GWM ORA vs Suzuki Swift

What's the difference?

The GWM Ora is a solid electric car for the city with an extremely competitive price, balanced with some flaws that might frustrate some - Android phone owners especially. But the GT variant doesn’t offer enough to justify how much more expensive it is than the variants below.

It has a slightly lower range, no more performance (not that it needs more power), a features list almost identical to the Ultra and arguably loses its appealing cutesy looks. 

While the rest of the Ora line-up has its strengths and a cute but daring design, the GT effectively offers only its bark-over-bite styling changes.

If the Ora is on your shopping list, it’s certainly worth checking out the $43,990 Ultra, or even the $40,990 Extended Range if its list of features suits you. But if you for some reason enjoy the GT’s styling, that extra spend might be worth it.

So, there you have it. A brief look at the new, sixth-gen Swift.

Better where it needs to be, the supermini survivor still remains competitively priced, with loads of new efficiency and safety tech that buyers will appreciate.

But, most of all, the Suzuki still feels, drives and rewards like the old model used to. It just does so with more sophistication.  

As inexpensive city cars continue to fade, the new Swift continues 41 years of providing a fun, affordable and dependable solution, in a vibrant and desirable package.

Yep, as a step-up from the Ora Ultra, the GT’s main selling point is its styling. For a car with a 400km driving range, it’s so non-threatening it looks like it would get beaten up and have its lunch money stolen by dual-cabs if it left the city - but cute works, just ask Mini or Fiat.

Its headlights have a splash of Porsche 911 in them. There are some angles that even look a little like someone had an Abarth explained to them then tried to draw it. More than one friend has told me it reminds them of a VW Beetle.

None of that bothers me in particular, but the GT-specific additions to the Ora make it feel like a deeply unserious car.

The fake carbon trim is tacky on a car that has no performance improvement over its base variant sibling, the red strip under the number plate looks like a tongue poking out under an overbite, the wheels look like Tony Stark designed them, and the rear ‘wing’ and diffuser just don’t feel at home.

One thing that didn’t bother me as much as I thought it would was the lack of ‘traditional’ tail-lights, instead a light bar under the rear window takes that role.

The rest of the Ora range is cute, fun, and looks at home in the city where the Ora is at its best. The GT’s features are mostly the same as the Ultra, so the extra $3000 for the GT exterior doesn’t really feel like value.

Inside, however, the design is less in-yer-face. A tidy set-up features a Mini-style row of switches (for some of the climate control) under a bar that spans the dash with the vents integrated.

The steering wheel is big, arguably too big, behind it is the 10.25-inch driver display attached to the central multimedia display. Everything’s very tidy and minimalistic inside, even the gear selector is a round dial.

It looks like a reasonably fashionable interior, but when it comes to the functionality, it starts to fall apart.

At first glance, the new one looks a lot like the old one. Short overhangs, long wheelbase, upright A-pillars, that signature 'floating' roof. This could be nothing else but a Swift.

Obviously, though, every single panel has changed, resulting in a stronger, quieter and more aerodynamic body.

Helping communicate this is a new and very definite crease line added to create a more-pronounced shoulder. The bonnet seems to be more clamshell-like and the nose is squarer, too. Indeed, everything about the overall styling seems to be more upright.

Debate is already raging in some circles. Is the new Swift too fussy? Too conservative? Has it lost the playful boldness of the proceeding version's gently-sculptured sides and hidden rear-door handles? Are the proportions slightly out now? Has the previous design integrity and oneness of vision been diluted? Does the 2017 predecessor look better?

Underneath, the platform is essentially the same, while overall dimensions are largely identical except for a 20mm stretch and 25mm roof lift. Length, width, height and wheelbase numbers 3860mm, 1735mm, 1520mm and 2450mm, respectively.

Happily, the aesthetic changes inside are likely to please rather than perplex, and even delight rather than divide opinion.

I can see the appeal of the Ora, but there are some glaring issues that I suspect many will find frustrating over time during ownership.

I’ll start with the big one - Android Auto. Or the lack thereof. Apple CarPlay is available however, even wirelessly.

Being a car journalist in 2024 involves a lot of playing around with in-car tech, and it’s been an awfully long time since I wasn’t able to mirror my phone to a car’s central screen where those with an Apple iPhone could. About 70 per cent of the world uses a phone running Android, by the way. Mostly Samsungs, like mine, but pretty much anything else that isn’t an iPhone too.

It wouldn’t be as major an issue if there was a navigation function in the car’s native multimedia system, but there isn’t. Having only a Bluetooth connection and no map felt a little like taking a step back in time, with an old iPad tacked onto the dash. No Fruit Ninja though.

