The Next Swift Sport Will Have A Better Power-To-Weight Ratio Than A GT86

The next Swift Sport will have more power-to-weight than a whole host of older, more powerful hot hatchbacks and even some brand new sports cars, and you can direct your thanks to massive weight reduction
The Next Swift Sport Will Have A Better Power-To-Weight Ratio Than A GT86

This is not a typo: the next Suzuki Swift Sport will have a higher power-to-weight ratio than the Toyota GT86. No, really.

Those who’ve driven the current one will know how good the Swift Sport already is. It’s an almost living, breathing embodiment of what a hot hatchback was designed to be; hilariously good to drive, quicker than you’d think and pretty damn affordable. It has character. It’s a car you can’t help but name, even if you don’t normally do that sort of thing.

It's our last year with this little gem
It's our last year with this little gem

It’s a wonderful car. It’s so light on its toes, able to absolutely storm along twisting roads and deftly flick left-right-left through roundabouts at speeds the police probably (definitely) wouldn’t approve of. Its suspension is pure perfection, giving you a level of control and confidence you just don’t find anywhere else below £25,000, and the fizzy little 1.6 under the bonnet loves to rev even more than you love to rev it. It’s brilliant. It’s not a matter of if I ever buy one; it’s a matter of when.

Part of its genius is its low weight. It may only have a year left to live as a current model, but it’s still even lighter than the famously light 2.0-litre MX-5. In fact, at 1045kg, the kerb weight is lower than just about any other similarly brisk hot hatch or sports car you could name. But the new one will be even lighter. A lot lighter, actually, and this is where things get really interesting.

Here's what the common-or-garden new Swift looks like
Here's what the common-or-garden new Swift looks like

A Suzuki insider told me earlier this week that the next Swift Sport, which we sadly don’t have any pictures of, yet, could weigh as little as 870kg. That’s basically one slim passenger’s worth lighter than a Volkswagen Up. We already know that it’s going to use the meaty 138bhp turbocharged 1.4 from the Vitara S, and putting the two figures together throws up some eye-opening numbers. The Vitara S, which is about the same weight as the current Swift, doesn’t exactly hang about.

The new car, if it does weigh so little, will deliver a power-to-weight ratio of 159bhp per ton. Without a basis for comparison you could brush that number aside, but the GT86 only has 158bhp/ton. When you factor in torque as well, the Toyota’s peak of 121lb ft per ton plays the Swift’s expected 186lb ft per ton. Don’t forget the Swift’s torque curve will be flatter and fatter, too. Yup, the 138bhp Swift should easily be faster than the 197bhp GT86 in everyday use.

The 1.4-litre BoosterJet engine destined for the Swift Sport
The 1.4-litre BoosterJet engine destined for the Swift Sport

Don’t get me wrong. I love the GT86 like it’s my first-born, but you’ve got to admit the Swift’s numbers are pretty awesome. It’s going to be genuinely quick, and it’s going to achieve it without posting big power figures that scare insurance companies.

Weight reduction is the key (bro). Losing flab also means nimbler handling, less wear on tyres and brakes, and less stress on the suspension. The same virtuous circle brings reduced fuel consumption, and given that it’s already possible in the current Swift Sport to hit the 50s for miles per gallon on a long, steady run, is 60mpg going to be possible in the next one? Maybe. There are no drawbacks in this equation, except for losing the super-crisp throttle response of the outgoing normally aspirated 1.6.

The Next Swift Sport Will Have A Better Power-To-Weight Ratio Than A GT86

That’s why, for me, weight reduction kicks power increases square in the gooseberries. Extra power brings higher performance at higher speeds, but lower weight brings so much more. It’s always the first improvement any car maker should make to any car that’s designed to involve the driver even in the slightest. The next Swift Sport is going to be mega. If, when I drive it, it’s even better than the one you can buy today, I may have to make an excitement-related underwear change.

Sponsored Posts

Comments

Fred Jones

Love cars withQ
Zzbkckj!

04/01/2017 - 09:45 |
2 | 6
Anonymous

Now this new car will surely be SWIFT

04/01/2017 - 10:11 |
34 | 2
Joseph M

Nice to see a brand focus on losing weight. Imagine what audi/merc/bmw would be able to achieve with their current engines if their cars didn’t weigh more than 1,5 tons

04/01/2017 - 10:30 |
20 | 0
Jia the Supra Fanboy

In reply to by Joseph M

Things that require additional weight:
-power
-safety
-refinement
-luxury
-durability
-technology
-stability (to some degree)

Things that require weight reduction:
-performance
-fuel efficiency

Now, as a manufacturer, weigh the balance between gains & losses of extensive weight reduction.

Also, keep in mind, lightweight components reduce durability and increase development costs & complexity.

Weight reduction would almost be a perfect solution for economy cars, where refinement and the like aren’t key factors. The only (and biggest) problem of course is safety, something which every CTzen seems to give zero f**ks about.

Then, when you consider premium/luxury cars ie. BMW, Audi, Merc, which need to do more than just perform well and save fuel, weight reduction no longer becomes worth it.

Why buy a $70,000 lightweight, powerful, unrefined, unsafe and ill-appointed BMW when you could probably build a stripped-out racecar for less money?

Doesn’t make sense for the manufacturer.

04/02/2017 - 22:05 |
6 | 0
PN K

Suzuki be like

¯_(ツ)_/¯

04/01/2017 - 10:52 |
10 | 0
Anonymous

The BoosterJet Engine Is Used In The Baleno RS Too. Then I Hope That These Two Are Sisters.

04/01/2017 - 11:06 |
4 | 4
Nimish Gulati

In reply to by Anonymous (not verified)

But its in 1.0 litre form.

04/02/2017 - 04:57 |
0 | 0
Pascal_98

i bet this car is awesome to drift.. oh wait

04/01/2017 - 11:47 |
4 | 4
Anonymous

Too bad suzuki is gone from the USA so i can’t get one.

04/01/2017 - 14:28 |
4 | 0
Anonymous

How come the 86 is the staple benchmark car? It makes more sense to compare this to a Fiesta ST or the like

04/01/2017 - 18:27 |
2 | 2
Rise Comics

gt86 fanboys be like

04/01/2017 - 21:58 |
8 | 0
Zuez

I dont get why other companies dont do this. We’ve seen that they downsize engines and turbocharge them to make up for the loss of power but they can’t gain any fuel efficiency benefits if they dont first downsize their cars. Its examples like these that show one doesnt need to have a hybrid to get the most out of fuel. One just needs to reduce weight and simplify.

(I think some people will find my comment to be ignorant, which is fine as I dont know everything. So feel free to correct me if I’m wrong)

04/02/2017 - 05:43 |
0 | 0
Jia the Supra Fanboy

In reply to by Zuez

Things that require additional weight:
-power
-safety
-refinement
-luxury
-durability
-technology
-stability (to some degree)

Things that require weight reduction:
-performance
-fuel efficiency

Now, as a manufacturer, weigh the balance between gains & losses of extensive weight reduction.

Also, keep in mind, lightweight components reduce durability and increase development costs & complexity.

Weight reduction would almost be a perfect solution for economy cars, where refinement and the like aren’t key factors. The only (and biggest) problem of course is safety, something which every CTzen seems to give zero f**ks about.

Then, when you consider premium/luxury cars ie. BMW, Audi, Merc, which need to do more than just perform well and save fuel, weight reduction no longer becomes worth it.

04/02/2017 - 22:02 |
2 | 0