Kia Cerato VS Suzuki Swift

The 1.6-litre turbo engine is a ripper and it’s been put to good use in Hyundai’s i30 N-Line and Veloster Turbo.

It’s just as willing and responsive under the bonnet of the Cerato GT, but they each perform quite differently.

Accelerating from a standing start, there’s mild turbo lag in the Cerato, and some torque steer when accelerating hard.

Once up and running it’s quick, and the seven-speed dual clutch snaps through the gears smoothly while still allowing it to rev freely.

It’s the type of powertrain that is utterly unbothered by things like steep ascents. The Cerato GT just keeps pushing on, without losing momentum.

The downside of that is that the engine is super noisy when pushed and the Kia just doesn’t have sufficient noise suppression materials to counter that. Because of this, it lacks the refinement of its i30 N-Line cousin and the Mazda3.

Steering is weighted on the heavier side but it’s direct and the car goes where you point it.

Like many Kia models, the Cerato GT benefits from an Australian-specific steering and suspension tune. Kia doesn’t have a full performance hot hatch to line up with the i30 N, but the engineers seem to have tuned the suspension to be just as capable as the full-fat i30 N.

That certainly aids dynamic driving in the Cerato GT. It hugs corners and grips the road, avoiding any skipping and with only a hint of body roll.

However, we think Kia’s engineers have made the damper settings too firm, because the Cerato GT’s ride is harsh in virtually all driving environments.

A new, freshly laid road surface in an urban area without any speed bumps was the only time the ride was comfortable during our week with the car.

It crashes over potholes and it’s loud and jarring when you unexpectedly encounter a sharp rut. There’s a bit of vibration through the steering wheel too.

This is disappointing, especially when you consider that the i30 N-Line has a much more supple ride and is the sort of warmed-up hatch or sedan you could easily live with day to day.

We briefly drove the i30 N hot hatch just before we got into the Cerato GT and even that has a more tolerable ride quality than the Kia.

MG claims the MG3 Hybrid will accelerate from 0-100km/h in 8.0sec and it feels quick, especially in ‘Sport’ mode, rather than the ‘Eco’ and ‘Normal’ settings.

No doubt the MG is the quieter of the two and it’s important to point out the MG3 is able to run on pure electric power, while the Suzuki cannot.

Suspension is by struts at the front and torsion beam at the rear and the MG feels bumpier over typical pock-marked and patched urban surfaces. That may have something to do with the MG3’s 1298kg kerb weight and slightly wider and lower profile tyres - 195/55 vs 185/65.

The MG steers nicely through a squared-off steering wheel, a la the ‘quartic’ wheel found in the Austin Allegro and Rover SD1 from the 1970s. Road feel is good.

Disc brakes front and rear do the stopping on the MG with three levels of regenerative braking available. The most aggressive setting slows the car markedly but won’t bring it to a full stop, so no ‘single pedal’ driving.

By comparison, expect the Swift to reach 100km/h in around 12.5sec and first impressions are dominated by the characteristically coarse three-cylinder engine and exhaust sound.

Flick the Sport button on the gear shift and performance becomes more urgent but it can’t match the MG’s punch. That said, you can feel that extra 60Nm of pulling power when you want it.

But it’s the Suzuki’s supple ride and nimble handling that stand it apart. Despite its shorter wheelbase and substantially lighter weight the little Suzuki irons out bumps and thumps beautifully.

The steering is well-weighted, accurate and responsive with excellent road feel. Braking is by disc at the front and, yes, drums the size of a small Tupperware container at the rear.

But jokes aside, in a car this light a good drum brake will work perfectly well and it does here. No levels of regen braking. As soon as you’re off the throttle a small light on the dash lets you know you’re sending energy to the battery.

In terms of miscellaneous observations, the MG’s front seats aren’t as comfy as the Suzuki’s. In fact, all who drove the MG3 noticed the driver’s seat cushion is overly firm towards the rear, pushing into your tailbone.

The driver’s door armrests are hard in both cars and there’s some mild wind noise in the Swift at freeway speeds.

Both are super-easy to park but the Swift is that bit smaller with superior visibility, and neither car has a rotary dial for audio volume with wheel, dash buttons or screen sliders instead.

Overall both of these light hatches offer excellent dynamics and refinement for the money, but the Swift delivers a more relaxed and engaging drive.