I've wanted a ZC31S for ages now. How does it compare to the Twingo?
Very favorably. Though I haven't owned the ZC31S for long, it has already left its mark and, while I think there are a few things from the Twingo 133 that I prefer, I feel the Swift is the better car overall.
In fact, I'll turn this post into a mini comparison, based on a few categories, to really show where they compare to each other.
Performance
They're incredibly similar performance wise, unsurprisingly. Both are powered by naturally aspirated, 1.6l, 16v VVT engines. The Swift has 123bhp (125ps) & 148nm (109lb-ft) torque. Whilst the Twingo punches out 131bhp (133ps) & 160nm (118lb-ft) torque. The claimed 0-60 times on each are 8.6 seconds for the Swift, and 8.4 seconds for the Twingo. Top speed for both is claimed around 125mph. The Swift weighs 1005kg (2216lbs) and the Twingo 1124kg (2478lbs).
I feel that the Suzuki estimate on 8.6 seconds 0-60 is conservative. With the few runs I've done coming in between 7.9 and 8.5 depending on the road. It certainly doesn't feel slower than the Twingo. The Twingo RS is known to have some power flat spots and that matches my experience, plus when you look at power curves, they're pretty neck and neck until around 5k RPM where the Swift starts extracting more power as the Twingo hits a flat spot. The Swift delivers it's power much more continuously and with no flat spots, really coming on song around 4.5k. The Twingo just gets a little more from it's VVT right near the red-line where it pushes up to that 130bhp just before you hit the red-line at 6.5k. The Swift however does that and then goes to 7k before dropping off, giving you a little bit more time with full performance, albeit a few BHP less. In my experience the Twingo 0-60 time is pretty accurate, although mine ended up going below 8 seconds regularly, however it was upgraded with a significant airbox upgrade (Clio 172 ph1 airbox) and a stainless manifold with decat freeing it up a bit. If I could back to back them, I think the Swift would feel quicker, even if they do match each other in time.
One big factor for why I think it will feel, and more often than not, be quicker than the Twingo, comes down to the gearboxes. They both have a 5 speed manual. But the box in the Swift is SO much better than the Twingo. 1st to second in the Twingo takes an age, the throw is long and it is just a very standard feeling Renault gearbox, no different to the one in my 1.2 Clio or my wife's diesel Scenic. In the Swift however, you get the sense that they actually wanted every part of the driving experience to feel good and sporty, it has a nice short throw (not MX5 short but much shorter than the Twingo), it has a really nice notchy feel, and it never feels like you're having to really wait for the next one, you can just bang it in from 1st up to 5th with ease. It really adds to the feeling of the Swift being the quicker car.
Handling wise, pick either. They both hold the road brilliantly, as you might expect given their nature. Wheels right out at each corner, sporty suspension etc. You can really tip them into the corners at a fair lick of speed and have really confidence in them hanging on. There are however, still some differences in the feel and some minor performance differences. The Swift has much better steering feel (to me at least), it just has a little more weight when throwing it into corners which just gives me a little more confidence in the front end. Some people will prefer the lighter feel of the Twingo steering but I find the Swift more engaging here. The Swift also responds better to getting on the power while cornering, the Twingo would have a slight tendency to wash out a bit and induce some understeer which I haven't felt the Swift do (though of course tyre choice and conditions can influence feel massively.).
Finally, the sound, I'm throwing this into performance as it doesn't fit anywhere else. In stock form, the Swift sounds better, it has a much more sporty tone from the driver seat, and the exhaust has a nice burble to it without being obnoxious. The Twingo sounds pretty dull from the driver seat, the exhaust sounds OK but nothing special. If you chuck the 172 airbox and stainless decat manifold into the Twingo, then you get much nicer noise, add in a scorpion or K-Tech racing exhaust and you get some nice fruity tones out the back as well. The Swift has options for more noise, but honestly, aside from maybe an induction kit (which I've done), it sounds good stock. So if sound is a consideration for you and you don't wanna drop 1k on the Twingo to get it sounding naughty, then the Swift wins here.