Smaller things come down to basic ergonomics. The touchscreen itself and the system on it are simple and easy enough to use, if a little unresponsive. The driver display is fairly simple and doesn’t fall too far into the trap of sub-menus on sub-menus.

Physically, the cabin is almost there - the seat and steering wheel adjustment, however, made it a little tricky for me to find a comfortable driving position. 

I’m pretty much dead-on the average height of an Australian man, and the lack of tilt for the base of the seat meant no under-thigh support if I was to be the right distance to have a proper hold on the steering wheel - not telescopically adjustable, by the way.

Another interesting ergonomic fail is the placement of the drive mode select button (one of the GT’s few unique features) being to the right side of the steering column, near where you’d expect rarely-used controls like the headlight height adjust to be - or in this case a couple of centimetres from the button that kills the power to the battery if pressed while not in motion.

This caused severe embarrassment at a set of lights while searching for the drive mode switch, with no obvious way to start the car again, short of opening and closing the driver door.

Oh, and switching through the drive modes elicits a unique videogame-style chime or jingle for each mode. Gimmicky at first, potentially rather irritating after some time.

A positive of the interior layout, however, is the space in the rear seats is fairly generous for a small car - at almost six-feet tall behind my own seating position, I wasn’t lacking space to move and the seat itself is comfortable enough for a decent trip.

Behind that, a relatively limited 228-litre boot is probably less useful for a decent trip, though its 858L of space with the rear seats folded down is more handy in a pinch.

From a packaging perspective, the latest Swift carries on from before, and that’s no bad thing. It remains exceptionally roomy as well as practical.

To that end, entry and egress are easy, there’s a sense of spaciousness thanks to deep windows, a high ceiling and lofty seating, while the latter also helps provide an agreeable driving position. Storage and ventilation are provided in abundance.

For many people, the dash redesign reflects a big change in attitude, having finally grown up and away from the previous cheap and cheerful look. Highlights include pleasing seat fabrics, interesting textures and a sense of quality craftspersonship, within a stylish and sweeping design. After 41 years, the Swift has matured gracefully.

It’s also worth pointing out the super-clear analogue instrumentation dials, supported by a digital speedo and configurable trip computer data; actual buttons for the heating and air-conditioning system and – joy of joys – a handbrake lever.

Plus, if you want to turn off the various beeps from the driver-assist systems, physical buttons are but a simple press away. No distracting sub-menu searches within fiddly touchscreens here, thanks.

Except if you want to change the volume because you’ll need to prod the screen after all. The knob is always the better option, Suzuki.

What else? The rear bench area is a little plain but surprisingly roomy for this class of light car. Probably more so than a Corolla provided back in the early 2000s, with a decent level of cushy support for two people or three at a squeeze.

Given the extra specification, even the cheapest grade is all the Swift you’ll need. A sign of a democratic car.

But keep in mind the base variant no longer comes with a driver’s seat adjuster, passenger vanity mirror and multiple USB ports found in the Plus and GLX versions, while it is alone with a clammy plastic rather than leather-sheathed steering wheel rim.

At least cargo capacity edges up, by 23 litres to 265L (VDA), and that’s just under the luggage cover, thanks to some clever repackaging of a now-lower boot floor and internal tailgate panels. Drop the rear backrests and that expands to 569L.

Note, however, that for the Swift to achieve its sensationally low kerb weight that starts from just 919kg (up around 50kg), it now uses a fiddly and frankly-inadequate tyre repair kit. Thankfully, Suzuki offers that space-saver spare, at extra cost (and mass) of course.

Still, keeping those kilos low pays high dividends when it comes to performance and economy.

So. Why are there so few affordable city-sized superminis like the Swift?

Just 10 years ago, the Swift had at least 25 rivals under $25,000. Today that’s phonetically as well as literally down "t(w)o" "three" – namely, the ageing but still-surprisingly-spry Mazda2 and intriguing all-new MG 3, as well as Australia’s sole sub-$20K new car, Kia's darling Picanto.

Many of the Class of 2014 have since morphed into pint-sized crossover hatchbacks like Suzuki’s soon-to-be-discontinued Ignis, the Hyundai Venue and Kia Stonic. And if you must, there are also the cheerless MG ZS and ancient Mitsubishi ASX biggish-small SUVs – but they’re cheapo for a reason.

Unlike the latest Swift... which, from $24,490 drive-away, is more than reasonably cheap, since it introduces some electrification tech across the whole range, while still being around the same price as the old base GL.

This now makes the new Swift Australia’s cheapest 'hybrid'.

Granted, despite wearing the Hybrid badge on every grade, it’s just a mild hybrid system, but one that provides extra electrification to usefully boost performance and economy for the all-new powertrain and revised transmissions. More on all that later.

