Source type: Suzuki Uganda / CFAO Mobility
Suzuki Ertiga vs Suzuki Fronx
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 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
VS
Suzuki Fronx
FRONX GL 2WD 5D 1462p 5MT
Petrol
5-Speed Manual
Current
UGX 92,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 77 kW
🔧 138 Nm
⛽ 17.8 km/l
Decision summary
Suzuki Ertiga vs Suzuki Fronx: the short answer
Ertiga and Fronx are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Ertiga starts UGX 4,000,000 cheaper
Ertiga from UGX 88,000,000 · Fronx from UGX 92,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | Ertiga | Fronx |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | Ertiga77 kW @ 6000 rpm | Fronx77 kW @ 6000 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | Ertiga138 Nm @ 4400 rpm | Fronx138 Nm @ 4400 rpm |
| Engine Size | Ertiga1462 cc | Fronx1462 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | Ertiga16.5 km/l | Fronx17.8 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | Ertiga180 mm | Fronx170 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)
Ertiga
Strengths
- Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
- Lower fuel efficiency
- Fewer listed safety features
Best suited to:
Published Practicality
Specification evidence leader
Fronx
Strengths
- Better fuel efficiency
- Stronger listed safety equipment
Weak Spots
- Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to:
Published Efficiency
Which One's Right for You?
Ertiga
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
Fronx
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | Ertiga | Fronx |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | MPV | SUV |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | MPV | Passenger vehicle |
| Vehicle Type | Passenger car | Passenger car |
| Spec | Ertiga | Fronx |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4395 mm | 3995 mm |
| Width | 1735 mm | 1765 mm |
| Height | 1690 mm | 1550 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2740 mm | 2520 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 180 mm | 170 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 150 mm | 150 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 l | 37 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 209 l | 304 l |
| Kerb Weight | 1165 kg | 1010 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 1735 kg | 1480 kg |
| Payload Capacity | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Towing Capacity | 750 kg | 600 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Rows | 3 rows | 2 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 5.2 m | 4.8 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 Ertiga and Fronx 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: Ertiga 32 vs Fronx 32.
Efficiency index: Ertiga 64 vs Fronx 68.
Safety-equipment index: Ertiga 36 vs Fronx 65.
Practicality index: Ertiga 56 vs Fronx 51.
Ownership-cover index: Ertiga not separately scored vs Fronx 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
Ertiga and Fronx image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Suzuki Ertiga
View 8 more Ertiga images
Suzuki Fronx
View 8 more Fronx 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
Fronx leads by 7 points
Ertiga and Fronx are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Evidence leader
53
/100
Lead
7
points
Data
78%
source coverage
53
#1
Evidence leader
Fronx
Performance
32
Efficiency
68
Safety
65
Practicality
51
Leads by 7 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
Fronx +4
Safety
Fronx +29
Practicality
Ertiga +5
Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
Fronx
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
68/100
Safety
65/100
Practicality
51/100
Ertiga
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
64/100
Safety
36/100
Practicality
56/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Fronx 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.
Ertiga vs Fronx 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.