Source type: Toyota Uganda / generation-matched Toyota data; user-supplied estimates for remaining fields
Toyota Coaster vs Suzuki S-Presso
A proper head-to-head in Uganda — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.
Toyota Coaster
Coaster 4.2L Diesel 30-Seater MT
Diesel
5-Speed Manual
Current
UGX 395,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 96 kW
🔧 285 Nm
⛽ 12.5 km/l
VS
Suzuki S-Presso
S-PRESSO GL+ 5D 998p AMT
Petrol
5-Speed AMT
Current
UGX 55,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 77 kW
🔧 138 Nm
⛽ 21.5 km/l
Decision summary
Toyota Coaster vs Suzuki S-Presso: the short answer
Coaster holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over S-Presso.
S-Presso starts UGX 340,000,000 cheaper
Coaster from UGX 395,000,000 · S-Presso from UGX 55,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | Coaster | S-Presso |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | Coaster96 kW @ 3800 rpm | S-Presso77 kW @ 6000 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | Coaster285 Nm @ 2200 rpm | S-Presso138 Nm @ 4400 rpm |
| Engine Size | Coaster4164 cc | S-Presso998 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | Coaster12.5 km/l | S-Presso21.5 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | Coaster180 mm | S-PressoNot Officially Disclosed |
Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.
Source type: Suzuki Uganda local distributor/source record
What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)
Specification evidence leader
Coaster
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
S-Presso
Strengths
- Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
- Less powerful engine setup
- Fewer listed safety features
- Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to:
Published Efficiency
Which One's Right for You?
Coaster
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
S-Presso
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | Coaster | S-Presso |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | 2024 | 2023 |
| Generation | Current Uganda-market generation | Current Uganda-market generation |
| Facelift History | Current Uganda-market version | Current-generation specification |
| Facelift Launched Since | 2024 | 2023 |
| Facelift Version Ending | Current | Current |
| Body Style | Bus | Hatchback |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Bus segment | Passenger vehicle |
| Vehicle Type | Bus | Passenger car |
| Spec | Coaster | S-Presso |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 6990 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Width | 2275 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Height | 2635 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Wheelbase | 3935 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 180 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 165 mm | 150 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 95 l | 40 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | Not Officially Disclosed | 239 l |
| Kerb Weight | 3350 kg | 500 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 1500 kg | 500 kg |
| Payload Capacity | 1500 kg | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Towing Capacity | 1500 kg | 300 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 30 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Rows | 8 rows | 2 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 5.5 m | 5.0 m |
| Front Headroom | 1000 mm | 1000 mm |
| Rear Headroom | 960 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Front Legroom | 1050 mm | 1020 mm |
| Rear Legroom | 850 mm | 860 mm |
In depth: how these cars differ
This Coaster and S-Presso 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: Coaster 46 vs S-Presso 32.
Efficiency index: Coaster 54 vs S-Presso 79.
Safety-equipment index: Coaster 68 vs S-Presso 36.
Practicality index: Coaster 76 vs S-Presso 25.
Ownership-cover index: Coaster not separately scored vs S-Presso 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
Coaster and S-Presso image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Toyota Coaster
View 8 more Coaster images
Suzuki S-Presso
View 8 more S-Presso 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
Coaster leads by 20 points
Coaster holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over S-Presso.
Evidence leader
61
/100
Lead
20
points
Data
69%
source coverage
61
#1
Evidence leader
Coaster
Performance
46
Efficiency
54
Safety
68
Practicality
76
Leads by 20 points
41
#2
S-Presso
Performance
32
Efficiency
79
Safety
36
Practicality
25
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
Coaster +14
Efficiency
S-Presso +25
Safety
Coaster +32
Practicality
Coaster +51
Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
Coaster
Performance
46/100
Efficiency
54/100
Safety
68/100
Practicality
76/100
S-Presso
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
79/100
Safety
36/100
Practicality
25/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Coaster leads. However, S-Presso 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.
Coaster vs S-Presso 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.