What else? The base Swift at last gains LED lights, telescopic as well as tilt steering adjustment and important driver-assist safety like Autonomous Emergency Braking (AEB), along with lane-support systems, adaptive cruise control and rear parking sensors.

Also included now are keyless entry/start, a 9.0-inch touchscreen as part of a new multimedia set-up, wireless for Apple CarPlay (but not for the Android Auto), a digital radio, heated mirrors, traffic sign recognition, auto high beams and an alarm.

And there's more. The entry-level Swift Hybrid is also class unique in offering a manual gearbox. Good on you, Suzuki.

Not for you? Don't worry, because the Hybrid auto that is expected to be the bestseller starts from $26,990, drive-away. For the record, that’s only about $1000 more than the equivalent old version but with all that extra gear to boot.

But, beware, the base-model Hybrid alone lacks a few items that may or may not have been standard in the outgoing Swift, such as a driver’s seat-height adjuster, leather-wrapped steering wheel, privacy glass, alloy wheels, front passenger vanity mirror, front-seat map pockets, multiple USB charging outlets and a spare wheel (though you can pay extra for one as the wheel-well remains).

All of the above, except the missing spare, are included in the new Hybrid Plus auto grade, from $28,490 drive-away, along with heated front seats and additional driver-assist tech like a blind-spot monitor. We’ll get into more detail in the Safety section below.

Finally, there’s the Hybrid GLX auto, with its wireless phone charger, folding exterior mirrors, steering wheel paddle shifters, climate control, glossy alloys and more from $29,490, drive-away.

Sadly, the terrific old GLX 'BoosterJet' three-cylinder turbo is no more, and there might not even be a new Swift Sport to continue the GTi hot-hatch legacy.

Still, Suzuki’s managed to keep the entire range under $30K drive-away, despite big changes inside and out. Let’s check those out.

All four variants of the Ora have the same outputs from its front-mounted electric motor - 126kW and 250Nm. Yes, even the GT.

What the GT does have over at least the base model is a larger battery shared with the Long Range and Ultra variants, but despite having the same weights and outputs, the GT is, on paper, claimed to be a tenth of a second slower to 100km/h than the rest of the range: 8.5 seconds versus 8.4sec for the cheaper models.

If there’s one area where Suzuki shines, that’s in making sweet little engines, and the new, chain-driven, 1197cc 1.2-litre mild hybrid three-cylinder petrol unit is no exception.

Now, on paper, 61kW at 5700rpm and 112Nm at 4500rpm may seem slightly lacking. A Mazda2 manages to make nearly 35 and 30 per cent more power and torque, respectively.

But the Swift's new 'ISG' integrated starter/generator/electric motor unit delivers an additional 2.3kW and 60Nm.

Combined with the hatchback's comparative lightness, it makes for a sufficient power-to-weight ratio of between 63 and 66kW per tonne.

Or, in other words, it provides some welcome extra low-down muscle.

Drive is naturally sent to the front wheels, via either a light-yet-positive shifting five-speed manual gearbox, or new CVT auto. Both have been heavily revised in their new roles serving the mild-hybrid powertrain.

That aforementioned larger battery is a 63kWh lithium-iron phosphate (LFP) battery, over the 48kWh unit in the Standard Range base variant.

According to GWM’s brochure, the GT’s electric driving range under WLTP is 400km, 20km less than the Long Range and Ultra (and like the acceleration time, for no obvious reason).

With a 400km claimed range and 63kWh battery, the Ora GT should return a power consumption figure of around 15.75kWh/100km, though on test we saw 16.4kWh.

GWM claims charging with 11kWh AC power will take 6.5 hours to jump from 10 to 80 per cent charge, while 80kW DC charging takes 50 minutes to do the same.

The latest Swift’s maturity does not end with its suave cabin presentation.

Prioritising high economy and subsequently low pollution, this Euro 6d-rated three-pot hybrid powertrain promises an astonishing combined fuel-consumption average of just 3.8 litres per 100km for the manual, and slightly more for the CVT at 4.0L/100km.

The results are 78 and 80 grams per kilometre of carbon dioxide emissions, respectively, along with around 970km between refills of the meagre 37L fuel tank.

These facts somewhat ease the pain of the need for more-expensive 95 RON premium unleaded petrol instead of the regular brew. High-tech solutions do require superior fuel, after all.

With just 70km on our ultra-tight test car’s odometer, the trip computer’s 6.7L readout is likely no indicator of the frugality we’re expecting to come.

So, how are such low consumption figures attainable? Along with better aerodynamics and a low kerb weight, the latest Swift Hybrid’s ISG hybrid unit generates supplementary electricity under acceleration, to ease the engine’s reliance on petrol.

It also recharges the 12-volt lithium-ion battery that lives beneath the front passenger-seat floor off-throttle via regenerative braking.

Note that the Suzuki never drives purely on electricity.