Overall, both cars will put a smile on your face with their performance, but the Swift does feel quicker and is much more satisfying thanks to the excellent gearbox.
Styling and interior
Something important to me when going for a hot/warm hatch has to be the styling and the interior. It has to look good, and the interior has to feel good. If I have a performance car, I want it to feel like I'm in a performance car, and I want it to remind me when I look at it, that it's a performance car. Both points here go to the Swift, the interior by a country mile, the styling, it's tight but to me it's the Swift.
Interior wise, I just think Renault missed the mark with the Twingo. I know they were worried about it being to competitive with their own Clio 197/200 RS (something which is rumoured to be why they programmed a performance flat spot and gave it a crap gearbox, because with a good RS tune and better gearbox it was quicker than a 197). But they skimped out big time inside. Take away the Renault Sport seats (which have a nice body hugging bucket-ness to them), and you would struggle to tell it apart from a regular Twingo. even the RPM counter mounted right behind the steering wheel is an option on the standard cars, with just a tiny Renault Sport logo giving it away. It also has an absolute boat wheel. You could spec a few options from new to make it look a bit more special, the silver steel pedals with or wihout the play, pause, stop logos, a gear knob and shifter gate emblazoned with Renault Sport logos and alcantara leather (not many people took this option sadly) and on certain models (the facelift 2012 on and Silverstone models) the RS Monitor system.
The Swift, while not perfect, at least looks a bit more special. Red stitching, red accents on the door cards, metal pedals as standard, a sport gear knob as standard, silver accents on the compact, sporty feeling wheel, and sporty dials, all add to the sporty feel of the car much more than the Twingo.
They are both typical budget car cheap hard plastics and so on. The Twingo gets points back with its seats and seating position however. The seats are just a touch comfier for someone of a larger build (like myself), you feel very encompassed by them, whereas the Swift I find I need to give it a little more adjustment to get comfy. It's perfectly fine once in and you have a good position, but there is a problem with that which I'll come to later. The Twingo also has a lower feeling seating position, you feel like you're in a sporty car, the wheel height is good (although it is too big) relative to the seat, the pedals feel in a good place (although slightly off centre to your body as is the case with most Renault cars) and you do feel like you're in a sporty driving position. The Swift, did have younger drivers in mind when it launched, and as such has a slightly higher driving position, even with the seat at its lowest. I feel like I'm sitting on it rather than in it, very upright as the pedals are then a bit lower and the wheel is a little lower than I would personally want. Does it take anything away from the actual driving experience? Not hugely, but I would much prefer the lower feel of the Twingo.
Styling wise, they both have good points and boring points. The Twingo in it's standard 133 trim, has 16" wheels which look pretty uninspiring (same design as used on various Meganes and some Scenics from 2006 onwards), and while it doesn't sit super high, it does leave a distinctly un-hot hatch like arch gap which is a shame, because the flared arches look great, they just don't fill them well. However, if you get one with the cup pack, you get the 17" cup wheels which look significantly better, have a lower profile tyre and are slightly wider, combined with the cup springs and shocks which lower the car around 10mm from the standard 133, you have a much better looking car. It's just a shame that you had to effectively buy the good hot hatch stuff as an optional extra. Round the front, a slightly aggressive front lip and bigger fog lights with anthracite surrounds give it a sense of being more than just a regular Twingo, the wider arches I've mentioned (if you want to see how much they add to a standard Twingo, look at the fuel filler cap area, the standard Twingo follows the line of the fuel cap). Round the back, again, take away the arches and not much gives it away. The exhaust is the same style found on the 1.2 Twingo GT, and if you didn't get one with the cup styling pack, it'll have the same spoiler as the 1.2 Twingo GT as well. So not a lot to get excited about. The cup styling pack adds a much more interesting spoiler. Obviously factoring the arches back in and it does have a much more squat looking rear end than standard but I can't help but feel they could have done a bit more. Overall, with the right options, it is a good looking car, has a nice stance, looks chunky and sporty thanks to the arches but leaves a bit to be desired at the rear and if you buy one that doesn't have the cup packs on it.
