Source type: Suzuki Kenya
Suzuki FRONX vs Hyundai SANTA FE
A proper head-to-head in Kenya — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.
Suzuki FRONX
FRONX GL 2WD 5D 1462p 5MT
Petrol
5-Speed Manual
Current
KES 3,250,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 77 kW
🔧 138 Nm
VS
Hyundai SANTA FE
SANTA FE Kenya specification
Diesel
Current
KES 9,750,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 142 kW
🔧 440 Nm
Decision summary
Suzuki FRONX vs Hyundai SANTA FE: the short answer
SANTA FE holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over FRONX.
FRONX starts KES 6,500,000 cheaper
FRONX from KES 3,250,000 · SANTA FE from KES 9,750,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | FRONX | SANTA FE |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | FRONX77 kW @ 6000 rpm | SANTA FE142 kW |
| Maximum Torque | FRONX138 Nm @ 4400 rpm | SANTA FE440 Nm |
| Engine Size | FRONX1462 cc | SANTA FENot Officially Disclosed |
| Combined Fuel Economy | FRONXNot Officially Disclosed | SANTA FENot Officially Disclosed |
| Ground Clearance | FRONX170 mm | SANTA FE176 mm |
Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.
Source type: Hyundai Kenya
What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)
FRONX
Strengths
- Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
- Less powerful engine setup
- Fewer listed safety features
- Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to:
Published Efficiency
Specification evidence leader
SANTA FE
Strengths
- More powerful engine output
- Stronger listed safety equipment
- Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
- Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to:
Published Performance
Published Practicality
Which One's Right for You?
FRONX
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
SANTA FE
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | FRONX | SANTA FE |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Generation | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Facelift History | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Facelift Launched Since | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Facelift Version Ending | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Body Style | SUV | SUV |
| Model Year | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Production Status | Active | Active |
| Segment | Kenya-market SUV | Kenya-market SUV |
| Vehicle Type | SUV | SUV |
| Spec | FRONX | SANTA FE |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 3995 mm | 4830 mm |
| Width | 1765 mm | 1900 mm |
| Height | 1550 mm | 1720 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2520 mm | 2815 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 170 mm | 176 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 155 mm | 161 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 37 l | 67 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 308 l | 634 l |
| Kerb Weight | 1040 kg | 1905 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 1480 kg | 2610 kg |
| Payload Capacity | 470 kg | 705 kg |
| Towing Capacity | 1000 kg | 2500 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Rows | 2 rows | 3 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 4.8 m | 5.7 m |
| Front Headroom | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Rear Headroom | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Front Legroom | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Rear Legroom | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
In depth: how these cars differ
This FRONX and SANTA FE comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for Kenya. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.
Performance index: FRONX 35 vs SANTA FE 69.
Efficiency index: FRONX 60 vs SANTA FE 51.
Safety-equipment index: FRONX 83 vs SANTA FE 94.
Practicality index: FRONX 53 vs SANTA FE 83.
Ownership-cover index: FRONX not separately scored vs SANTA FE not separately scored.
These figures are Hagalu catalogue-comparison indicators, not customer ratings, crash-test scores, resale guarantees or a substitute for a road test. Each page shows its weighted source coverage beside the result.
Model imagery
FRONX and SANTA FE image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Suzuki FRONX
View 8 more FRONX images
Hyundai SANTA FE
View 8 more SANTA FE images
Specification Evidence Index
A transparent comparison of published catalogue fields. This is not a road-test score, owner rating or editorial review rating, and it appears only when every vehicle clears the same comparable-data threshold.
Evidence-index readout
SANTA FE leads by 18 points
SANTA FE holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over FRONX.
Evidence leader
75
/100
Lead
18
points
Data
65%
source coverage
75
#1
Evidence leader
SANTA FE
Performance
69
Efficiency
51
Safety
94
Practicality
83
Leads by 18 points
57
#2
FRONX
Performance
35
Efficiency
60
Safety
83
Practicality
53
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
SANTA FE +34
Efficiency
FRONX +9
Safety
SANTA FE +11
Practicality
SANTA FE +30
Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
SANTA FE
Performance
69/100
Efficiency
51/100
Safety
94/100
Practicality
83/100
FRONX
Performance
35/100
Efficiency
60/100
Safety
83/100
Practicality
53/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, SANTA FE leads. However, FRONX may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in Kenya.
Related comparisons
Continue with closely related Kenya models and comparable body styles.
FRONX vs SANTA FE questions
There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in Kenya on price, safety equipment, space, powertrain and ownership cover. The category indicators summarise published catalogue data; they are not a road test or customer rating.
Compare the published consumption or mileage rows for the exact derivatives using the same unit and test basis. A catalogue figure is useful for like-for-like comparison, but traffic, speed, load, weather and driving style can change actual fuel use.
Compare only equipment explicitly listed for each derivative, including airbags, stability control and driver-assistance systems. Confirm the exact trim with the manufacturer, and treat any independent crash-test result separately because equipment and ratings can differ by market.
A reliable five-year total cannot be calculated from catalogue data alone. Add the exact purchase and finance cost, fuel or electricity, insurance quotes, scheduled servicing, tyres and expected resale value. Check whether the selected derivative includes a service or maintenance plan.
Use the seating, boot or load-space, ISOFIX and safety rows as a first check. Then test the exact cars with your child seats, passengers and typical luggage, because published dimensions do not show every access or comfort difference.
Compare the published power, torque and 0–100 km/h rows when they are available for both exact derivatives. Vehicle weight, gearing and power delivery also matter, so catalogue outputs alone do not establish real-world overtaking or response.