Compare two cars

Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion

Car #1
Make
Model
Variant
Engine
Car #2
Make
Model
Variant
Engine

compare selected cars
2010. - 2014.
D - Large family car
sedan, 4 door
4 x 4
Badges
Production
Vehicle class
Body style
Wheel drive
Safety
2007. - 2012.
D - Large family car
sedan, 4 door
front

Marketing

!function(v,t,o){var a=t.createElement("script");a.src="https://ad.vidverto.io/vidverto/js/aries/v1/invocation.js",a.setAttribute("fetchpriority","high");var r=v.top;r.document.head.appendChild(a),v.self!==v.top&&(v.frameElement.style.cssText="width:0px!important;height:0px!important;"),r.aries=r.aries||{},r.aries.v1=r.aries.v1||{commands:[]};var c=r.aries.v1;c.commands.push((function(){var d=document.getElementById("_vidverto-725dc94bb887f000f0b279c49613751c");d.setAttribute("id",(d.getAttribute("id")+(new Date()).getTime()));var t=v.frameElement||d;c.mount("10285",t,{width:720,height:405})}))}(window,document); */ ?>

Dimensons & Outlines

4650 mm
1820 mm
1470 mm
461 liters
461 liters
63 liters
Length
Width
Height
Boot (min)
Boot (max)
Fuel tank
4647 mm
1802 mm
1450 mm
425 liters
425 liters
58 liters
2010 Suzuki Kizashi
2007 SAAB 9-3

Engine

Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Nat. Asp.
2393 cc
178 hp
230 Nm
Engine
Fuel
Configuration
Aspiration
Displacement
Power
Torque
Opel / General Motors
2.0 Z20NET
Petrol
4 - Inline, 4 valves per cylinder
Turbo
1998 cc
175 hp
265 Nm

Performance (manual gearbox)

 
kg
s
km/h
l/100km
l/100km
l/100km
g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
manual gearbox - 6 gears
1395 kg
8.5 s
220 km/h
11.1 l/100km
6.0 l/100km
7.9 l/100km
189 g/km

Performance (automatic gearbox)

cvt - gears
1505 kg
8.8 s
205 km/h
11.3 l/100km
6.6 l/100km
8.3 l/100km
191 g/km
Gearbox type
Vehicle weight
Acc. 0-100
Top speed
Cons. (urban)
Cons. (highway)
Cons. (average)
CO2 emissions
automatic - 5 gears
1430 kg
9.7 s
220 km/h
12.9 l/100km
6.7 l/100km
9.0 l/100km
216 g/km

Expenses

4500 EUR
Price from
4300 EUR

Virtual Adviser's™ opinion

Overview

Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 4-door sedan body style within the same 'Large family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Suzuki and front in the case of the SAAB). The first one has a Suzuki-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 178hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 175hp engine designed by Opel.

Safety

The fact that the SAAB got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, puts it sky-high safety-wise, in my eyes at least. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 8% more metal.

Reliability

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Suzuki as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the SAAB badge with 4.2 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Kizashi as average reliability-wise, and 9-3 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.9 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

SAAB is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 220 kilometers per hour, 15km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 8.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (35 mpg), in combined cycle.


Verdict

Suzuki is apparently more reliable, not too much, but just enough. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the Swedish car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with SAAB outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but SAAB. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.

Check a car by its VIN number

Follow us

AutoManiac Instagram

AutoManiac Facebook

AutoManiac database currently covers:

47worldwide automotive brands
1.613different vehicle models
2.331engines
14.590specific cars