As is the case with the GT’s outputs and features, there’s nothing to suggest the GT would be fundamentally better to drive than any other variant. Unless all those kids at school were right about red bits making cars go faster.

The Ora’s front-drive layout paired with relatively immediate electric torque delivery, however, means you probably wouldn’t want it to be much more powerful with this particular mechanical setup.

The Ora, as a city car, does its job reasonably well in standard drive modes, though its sport mode is possibly a little too eager for day-to-day affairs - and the way it quite conservatively understeers on corners suggests there’s not much ‘sport’ driving to be done in this cute EV.

The steering itself feels fairly numb (again, fine day-to-day) and becomes heavier or lighter in different drive modes, but with no real advantage - the wheel itself is also a little on the large side.

Its suspension tune is comfortable enough for the low-speed streets on which this car is likely to find itself most often, where most city cars aren’t exactly riding on clouds, though can more obviously start to feel a little underdone on rougher roads at high speed.

It’s not a light car, after all, a hatchback that weighs 1580kg and has a short wheelbase isn’t going to be a dynamic masterpiece, though it does at least feel stable enough through corners thanks to its low centre of gravity.

It’s not going to encourage any heroic driving, but it’s also more likely to deter rather than outright punish any silly behaviour behind the wheel.

No Swift since 2004’s new-millennium redesign has been anything less than fun to punt around. A focus on driving pleasure and superior dynamics has helped make each version a cut-above most rivals.

Losing the smooth old 1.2-litre four-cylinder engine in the name of low consumption and emissions is a noble move. But how does this translate out in the real world, especially with a Swift fan behind the wheel?

It's mostly great, actually.

Losing a cylinder results in a slightly less creamy power delivery, especially as it’s accompanied by a distinctive three-cylinder exhaust-note thrum. But that’s still in keeping with the Swift’s endearingly sporty character.

Better still, even with all the examples we tested showing barely more than delivery mileage on the odometer, there seems to be more than enough grunt to please driving enthusiasts.

While not wanting to tax engines that weren’t even run-in yet, the charming revvy eagerness and instant throttle response remains, along with a discernible extra kick when accelerating away from standstill.

Even being so new, our Swifts proved to be lively, lusty and surprisingly rapid performers. We can’t wait to test run-in examples!

The five-speed manual is deliciously well-oiled and precise, immersing the driver into the Swift experience on another level compared to the CVT auto, which still manages to impress by responding quickly and effortlessly, without feeling laggy or droney. A lot like the old version.

Suzuki is making a lot of noise over how agile yet comfortable the newcomer’s handling and ride qualities are, as a result of improved rigidity and noise-dampening measures.

The Swift’s MacPherson-style front struts and torsion beam rear suspension systems have been revised with stronger and quieter mounts for better performance, while the electric steering has been retuned for greater feel and linearity. 

The result? Even our limited time behind the wheel revealed tactile and precise steering, composed handling and extraordinary isolation from the road below for a car barely weighing 950kg (at most).

Combined with the nuanced driver-assist safety tech that rarely interrupted the fun, the latest Swift is a cheerfully animated, nimble and rewarding experience... and one that stands out all the more for evolving while so many other like-minded rivals like the Ford Fiesta have sadly fallen away.

Bravo, Suzuki. Generation Number Six remains the enthusiast driver’s choice, and a hybrid bargain to boot.

The latest, sixth-generation Swift has yet to be crash-tested by ANCAP.

Even the base Hybrid now includes driver-assist safety like AEB that includes night and day pedestrian and cyclist detection as standard, along with lane-departure warning, lane-keep assist, 'Weaving Alert' (a driver-drowsiness warning prompt), rear parking sensors, traffic-sign recognition, a reverse camera, automatic high beams and adaptive cruise control.

You’ll need to go Hybrid Plus for rear-cross traffic alert and blind-spot warning tech, though.

Note that Suzuki does not supply information about the AEB and other driver-assist tech’s operating parameters.

Also fitted are six airbags (dual front, dual front side and curtain), electronic stability control, anti-lock brakes with electronic brake-force distribution and brake-assist.

The rear seats also contain a trio of child-seat tether anchorages, as well as an outboard pair of ISOFIX attachments.

GWM offers a seven-year/unlimited kilometre warranty, as well as an eight-year/unlimited kilometre battery warranty. The former is quite decent for the industry, the latter relatively par when it comes to battery warranties.

Five years or 150,000km of roadside assistance is also included.

The Ora’s first five services, each coming in at 12 month/15,000km intervals, are capped price, all at $99.

Suzuki offers an industry-average five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty and roadside assistance.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 15,000km, while basic capped-price servicing is available, with the website showing pricing for the first five years and 100,000km averaging $391 per workshop visit.