Aston Martin DBX vs Suzuki Fronx

What's the difference?

As with all Aston Martins the DBX is a seriously beautiful car with that high-end exotic but restrained exterior styling for which the brand is known. As with all Astons, too, the busy interior design may put some minimalism fans off and those high-placed shifting buttons pose a functionality problem.

As an SUV the DBX is spacious and practical. You could use this daily as a family car. I did and found it easy to adapt to.

The driving experience left me disappointed. I didn’t feel the same close connection with the DBX while driving that I have had with other super SUVs, such as the Lamborghini Urus and more affordable models offered by Porsche and Mercedes-AMG.

But then, you see those other cars everywhere, unlike the DBX which is a rare and beautiful creature, despite the flaws.

If you’re considering a small car, particularly if an SUV is the goal, a Suzuki should in most cases be on the shopping list. Back-to-basics motoring is key to the brand’s identity. Its most popular model is a tiny ladder-frame 4X4, for example. Hi Jimny.

The Fronx doesn’t break new ground in any practical sense, but it does come in with a decent price and list of features that should sway plenty of small-car fans in the showroom.

It’s decent to look at, comfortable for the segment, and easy to get used to and drive. The numerical rating on this review betrays just how likeable the car is.

It’s not extremely refined and it starts to lose its dynamic shine on rough roads, but in an urban setting the Fronx should excel.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with meals provided.

I'm not one to name drop but I was having a chin wag with Marek, that's Marek Reichman, Aston Martin's Vice President and Chief Creative Officer, the fellow who has designed every Aston from the past 15 years, that Marek. Anyway, before the DBX came out he told me any SUV he designed would be unmistakably an Aston Martin.

I think he nailed it. The gaping Aston Martin grille is unmistakably the same as the DB11's and the tailgate, which although is the back hatch to a large SUV, is absolutely the same as the rear end of the Vantage.

Everything in between has all the family hallmarks. There are those oval headlights and the huge beak of a bonnet, the chiselled side panels with wheel arches that push up towards the sky and those rear haunches.

Not a fan of minimalist design? Then you'll love the DBX's cabin and its dashboard cluttered with dials, buttons, and switches.

It's like the cockpit of a plane and it's a very Aston Martin thing – just look at the layout of the DB5 from the 1960s, it's a mess, a beautiful mess though. The same goes for current models such as the DB11, DBS and Vantage.

Seriously, if there was one area where Marek may have decided not to make the DBX unmistakably Aston Martin, I wish it had been the interior.

Still, I think the DBX has the best cabin design of any current Aston, with its large media screen built into the centre console and more modern styling.

But regardless of what it looks like the feel of the materials is outstanding. There's a thick leather coating on just about every surface, apart from those which are solid, cold metal, like the paddle shifters and door handles.

It's a plush, sporty place, like Batman's suit only it smells a lot nicer.

The DBX is a large SUV at 5039mm long, 2220mm wide with the mirrors unfurled and 1680mm tall. Yep, this thing fills up an entire space in a car park.

The DBX comes in a choice of 53 colours. Yes, fifty three.  There's the 'Onyx Black' my test car wore, but also 'Royal Indigo', 'Supernova Red' and 'Kermit Green.'

‘Fronx’ as a name doesn’t exactly scream ‘cute’, but the little SUV has a pretty classically Suzuki design. This is not a complaint at all.

The Fronx is 3995mm long, 1765mm wide and 1550mm tall, but despite its diminutive dimensions the brand has opted to lean into a ‘coupe’ style with a sloping roofline that creates a relatively sporty look, especially for something with a two-digit power figure.

So while some of Suzuki’s designs have been divisive in Australia (Ignis, anyone?) the Fronx takes a slightly more conservative approach by leaning into more design trends than just the coupe-back SUV shape. 

For example, its tail-lights span the width of the tailgate rather than simply flanking the boot as was standard for decades.

The LED daytime running lights at the front are also arranged in a slim, high-up position with a set of headlights below.

Inside is arguably more conservative than out, as the Fronx goes with a fairly standard formula in terms of its layout, with few premium materials (the synthetic leather on the seats feels cheap for example) or adventurous design elements to be found.

But that’s not such a bad thing.

Until the DBX came along the most practical Aston Martin was the five-door, four-seater Rapide which had a huge rear hatch and a boot big enough to swallow an entire matching five-piece luggage set – I saw it with my very own eyes.

Now there's the DBX which seats five (well, four comfortably, because nobody wants to be in the middle) and has a boot with a luggage capacity of 491 litres under the leather cargo cover.

As you can see it fit our three-piece CarsGuide luggage set, and I also used it to pick up some compost – very likely the first time anybody has done this to a DBX ever in Australia, and probably the last.

Cabin storage is impressive. The floating centre console is suspended like a hammock and under it is a huge bunk for a phone, wallet, and small bags. The split-opening armrest houses a large box, too.

The door pockets are on the small side but there are two cupholders up front and another two in the fold-down armrest in the second row.

Talking of rows, there's no third row. The DBX comes as a two-row, five-seater only.

It’s a roomy second row, with more than enough space for me at 191cm (6'3") tall to sit behind my driving position and headroom is excellent, too.

Because for all the conservative, even outdated, styling in the cabin, the fact is it’ll be refreshingly familiar to someone who’s getting out of a car from perhaps even before the year 2000.

Suzuki’s place at the budget end of the new-car market means its customers are likely either quite young and buying their first new car, or relatively old and looking for a cheap, rarely used runabout as the ‘last car’.

