Source type: MAC Uganda / Isuzu
Isuzu mu-X vs Suzuki New Swift
A proper head-to-head in Uganda — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.
Isuzu mu-X
mu-X 1.9L 4x4 6AT
Diesel
6-Speed Automatic
Current
UGX 275,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 110 kW
🔧 350 Nm
⛽ 11.8 km/l
VS
Suzuki New Swift
SWIFT GL+ 5D 1197p CVT
Petrol
CVT
Current
UGX 68,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 77 kW
🔧 112 Nm
⛽ 21.0 km/l
Decision summary
Isuzu mu-X vs Suzuki New Swift: the short answer
mu-X has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over New Swift.
New Swift starts UGX 207,000,000 cheaper
mu-X from UGX 275,000,000 · New Swift from UGX 68,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | mu-X | New Swift |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | mu-X110 kW @ 3600 rpm | New Swift77 kW @ 6000 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | mu-X350 Nm @ 1800-2600 rpm | New Swift111.7 Nm @ 4300 rpm |
| Engine Size | mu-X1899 cc | New Swift1197 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | mu-X11.8 km/l | New Swift21.0 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | mu-X220 mm | New Swift145 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
mu-X
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
New Swift
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?
mu-X
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
New Swift
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | mu-X | New Swift |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | 2022 | 2023 |
| Generation | Current Isuzu Uganda-listed generation | Current Uganda-market generation |
| Facelift History | Current Uganda-listed generation; 2026 catalogue planning specification | Current-generation specification |
| Facelift Launched Since | 2024 | 2023 |
| Facelift Version Ending | Current | Current |
| Body Style | SUV | Hatchback |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Seven-seat body-on-frame SUV | Passenger vehicle |
| Vehicle Type | Passenger SUV | Passenger car |
| Spec | mu-X | New Swift |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4850 mm | 3860 mm |
| Width | 1870 mm | 1735 mm |
| Height | 1790 mm | 1520 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2855 mm | 2450 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 220 mm | 145 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 195 mm | 150 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 l | 37 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 311 l | 265 l |
| Kerb Weight | Not Officially Disclosed | 945 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 3100 kg | 1375 kg |
| Payload Capacity | 1000 kg | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Towing Capacity | 3500 kg | 400 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 7 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Rows | 3 rows | 2 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 6.1 m | 5.0 m |
| Front Headroom | 1005 mm | 1000 mm |
| Rear Headroom | 980 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Front Legroom | 1050 mm | 1020 mm |
| Rear Legroom | 900 mm | 860 mm |
In depth: how these cars differ
This mu-X and New Swift 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: mu-X 52 vs New Swift 30.
Efficiency index: mu-X 47 vs New Swift 77.
Safety-equipment index: mu-X 96 vs New Swift 36.
Practicality index: mu-X 83 vs New Swift 46.
Ownership-cover index: mu-X not separately scored vs New Swift 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
mu-X and New Swift image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Isuzu mu-X
View 8 more mu-X images
Suzuki New Swift
View 8 more New Swift 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
mu-X leads by 25 points
mu-X has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over New Swift.
Evidence leader
70
/100
Lead
25
points
Data
78%
source coverage
70
#1
Evidence leader
mu-X
Performance
52
Efficiency
47
Safety
96
Practicality
83
Leads by 25 points
45
#2
New Swift
Performance
30
Efficiency
77
Safety
36
Practicality
46
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
mu-X +22
Efficiency
New Swift +30
Safety
mu-X +60
Practicality
mu-X +37
Large difference in the source-backed catalogue index.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
mu-X
Performance
52/100
Efficiency
47/100
Safety
96/100
Practicality
83/100
New Swift
Performance
30/100
Efficiency
77/100
Safety
36/100
Practicality
46/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, mu-X leads. However, New Swift 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.
mu-X vs New Swift 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.