Source type: Suzuki Uganda / CFAO Mobility
Suzuki Across vs Suzuki Ertiga
A proper head-to-head in Uganda — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.
Suzuki Across
ACROSS GLX SUN ROOF 6AT MHV 2WD 1462cc
Petrol Mild Hybrid
6-Speed Automatic
Current
UGX 126,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 77 kW
🔧 137 Nm
⛽ 16.0 km/l
VS
Suzuki Ertiga
ERTIGA GA 5D 1462p 5MT
Petrol
5-Speed Manual
Current
UGX 88,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 77 kW
🔧 138 Nm
⛽ 16.5 km/l
Decision summary
Suzuki Across vs Suzuki Ertiga: the short answer
Across and Ertiga are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Ertiga starts UGX 38,000,000 cheaper
Across from UGX 126,000,000 · Ertiga from UGX 88,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | Across | Ertiga |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | Across77 kW @ 6000 rpm | Ertiga77 kW @ 6000 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | Across136.8 Nm | Ertiga138 Nm @ 4400 rpm |
| Engine Size | Across1462 cc | Ertiga1462 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | Across16.0 km/l | Ertiga16.5 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | Across210 mm | Ertiga180 mm |
Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.
Source type: Suzuki Uganda / CFAO Mobility
What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)
Specification evidence leader
Across
Strengths
- Better fuel efficiency
- Stronger listed safety equipment
- Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
- No obvious weak spots to flag.
Best suited to:
Published Efficiency
Published Practicality
Ertiga
Strengths
- Nothing stands out clearly here.
Weak Spots
- Lower fuel efficiency
- Fewer listed safety features
- Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to:
General Use
Which One's Right for You?
Across
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
Ertiga
- Buyers who prefer this derivative's confirmed specification mix
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | Across | Ertiga |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | 2023 | 2023 |
| Generation | Current Uganda-market generation | Current Uganda-market generation |
| Facelift History | Current-generation specification | Current-generation specification |
| Facelift Launched Since | 2023 | 2023 |
| Facelift Version Ending | Current | Current |
| Body Style | SUV | MPV |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Passenger vehicle | MPV |
| Vehicle Type | Passenger car | Passenger car |
| Spec | Across | Ertiga |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4360 mm | 4395 mm |
| Width | 1795 mm | 1735 mm |
| Height | 1655 mm | 1690 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2600 mm | 2740 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 210 mm | 180 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 150 mm | 150 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 l | 45 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 373 l | 209 l |
| Kerb Weight | 1250 kg | 1165 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 1710 kg | 1735 kg |
| Payload Capacity | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Towing Capacity | 1200 kg | 750 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 5 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Rows | 2 rows | 3 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 5.4 m | 5.2 m |
| Front Headroom | 1000 mm | 1000 mm |
| Rear Headroom | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Front Legroom | 1020 mm | 1020 mm |
| Rear Legroom | 860 mm | 860 mm |
In depth: how these cars differ
This Across and Ertiga comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for Uganda. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.
Performance index: Across 32 vs Ertiga 32.
Efficiency index: Across 68 vs Ertiga 64.
Safety-equipment index: Across 38 vs Ertiga 36.
Practicality index: Across 61 vs Ertiga 56.
Ownership-cover index: Across not separately scored vs Ertiga 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
Across and Ertiga image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Suzuki Across
View 8 more Across images
Suzuki Ertiga
View 8 more Ertiga 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
Across leads by 2 points
Across and Ertiga are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Evidence leader
48
/100
Lead
2
points
Data
78%
source coverage
48
#1
Evidence leader
Across
Performance
32
Efficiency
68
Safety
38
Practicality
61
Leads by 2 points
46
#2
Ertiga
Performance
32
Efficiency
64
Safety
36
Practicality
56
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
Level
Efficiency
Across +4
Safety
Across +2
Practicality
Across +5
Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
Across
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
68/100
Safety
38/100
Practicality
61/100
Ertiga
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
64/100
Safety
36/100
Practicality
56/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Across leads. However, Ertiga may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in Uganda.
Related comparisons
Continue with closely related Uganda models and comparable body styles.
Across vs Ertiga questions
There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in Uganda 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.