Very first Drive: Suzuki SX4 S Cross 1.6 SZ4 5dr (2013-2014)
Suzuki could have built a direct replacement for the SX4. The SX4 might be a forgettable car in many ways, but it was the very first of the current epidemic of supermini-sized crossovers, having hammered the Nissan Juke by aeons. But instead, Suzuki realised the indeed big market isn’t the Juke-sized crossovers, but a size up. So the S-Cross is Qashqai-sized.
In fact, from the side view, it could lightly be mistaken for the Qashqai. Which might make it seem a bit stale next year or two when the next-generation Nissan is on the streets. Still, the S-Cross is a well-targeted design. It’s supposed to be not just a rival to the Nissan and Peugeot 3008, but to attract people out of Scenic-sized five-seat MPVs. And a radical design would scare them away.
Before we come to the driving impressions, two facts. Very first, the S-Cross is by the standards of the class usefully cheap. Suzuki makes competent reliable cars (and in the Swift Sport, one that’s a bundle of joy). Suzuki doesn’t waste time pretending to be ‘semi-premium’ (recall that a Suzuki was Top Gear’s original Reasonably Priced Car). The S-Cross will be about £2000 cheaper than an equivalently powered and tooled Qashqai.
Also, the S-Cross is roomy. This is a class of family cars, but some of them, especially the Nissan, are a bit cramped in the back. No such worries here.
So even if was a donkey to drive, the S-Cross could justify itself as a family hack.
Actually however, it’s not a bad mover. The treating and rail weretested and honed on British roads, by the same people who did the Swift. Albeit the S-Cross is fairly tall, it doesn’t sway about much, and corners remarkably cleanly.
That means it doesn’t have the plushest rail in the world, but it’s well managed, taking the acute edges off bumps and potholes, so you feel at ease with it.
Suzuki has explosions of small-4×4 heritage to call on, so there’s a version of the S-Cross with electronically managed 4WD. It has a selector so you can choose the bias of the front-rear torque split programming. But most people will buy the plain FWD version. That’s fair enough unless they spend a lot of time in the snow or mud. With just 120bhp to dispense, traction on the road is seldom an issue. The 2WD and 4WD versions have the same type of suspension and calibration so they mostly don’t feel different.
But these aren’t cars for belting round. The 0-62 times are near-geologic: from eleven seconds (petrol 2WD) to thirteen sec (turbodiesel 4WD). Both versions make do with 120bhp and 1.6 litres. The petrol is naked of a turbo, so you’d think it would feel puny, but actually it’s just – just – game enough for gentle family use, and not too noisy. The diesel, bought from Fiat, is a bit rough-sounding if you listen, but actually decently quiet and usefully torquey. Both engines have strong economy, implying low CO2 and company tax.
By the way, even if we’ve forgotten the original SX4, Suzuki hasn’t. In two thousand fifteen it will launch a fresh supermini-sized crossover. The company’s people promise it’ll have more interesting styling than the very first one. (Strange fact: that original, because Fiat also sold it as the Sedici, was actually designed by Giugiaro. On what must have been a particularly abate Friday afternoon in Turin.)