The Swift, gets more right. It's instantly distinguishable from the standard Swifts from almost every angle. Round the front, bigger more prominent front grills give weight to it's Sport name, the fog light surrounds blacked out with a little lip at the bottom create a faux front lip that wraps into the lower grill. One thing it lacks as you move around the car compared to the Twingo, is width, it doesn't have an arch kit like the Twingo, making it some 5 inches narrower. The Swift comes standard with 17" alloys which are far more attractive than the standard 133s 16" effort. But the 17" cup wheels do edge them out, but it is nice to know that the 17s are standard on the Swift Sports, so less hunting in that regard. It also does a better job of filling its arches than the standard 133 as well. Round the back and the Swift annihilates the Twingo. A good looking roof spoiler (better than both Twingo efforts) and a fatter rear bumper with a faux diffuser and, very real, twin exit exhausts. More than making up for the lack of a wide kit. Like the Twingo, there were options to enhance the look of the car, but they are even rarer than the cup packs on the Twingos (which can be found quite readily for sale). The Suzuki Motorsport lip kit being the most desirable options. Came in 3 pieces, front, side and rear, and gave the car a lower look. My Swift had these options although the previous owner damaged the front lip. It was a £1500ish option all in so not many have it.
Looks will always be subjective, but to me the Swift wins on both exterior and interior.
Daily driving/running costs
Both these cars perform well, but most people buy these because they need them to work as a daily as well as a fun performance car. I have 2 kids, and both cars work well here, both have ISO Fix as standard, with plenty of space for a larger 360 car seat in the back. They are both 4 seat, so they haven't bothered trying to squeeze a needless 5th seat in so all passengers in the back benefit from that. The Twingo has a slightly better layout with the rear seats being individual, they have their own rails to slide on so taller people can fit with absolute ease, and you can do a 50/50 rear seat split as well to increase boot space if you aren't carrying 4 people. The downside to this is the Twingo loses out on boot space quite significantly when the seats are up in a standard people carrying position. The Twingo coming in with 165 litres, the Swift, 213 litres. Both can fold the rear seats down but the Swift being a single bench seat offers less versatility here. But with 50 litres more space, arguably a better trade off. The Swift is much more comfortable to commute in down the rough back roads of Norfolk, it's still a sporty, firm ride, but it doesn't crash about over the bumps as much as the Twingo does. Expect it to be even worse in the Twingo if you do get one with the cup chassis option, it can be back breaking over the rough stuff. That also means it rattles and squeaks a lot more which can get irritating, the Swift comes across as being better put together, partly because it is, but also because it doesn't shake itself apart.
The one thing I mentioned earlier regarding getting a good position in the Swift? Well, like a lot of other Japanese 3 door cars, when you recline the driver seat forward to get someone or something into the rear seats, the seat doesn't go back to were you had it, it goes to a default forward, upright position, needing you to try and find where you had it comfortable. Now granted, if you don't have kids or need rear access, it isn't much of an issue. My 4 year old likes to ride up front and her sister is behind her so my seat moves forward. And if the wife comes out with us, both kids are in the back and both front seats move forward. The Twingo doesn't have this problem, it comes back to where you left it. Point to the Twingo.
Almost everything that is an optional extra on the Twingo RS, is standard on the Swift. Heated mirrors, traction control, ESP, air con, climate control and a few other littler things, all standard on the Swift, all optional on the Twingo. There are some options on the Swift that do pop up but very rarely, such as the leather interior (like mine, currently the only known one among the owners clubs), a Recaro interior (more common in Japan, see GT7 for that one), and the extra skirt kits.
