Source type: Suzuki Uganda / CFAO Mobility
Suzuki Fronx vs Suzuki Jimny 3-door
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 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
VS
Suzuki Jimny 3-door
Jimny 3D MC25 5MT 4WD GL DA2 audio
Petrol
5-Speed Manual
Current
UGX 112,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 75 kW
🔧 130 Nm
⛽ 13.5 km/l
Decision summary
Suzuki Fronx vs Suzuki Jimny 3-door: the short answer
Fronx and Jimny 3-door are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Fronx starts UGX 20,000,000 cheaper
Fronx from UGX 92,000,000 · Jimny 3-door from UGX 112,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | Fronx | Jimny 3-door |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | Fronx77 kW @ 6000 rpm | Jimny 3-door75 kW @ 6000 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | Fronx138 Nm @ 4400 rpm | Jimny 3-door130 Nm @ 4000 rpm |
| Engine Size | Fronx1462 cc | Jimny 3-door1462 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | Fronx17.8 km/l | Jimny 3-door13.5 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | Fronx170 mm | Jimny 3-door210 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
Fronx
Strengths
- Better fuel efficiency
- Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
- Fewer listed safety features
Best suited to:
Published Efficiency
Published Practicality
Jimny 3-door
Strengths
- Stronger listed safety equipment
Weak Spots
- Lower fuel efficiency
- Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to:
General Use
Which One's Right for You?
Fronx
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
Jimny 3-door
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | Fronx | Jimny 3-door |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | SUV |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Passenger vehicle | Passenger vehicle |
| Vehicle Type | Passenger car | Passenger car |
| Spec | Fronx | Jimny 3-door |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 3995 mm | 3650 mm |
| Width | 1765 mm | 1645 mm |
| Height | 1550 mm | 1725 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2520 mm | 2250 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 170 mm | 210 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 150 mm | 150 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 37 l | 40 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 304 l | 85 l |
| Kerb Weight | 1010 kg | 1110 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 1480 kg | 1450 kg |
| Payload Capacity | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Towing Capacity | 600 kg | 1300 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Rows | 2 rows | 2 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 3 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 4.8 m | 4.9 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 Fronx and Jimny 3-door 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: Fronx 32 vs Jimny 3-door 32.
Efficiency index: Fronx 68 vs Jimny 3-door 56.
Safety-equipment index: Fronx 65 vs Jimny 3-door 67.
Practicality index: Fronx 51 vs Jimny 3-door 45.
Ownership-cover index: Fronx not separately scored vs Jimny 3-door 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 Jimny 3-door 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
Suzuki Jimny 3-door
View 8 more Jimny 3-door 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 4 points
Fronx and Jimny 3-door are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Evidence leader
53
/100
Lead
4
points
Data
78%
source coverage
53
#1
Evidence leader
Fronx
Performance
32
Efficiency
68
Safety
65
Practicality
51
Leads by 4 points
49
#2
Jimny 3-door
Performance
32
Efficiency
56
Safety
67
Practicality
45
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
Level
Efficiency
Fronx +12
Safety
Jimny 3-door +2
Practicality
Fronx +6
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
Jimny 3-door
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
56/100
Safety
67/100
Practicality
45/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Fronx leads. However, Jimny 3-door 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.
Fronx vs Jimny 3-door 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.