CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsChery C5 vs Suzuki Fronx
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Chery C5 vs Suzuki Fronx

A detailed look at how two of Australia's most popular SUVs compare on price, running costs, safety, and everyday livability.

Specifications and pricing correct at time of publishing. Prices are RRP before on-road costs unless stated otherwise. Always confirm with the manufacturer or dealer before purchasing.

SpecCherySuzuki
Price (RRP)$27,500$28,490
Fuel typePetrolHybrid
Power108kW75.8kW
0-100 km/h8.5s11.5s
Fuel Economy6.9 L/100km4.9 L/100km
Boot Space370L304L
Warranty7yr / Unlimited3yr / 100k km
ANCAP Safety5 Stars1 Stars

Track the Chery C5 & Suzuki Fronx

Get price-drop alerts on these models plus our free weekly new-car rundown. Unsubscribe anytime.

Price Breakdown

The Chery C5 starts from $27,500 before on-road costs, while the Suzuki Fronx opens at $28,490. That makes the Chery C5 the more affordable entry point by $990.

Once you factor in stamp duty, registration, CTP insurance, and dealer delivery, expect to add roughly 8-12% on top of the RRP depending on your state. That puts estimated driveaway prices in the ballpark of $30,250 and $31,339 respectively.

Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Suzuki Fronx by roughly $2,850 in fuel alone.

Safety Rundown

The Chery C5 holds a 5-star ANCAP rating vs 1 stars for the Suzuki Fronx. Adult occupant protection scored 87% for the Chery C5 and 48% for the Suzuki Fronx.

Where the two diverge is in active safety technology. The Suzuki Fronx packs more ADAS features with 5 out of 10 key systems fitted, compared to 4 in the Chery C5.

Both include the essentials: autonomous emergency braking, lane keep assist, adaptive cruise control, a reversing camera. Airbag count is 7 in the Chery C5 and 6 in the Suzuki Fronx.

Feature Showdown

The Chery C5 features a 10.3-inch touchscreen paired with a 10.3-inch digital dash, while the Suzuki Fronx gets a 9-inch display. Apple CarPlay and Android Auto are standard across both.

Drivetrain

The Chery C5 uses a Petrol producing 108kW and 210Nm of torque, sent through a 6-speed dual clutch to a FWD layout. It covers the 0-100km/h sprint in 8.5 seconds.

The Suzuki Fronx responds with a Petrol making 75.8kW and 137Nm, paired to a automatic driving the front wheels. It gets to 100km/h in 11.5 seconds.

The Chery C5 has the clear power advantage at 108kW vs 75.8kW. In the real-world sprint, the Chery C5 is 3.0s quicker. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Chery C5 measures 4,351mm long on a 2,610mm wheelbase, 356mm longer than the Suzuki Fronx at 3,995mm (2,520mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Chery C5 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 370L in the Chery C5 and 304L in the Suzuki Fronx, giving the Chery C5 a 66L advantage.

0

Turning Circle

Kerb-to-kerb diameter. Smaller turns easier in tight carparks and U-turns.

10.4m to 11.2m

TightestSuzuki Fronx GLTightest turn at 10.4m, easiest U-turns and carparks
Suzuki Fronx GL
10.4mTighter
Best
Chery C5 Urban
11.2m
Worst
Chery C5 Urban
11.2m · Average

Based on 11.2m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways
Suzuki Fronx GL
10.4m · Good

Based on 10.4m turning circle:

  • U-turn on standard street (7m+ wide)
  • Standard parking bay
  • Tight carparks
  • Narrow laneways

Turning circle ratings

Under 10m, Excellent
10 to 11m, Good
11 to 12m, Average
Over 12m, Large
Compare U-turns side by side

Turning Circle · U-turn compare

kerb-to-kerb, 2 cars
Tap to add/remove
TightestSuzuki FronxTightest turn at 10.4m, needs the least road to swing around
Chery C511.2 m
Average△ 3-point
Suzuki FronxTightest10.4 m
Good△ 3-point
Scrub the turn

0 of 2 clear a 7.0 m street in one sweep

Green cars complete the U-turn; amber need a 3-point turn. Drag the slider to test tighter streets.

Under 10 m · Excellent 10–11 m · Good 11–12 m · Average Over 12 m · Large

Standard widths: AU local streets ~5.5–7 m; main roads ~9–12 m.

True Cost to Own

Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $1,967/year for the Chery C5 and $1,397/year for the Suzuki Fronx. That is a $570 annual difference in favour of the Suzuki Fronx.

Estimated annual total: $1,967 (Chery C5) vs $1,397 (Suzuki Fronx). The Suzuki Fronx saves you roughly $570 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.

Warranty: 7 years / 999,999km (Chery C5) vs 3 years / 100,000km (Suzuki Fronx). The Chery C5 has longer coverage.

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Chery C5 if: You want the lower entry price, prioritise performance, need more boot space, value a longer warranty, or prefer Chery's approach to design and ownership experience.

Buy the Suzuki Fronx if: You want lower running costs, or prefer Suzuki's approach to design and ownership experience.

The Verdict

The Chery C5 takes 6 of 7 key spec categories and comes in at a lower price. The Suzuki Fronx will save you roughly $570 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Chery C5 has a clear edge. The Chery C5 adds peace of mind with a longer 7-year warranty. The best pick depends on what you value most. Explore the full specs for each model below.

Common questions

Which is cheapest, Chery C5 and Suzuki Fronx?

The Chery C5 is the cheapest at $27,500 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Suzuki Fronx by $990.

Which is the most fuel-efficient?

The Suzuki Fronx uses the least fuel at 4.9L/100km on the combined cycle.

Which is safest?

The Chery C5 has the highest ANCAP rating at 5 stars.

Which has the most boot space?

The Chery C5 has the largest boot at 370L.

Which has the best warranty?

The Chery C5 has the longest warranty at 7 years / Unlimited.

Which is the most powerful?

The Chery C5 makes the most power at 108kW. The Chery C5 is quickest to 100km/h in 8.5s.

Free alerts

Track the cars you're comparing

Get price-drop and spec-change alerts on the models in this comparison, plus our weekly new-car rundown of launches, deals and reviews.

  • Price-drop alerts on these models
  • Spec-change alerts
  • Weekly new-car rundown

No spam, unsubscribe anytime. By subscribing you agree to receive marketing emails.

Disclaimer: All information in this comparison was believed to be correct at the time of publishing (20 April 2026). Prices are manufacturer recommended retail prices (RRP) and may vary by state, dealer, and options. Driveaway costs include estimated on-road costs for Victoria. Fuel economy figures are WLTP/ADR combined cycle. Specifications can change without notice. Always verify with the manufacturer before making a purchase decision. CarSorted does not accept payment for recommendations.

Auto-generated from CarSorted's specification data · 20 April 2026

Comments (0)

Sign in to join the conversation

No comments yet. Be the first!

More head-to-heads

Other matchups worth a look

Same segment, similar money. Tap any pair for the full side-by-side spec sheet.

All comparisons

Images are representative. Actual variant trim, colour and equipment may differ.

Browse all cars · All SUVs · Best mid-size SUVs · Best hybrid cars