Cost wise, if you thrash them everywhere (and that's what you should do) then they will both get below 400 miles to a tank. However, despite Renaults claims of a 42mpg average vs Suzukis 40mpg claim, I found it to be wildly different. Both Twingo RS I've owned sat around the 28-32mpg average area. The Swift, so far, has averaged 38mpg. I always found it very hard to belive I could ever see 40mpg from the Twingo RS in any situation, the Swift, I do believe it can and many people have had 42mpg+ on a run. The Swift also has a larger fuel tank (45l to the Twingos 40l) meaning with a mix of sensible and fun driving, the Swift will comfortably get 400 miles+ to a tank, the Twingo more often than not was seeing me to around 300-320 before needing some juice. If you get a 2009 on Swift Sport, then the tax is the same as well (£220 per year), if you get a Swift from MY2007 or 2008 and you'll be in a higher bracket at £265. But if you do that, you'll get that £45 back in better fuel economy and cheaper servicing costs.
There's no getting around it, the Suzuki is cheaper to maintain, while certain parts can be expensive (interiors, bumpers, anything unique to the sport), a lot of it is very affordable and easily sourced as it shares a lot of parts with the Vitara, SX4 and so on. It utilises a timing chain rather than a belt which is one less thing to worry about. The M16A engine is bulletproof as long as you service it correctly. very few people have ever reported major faults with the engines and they are well known for their superb reliability. Mine did throw its alternator pulley/bearing which took the belt off and stopped the water pump, but when I posted about this happening on the Swift owners pages, no one had seen it happen before, so I put it down to bad luck rather than something to worry about. £49 of parts later and it was fixed.
The Twingo, is a bit more expensive to maintain. The K4M engine is quite a common Renault unit, but the K4M-RS unit in the Twingo has enough different about it to not have many shareable parts with other K4M loaded cars. It is also very tightly packaged as well, with it being designed primarily for 1.2l engines, the 1.6 is snug, so most major part replacement or work is an up in the air/engine out job. One of the biggest, most expensive jobs these need is the cam-belt and dephaser pulley, which get done together every 70k or so. It is a job that will set you back anywhere between £600 and £900 depending on where you get it done. So be aware of that and if buying one, make sure its been done. Body panels are large and hard to source when damaged due to how the car is built, done be surprised to see a lot of Cat S (non structural repair) cars around as they will just get written off for any damage to larger panels or the body kit.
The Swift wins this category.
Final Thoughts
So much about cars is personal and objective. To me, despite having not owned the Swift for very long, I can already say I prefer it in almost every way to the Twingo 133. It's easier, and cheaper, to live with, it feels quicker, sounds better, looks better (in my opinion) and just feels a bit more bespoke than the Twingo. You can also pick them up for less money on average for good examples and as there was only 1 trim level for the Swift Sport, there's a bit less to think about when choosing a car because they all have the same spec, which is a higher spec than the base Twingo 133. There are more pitfalls when buying a 133, service history is more crucial and important, write offs, varying levels of spec (which will make a huge difference to your experience).
If you want a good, budget performance hatch which is easy to live with, fun to drive, fast enough for UK roads, good on economy and a bit different, the Swift is the way to go. Good examples can be found between 1.5k and 3k as well meaning it is plenty affordable to go and buy one.
If you are going down the 133 route, look for a special one, the Gordini and Silverstone models for example. The Gordini has the cup packs as standard, a fancier Gordini interior (blue trim, blue stitching, leather style seats) and the Silverstone has a unique colour, stainless steel twin exhaust, RS monitor as well as the cup packs and some unique Silverstone styling.
However, for both those models, expect to be paying in excess of 5-6k versus 2-4k on the regular ones. And to be honest at the point, it would be worth looking at the ZC32S Swift Sport, as it has more power than all the Twingo 133s, (134bhp), more torque, better economy, cheaper tax and comes in a 5 door version with excellent standard trim.
Sorry for the long read, but hopefully it gives you a good insight into my thoughts and why I feel the Swift Sport is the better car overall.
