CS
CarSorted
HomeComparisonsChery Tiggo 4 vs Suzuki Swift
Spec Battle Updated 20 April 2026 5 min read

Chery Tiggo 4 vs Suzuki Swift

A detailed look at how two of Australia's most popular cars 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)$21,750$16,990
Fuel typePetrolPetrol
Power108kW70kW
Fuel Economy7.4 L/100km5.5 L/100km
Boot Space380L210L
Warranty7yr / Unlimited3yr / 100k km
ANCAP Safety5 Stars5 Stars

Track the Chery Tiggo 4 & Suzuki Swift

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

Price Breakdown

The Chery Tiggo 4 starts from $21,750 before on-road costs, while the Suzuki Swift opens at $16,990. That makes the Suzuki Swift the more affordable entry point by $4,760.

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 $23,925 and $18,689 respectively.

Over 5 years, the running costs favour the Suzuki Swift by roughly $2,705 in fuel alone.

Safety Rundown

Both the Chery Tiggo 4 and Suzuki Swift hold a 5-star ANCAP safety rating.

Where the two diverge is in active safety technology. The Chery Tiggo 4 packs more ADAS features with 6 out of 10 key systems fitted, compared to 0 in the Suzuki Swift.

Both include the essentials: core safety systems. Airbag count is 7 in the Chery Tiggo 4 and 7 in the Suzuki Swift.

Feature Showdown

Both come with modern infotainment systems.

The Chery Tiggo 4 stands out with wireless Apple CarPlay/Android Auto that you will not find on the Suzuki Swift. Which feature set matters more depends on your daily routine and priorities.

Drivetrain

The Chery Tiggo 4 uses a Petrol producing 108kW and 210Nm of torque, sent through a cvt to a FWD layout.

The Suzuki Swift responds with a Petrol making 70kW and 130Nm, paired to a 5-speed manual driving the front wheels.

The Chery Tiggo 4 has the clear power advantage at 108kW vs 70kW. For most buyers, the way each car feels day-to-day matters more than outright acceleration.

Space & Comfort

The Chery Tiggo 4 measures 4,307mm long on a 2,610mm wheelbase, 457mm longer than the Suzuki Swift at 3,850mm (2,430mm wheelbase). The longer wheelbase on the Chery Tiggo 4 generally means more rear legroom.

Boot space is 380L in the Chery Tiggo 4 and 210L in the Suzuki Swift, giving the Chery Tiggo 4 a 170L advantage.

Turning Circle

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

9.6m diameter

Excellent

Suzuki Swift GA Manual
9.6m
Suzuki Swift GA Manual
9.6m · Excellent

Based on 9.6m 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
Interactive simulator: U-turns, parking & towing

Turning Circle

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

9.6 m Ø

Excellent

9.0 m road
Suzuki Swift Turning circle · Ø 9.6 m Kerb strike
Scrub the turn

Clears the U-turn in one swing

Needs about 8.4 m of road; you have 9.0 m.

U-turn on a wide street

≥ 10 m: clears in one

!

U-turn on a standard street

7 m: 3-point turn

Standard parking bay

1.7 m wide: fits with room

Tight carpark aisle

6 m: swings in

Narrow laneway

3.5 m: no room to turn

Turning circle ratings

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

Standard widths: AU local streets carry ~5.5–7 m of carriageway; main roads ~9–12 m. AS 2890.1 carpark aisles are ~5.8–6.6 m for 90° bays (2.6 m wide × 5.4 m deep).

Road, aisle, swing and off-tracking figures are indicative estimates from the published turning circle. Verify in person before relying on them.

True Cost to Own

Based on 15,000km of annual driving, fuel costs roughly $2,109/year for the Chery Tiggo 4 and $1,568/year for the Suzuki Swift. That is a $541 annual difference in favour of the Suzuki Swift.

Estimated annual total: $2,109 (Chery Tiggo 4) vs $1,568 (Suzuki Swift). The Suzuki Swift saves you roughly $541 per year in total ownership costs. Use our Fuel Cost Calculator to estimate based on your driving.

Warranty: 7 years / 999,999km (Chery Tiggo 4) vs 3 years / 100,000km (Suzuki Swift). The Chery Tiggo 4 has longer coverage.

Who Should Buy Which?

Buy the Chery Tiggo 4 if: You prioritise performance, need more boot space, value a longer warranty, or prefer Chery's approach to design and ownership experience.

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

The Verdict

The Chery Tiggo 4 takes 3 of 5 key spec categories. The Suzuki Swift will save you roughly $541 a year in fuel. If boot space matters, the Chery Tiggo 4 has a clear edge. The Chery Tiggo 4 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 Tiggo 4 and Suzuki Swift?

The Suzuki Swift is the cheapest at $16,990 before on-road costs. That undercuts the Chery Tiggo 4 by $4,760.

Which is the most fuel-efficient?

The Suzuki Swift uses the least fuel at 5.5L/100km on the combined cycle.

Which is safest?

They are evenly matched — Chery Tiggo 4 and Suzuki Swift all hold a 5-star ANCAP rating. Compare the active-safety features above to separate them.

Which has the most boot space?

The Chery Tiggo 4 has the largest boot at 380L.

Which has the best warranty?

The Chery Tiggo 4 has the longest warranty at 7 years / Unlimited.

Which is the most powerful?

The Chery Tiggo 4 makes the most power at 108kW.

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 · All Hatchbacks · Best mid-size SUVs · Best family cars