Source type: Suzuki Uganda / CFAO Mobility
Suzuki Fronx vs Isuzu N-Series
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
Isuzu N-Series
NHR 55E Cab Chassis 5MT
Diesel
5-Speed Manual
Current
UGX 125,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 59 kW
🔧 175 Nm
⛽ 4.5 km/l
Decision summary
Suzuki Fronx vs Isuzu N-Series: the short answer
Fronx and N-Series are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Fronx starts UGX 33,000,000 cheaper
Fronx from UGX 92,000,000 · N-Series from UGX 125,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | Fronx | N-Series |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | Fronx77 kW @ 6000 rpm | N-Series59 kW @ 3600 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | Fronx138 Nm @ 4400 rpm | N-Series175 Nm @ 2000 rpm |
| Engine Size | Fronx1462 cc | N-Series2771 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | Fronx17.8 km/l | N-Series4.5 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | Fronx170 mm | N-Series180 mm |
Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.
Source type: MAC Uganda / Isuzu East Africa
What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)
Fronx
Strengths
- More powerful engine output
- Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
- Fewer listed safety features
- Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to:
Published Performance
Published Efficiency
Specification evidence leader
N-Series
Strengths
- Stronger listed safety equipment
- Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
- Less powerful engine setup
- Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to:
Published Practicality
Which One's Right for You?
Fronx
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
N-Series
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | Fronx | N-Series |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | 2023 | 2022 |
| Generation | Current Uganda-market generation | N-Series truck cab-chassis specification in MAC Uganda-linked Isuzu East Africa brochure; finished body specified separately |
| Facelift History | Current-generation specification | Current Uganda-listed generation; 2026 catalogue planning specification |
| Facelift Launched Since | 2023 | 2024 |
| Facelift Version Ending | Current | Current |
| Body Style | SUV | Cab Chassis |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Passenger vehicle | Light-duty commercial truck |
| Vehicle Type | Passenger car | Commercial truck chassis |
| Spec | Fronx | N-Series |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 3995 mm | 4590 mm |
| Width | 1765 mm | 1695 mm |
| Height | 1550 mm | 2095 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2520 mm | 2490 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 170 mm | 180 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 150 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 37 l | 75 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 304 l | Not Applicable |
| Kerb Weight | 1010 kg | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 1480 kg | 7500 kg |
| Payload Capacity | Not Officially Disclosed | 4500 kg |
| Towing Capacity | 600 kg | 3500 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 5 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Rows | 2 rows | 1 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 2 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 4.8 m | 6.1 m |
| Front Headroom | 1000 mm | 1030 mm |
| Rear Headroom | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Applicable |
| Front Legroom | 1020 mm | 1020 mm |
| Rear Legroom | 860 mm | Not Applicable |
In depth: how these cars differ
This Fronx and N-Series 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 N-Series 29.
Efficiency index: Fronx 68 vs N-Series 26.
Safety-equipment index: Fronx 65 vs N-Series 89.
Practicality index: Fronx 51 vs N-Series 73.
Ownership-cover index: Fronx not separately scored vs N-Series 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 N-Series 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
Isuzu N-Series
View 8 more N-Series 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
N-Series leads by 2 points
Fronx and N-Series are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Evidence leader
55
/100
Lead
2
points
Data
59%
source coverage
55
#1
Evidence leader
N-Series
Performance
29
Efficiency
26
Safety
89
Practicality
73
Leads by 2 points
53
#2
Fronx
Performance
32
Efficiency
68
Safety
65
Practicality
51
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
Fronx +3
Efficiency
Fronx +42
Safety
N-Series +24
Practicality
N-Series +22
Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
N-Series
Performance
29/100
Efficiency
26/100
Safety
89/100
Practicality
73/100
Fronx
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
68/100
Safety
65/100
Practicality
51/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, N-Series leads. However, Fronx 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 N-Series 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.