the suzuki service centre where I bought the car but they said it’s the car’s characteristic. Anyone owing an alto has the same experience?

  • AndrewD

    Just bought a 1.5L Auto Micra for the wife. We looked at the alto but only 4 seats was a deal breaker (we have 3 kids!). She loves it and we have always driven powerful 6cyl cars. Great economy, about 7.5L in the city with the auto (better on freeway) and really nice to drive, no regrets yet (and 5 star safety, bonus). But for anyone being critical of these cars remember the price and compare apples with apples.

  • http://Caradvice foxy

    Yeah I think people are confused by car manufacturers!
    They should scrap these little sardine cans that crumble like butter and cost more to replace parts. Reduce prices of other better made small cars and offer better warranties. People don’t waste your time comparing the value of little cars you won’t get what you paid for, not like the eighties and nineties where cars were low and better value for money. The fact that car manufacturers cut costs and risk lives by going to countries like China, Thailand, Korea, Vietnam, India, Turkey, Africa where they are poorly educated and have no idea about quality cause they run on cheap slave labour…. well that says it all!!!

  • demo destroyer

    You’d be safer in
    either of these cars than you would be in a used twin bag Corolla/Mazda or god forbid, a crusty old Commodore or Falcon. Hard to accept for the average bogan so they often turn to racism regarding place of manufacture. Cars can be built anywhere by anyone if the same QC checks are made, which they are, in this case strictly supervised by Japanese owners. If you think the people at Elizabeth bolting your Commodore together are any more educated, trained, skilled or even care any more than those at Suzuki or Nissan’s plants then you’re deluded. In fact, the Indian and Thai employees probably have more commitment to performing their jobs well as they have more to lose if unemployed. Of course, both cars have a full three year warranty. Suzuki often offers five years as a sales incentive so push your dealer for five.

    Anyway, I’ve driven both and they’re both great commuting cars. When using them for what they are designed for, city/suburban stop-start commuting, there’s practically no advantage of one over the other. The Alto looks better and fuel economy is incredible, the Nissan has more ‘grunt’ if you’re a natural leadfoot. Both will cruise happily all day at 110 on the freeway with the aircon on. Just leave plenty of room when overtaking on single lane roads. There’s no point testing a manual Micra against an auto Alto though. In reality the manual Alto has just as much ‘go’ as the Micra due to it’s lower weight but the Alto thrives on revs and doesn’t like being lugged along in the wrong gear, something the Micra will tolerate slightly better. This trait confuses a lot of bogan test drivers who whinge and moan that these small hatches don’t have the ‘pull’ of their V8. Idiots. As for the guy who is looking to comfortably load up the wife, 3 kids and gear and use one of these tiny things as a general family car…just a thought, perhaps the small hatch market isn’t for you, even if the price is right.

    • Binnull

      Very well said!
      I recently bought Alto Automatic for my wife. And i must say I am always looking for an excuse to drive this instead of my top of the line X-Trail.  All that leather and comfort does not beat the zippiness and fun this car has to offer. The engine is awesome and very happy to rev hard, the suspension is firm and there is no body roll what so ever.
      1L engine? what 1L engine?
       

  • Ldhateley

    Well today I drove the Nissan Micra 1.5 the 1.2 wasn’t available and the Suzuki Alto and frankly to be honest I found the Micra a bit gutless and wine in the manual gearbox, also found on engine overrun on gear changes reminiscent of the first Camira where it would rev up once the clutch was disengaged and made smooth up changes difficult for a 1.5  4 cylinder it was rough at low revs I thought it would have been significantly better but no. I took the Alto for a drive and found it much quieter than the Micra and frankly there wasn’t much of a performance difference especially considering the Micra engine was 50% larger it was that much better. And the Holden Spark seems to unavailable at the moment so have to wait to drive it. But for the moment Suzuki Alto seems the go.

  • Makes006

    Hi, some comments based on my “real world” experience with the Suzuki Alto (manual) over the past two years. I can confirm that fuel economy is awesome !. I am getting just under 5l/100km each week just driving normally with aircon on fairly often. This driving is probably around 60% highway & 40% local streets. I have had zero problems with the car after 70,000kms with just routine servicing required every 15,000kms, still no noticable rattles or squeeks. I think it’s fun to drive, you have to use the gearbox a fair bit up hills etc. but absolutely no problem keeping up with traffic. Some not so good things; the boot cover thing gets in the way when loading things in the back (i have just removed it), rear view mirror doesn’t dip (annoying when 4WD is following you at night), the paintwork is quite thin and seems to scratch pretty easily, doesn’t have much ‘street cred’ haha…. However, in summary i have been very happy with this car and would buy one again. 

  • Gdt

    I also own a Alto manual. I chose it because an optioned-up Micra (the car closest to my Mazda 121 bubble) was touching $20K, and if I wanted to spend that much I’d get a Polo.

    The engine is fine around the city, although you do have to be willing to push down the accelerator and move through the gears. If you are in the right headspace that can be a lot of fun, and the light chassis makes it quick enough off the lights. Outside of the city it struggles in big hills (on the Hume Hwy between Gundagai and Yass it ascended hills at the same pace as the B Doubles) and coming up Bulli Pass you had to change the gears at exactly the right moment to maintain any speed. The RPM dial is absolutely essential for that sort of work. Going down Bulli Pass the brakes were fine, with little fading.

    The suspension is drum tight. You either love that or hate it. You get a few bumps where the light car glides across a pothole and then whacks into its side, rather than dropping in and climbing out. Handling on dirt should be terrible, but is actually nice. Clearance is more than you expect, but this is in no way a farm car.

    The lack of a flip dimmer on the mirror is one cost cutting too far.

    A set of thin roof racks is a worthwhile option, as it gives you a way to get home items from the hardware store that you might fit into longer cars. The Prorack Whispbar is the bar optioned by Suzuki, should you not wish to be stung by dealer pricing and source it elsewhere.

    The boot space in the Alto isn’t worth the name. It will hold maybe five shopping bags, but that’s about it. This also means that flipping down the back seats doesn’t give as much room as in other cars. The boot cover isn’t strung to the hatch, which makes it painful to use.

    The back seats are cramped, but you can fit four adults in the car for an hour or so. The back seats have two of the new baby seat hooks. Driver visibility (usually very good) is compromised when there are two adults in the back, but the side mirrors are huge.

    The airconditioning is absolutely essential, as it’s a small car and so heats up quickly. The airconditioner is adequate — it’s cold but not freezing. The car doesn’t get excessively hot when parked, as the near-vertical rear window doesn’t let in a huge amount of heat, leaving a folded out sunguard on the windscreen to work well in summer. The car’s heater works well.

    It takes premium unleaded. If you are in a country town the price of that might be an issue. Although if I had to do country driving I’d move up a size in car to the Swift/Polo/Rio.

    There’s no way the Alto is going to tow anything, not even a trailer to the tip.

    If you know what you are getting, then it’s a great car. It’s my big city household’s second car and it takes the kids to school and me to work. I think you could be readily disappointed if you bought the wrong class of car for the driving you do.