Source type: Suzuki Uganda local distributor/source record
Suzuki S-Presso vs Hyundai Santa Fe
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 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
VS
Hyundai Santa Fe
SANTA FE 2.5L Petrol 4x4 8AT GLS
Petrol
8-Speed Automatic
Current
UGX 210,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 143 kW
🔧 246 Nm
⛽ 11.76 km/l
Decision summary
Suzuki S-Presso vs Hyundai Santa Fe: the short answer
Santa Fe holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over S-Presso.
S-Presso starts UGX 155,000,000 cheaper
S-Presso from UGX 55,000,000 · Santa Fe from UGX 210,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | S-Presso | Santa Fe |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | S-Presso77 kW @ 6000 rpm | Santa Fe142.7 kW @ 6100 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | S-Presso138 Nm @ 4400 rpm | Santa Fe246 Nm @ 4000 rpm |
| Engine Size | S-Presso998 cc | Santa Fe2497 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | S-Presso21.5 km/l | Santa Fe11.76 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | S-PressoNot Officially Disclosed | Santa Fe177 mm |
Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.
Source type: Hyundai Uganda / Motorcare quotation catalogue and model specifications
What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)
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
Specification evidence leader
Santa Fe
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
Which One's Right for You?
S-Presso
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
Santa Fe
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
- Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | S-Presso | Santa Fe |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | 2023 | 2023 |
| Generation | Current Uganda-market generation | Current market generation |
| Facelift History | Current-generation specification | Current-generation specification |
| Facelift Launched Since | 2023 | 2023 |
| Facelift Version Ending | Current | Current |
| Body Style | Hatchback | SUV |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Passenger vehicle | SUV |
| Vehicle Type | Passenger car | Passenger SUV |
| Spec | S-Presso | Santa Fe |
|---|---|---|
| Length | Not Officially Disclosed | 4830 mm |
| Width | Not Officially Disclosed | 1900 mm |
| Height | Not Officially Disclosed | 1770 mm |
| Wheelbase | Not Officially Disclosed | 2815 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | Not Officially Disclosed | 177 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 150 mm | 160 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 40 l | 67 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 239 l | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Kerb Weight | 500 kg | 1970 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 500 kg | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Payload Capacity | Not Officially Disclosed | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Towing Capacity | 300 kg | 1500 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 2 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Rows | 2 rows | 3 rows |
| Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 5.0 m | 5.5 m |
| Front Headroom | 1000 mm | 1020 mm |
| Rear Headroom | Not Officially Disclosed | 1007 mm |
| Front Legroom | 1020 mm | 1052 mm |
| Rear Legroom | 860 mm | 1075 mm |
In depth: how these cars differ
This S-Presso and Santa Fe 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: S-Presso 32 vs Santa Fe 56.
Efficiency index: S-Presso 79 vs Santa Fe 46.
Safety-equipment index: S-Presso 36 vs Santa Fe 63.
Practicality index: S-Presso 25 vs Santa Fe 70.
Ownership-cover index: S-Presso not separately scored vs Santa Fe 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
S-Presso and Santa Fe image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Suzuki S-Presso
View 8 more S-Presso images
Hyundai Santa Fe
View 8 more Santa Fe 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
Santa Fe leads by 18 points
Santa Fe holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over S-Presso.
Evidence leader
59
/100
Lead
18
points
Data
71%
source coverage
59
#1
Evidence leader
Santa Fe
Performance
56
Efficiency
46
Safety
63
Practicality
70
Leads by 18 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
Santa Fe +24
Efficiency
S-Presso +33
Safety
Santa Fe +27
Practicality
Santa Fe +45
Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
Santa Fe
Performance
56/100
Efficiency
46/100
Safety
63/100
Practicality
70/100
S-Presso
Performance
32/100
Efficiency
79/100
Safety
36/100
Practicality
25/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Santa Fe 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.
S-Presso vs Santa Fe 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.