For the former, a lack of techy distractions is paramount. For the latter, ease of use wins over cutting-edge tech in most cases. Which is why it’s probably okay that the Fronx’s multimedia touchscreen and software wouldn’t feel out of place almost a decade ago.

It can be a tad fiddly to use at speed, but it’s still more straightforward than the ‘iPad-like’ systems Tesla has made popular, and there are physical controls for important functions like climate control.

There’s also a row of ever-present haptic buttons for volume controls and navigation shortcuts.

The ergonomics of the interior are quite basic, but there are no red flags in terms of visibility, reach, or placement. 

The head-up display is a bonus, but the physical dials on the dash rather than a digital driver display are clear enough, despite again feeling nabbed from a time before head-up displays even existed. 

Space for the front passengers is decent, it’s not cavernous but it’s far from cramped. Elbow rests and seating positions allow for a relaxed ride.

The back seat is a slightly less comfortable place, but at 178cm I can sit behind my own seating position without my knees touching the seat in front, and my head has just enough space above to accommodate the top of a mullet.

Behind that, luggage capacity in the boot is 304 litres, or 605 litres with the rear 60/40 split seats folded.

There’s also no space-saver spare tyre, just a repair kit as standard.

There’s only one variant of the Fronx, and it lands at $28,990 before on-road costs. It’s also relatively stacked when it comes to features, and Suzuki is even working on a sub-$30K drive-away offer for its on-sale date in September this year. We’d expect that means about $29,990 DA, though that’s to be confirmed down the track.

For something at that price point, features aren’t lacking. While things like wireless phone charging and wireless Android Auto and Apple CarPlay have become almost expected for even entry-level cars in Australia, the Fronx also features heated synthetic leather seats and a leather steering wheel.

It’s the first Suzuki in Australia to feature a head-up display, and there’s also a standard surround-view parking display thanks to a set of cameras.

The Fronx’s 9.0-inch multimedia touchscreen is joined by a small 4.2-inch driver display nestled between physical dials for the speedometer and tachometer. Exterior lighting is LED front and rear, with auto headlights and manual levelling.

The only extra-cost option for the Fronx is a choice of ‘premium’ single- or two-tone paint - Arctic White Pearl is the standard no-cost colour. Single-tone paint is $745 extra, while two-tone options are $1345, which is a lot pricier than many premium paint options in the market.

The Fronx comes in at the same price as a mid-to-high spec Hyundai Venue, Kia Stonic or Chery Tiggo 4, but some rivals like the Mazda CX-3 or Toyota Yaris Cross (with its Hybrid drivetrain) are more expensive even in their lower variants.

When it came to giving the DBX an engine Aston Martin chose the same 4.0-litre twin-turbo V8 that's in the Vantage only they made it more powerful – 25kW more at 405kW (542hp). There's 15Nm more torque as well, at 700Nm.

Shifting through a nine-speed automatic transmission the DBX's 0-100km/h time is 4.5 seconds, which is almost a second slower than the Vantage's 3.6 seconds.

That said, the DBX weighs more than 2.2 tonnes, has a maximum ground clearance of 190mm, can wade rivers to a depth of 500mm and has a braked towing capacity of 2700kg. Oh yeah, and it's all-wheel drive.

That engine is one of the world's best V8s. It's light, compact, efficient and can produce enormous grunt. It's also made by Mercedes-Benz. Yup, it's the same (M177) 4.0-litre V8 found in the Mercedes-AMG C 63 S and a stack of other AMG-badged beasties.

There's just one thing, the V8 in the DBX doesn't sound as good to me as the one in a Mercedes-AMG. Aston's version has a less guttural and breathy exhaust note.

Sure, it still sounds amazing and when pushed hard it screams like Boudica charging into battle, but how often will you drive like that?

Most of the time we're in traffic in the suburbs and city trundling around at 40km/h. But even with the ‘loud’ exhaust mode set the note is still not as deep and brash as the AMG, which sounds delicious even at a standstill.

You probably already know why Aston Martin uses Mercedes-Benz engines. But just in case, it's because the brand with the star has been a part owner since 2013. Aston saves money and in return gets some of the best engines in the world.

The Fronx is powered by a 1.5-litre four-cylinder engine with mild-hybrid assistance, driving the front wheels via a six-speed automatic transmission. 

Its outputs are quoted at 76kW and 137Nm, not exactly high-grade stuff and part of the reason the Fronx feels like it takes more than 10 seconds to hit 100km/h.

In my fuel test of the DBX I took in open roads and city streets and measured 20.4L/100km at the pump.

On the same test loop the Urus I drove used 15.7L/100km and the Bentley Bentayga consumed 21.1L/100km.

It's not surprising these super SUVs are thirsty, but if you're spending all your time on city roads you can expect the consumption to be even higher.

What is surprising is Aston Martin thinking anyone could really get 12.2L/100km, but then all carmakers tend to claim overly ambitious fuel economy figures.

Just think, your next car after this will probably be electric, so enjoy the petrol while it lasts.

Suzuki claims fuel consumption at 4.9L/100km. With its 37-litre fuel tank, the Fronx should be able to manage more than 600km on a single tank, though theoretically its maximum range given its claimed fuel efficiency is 755km.

The DBX is a circa 550 horsepower giant that can reach out and almost touch 300km/h. But testing it on Sydney's roads is like having a champion racehorse in your backyard and your neighbour asking you what it's like to ride.

A racetrack wasn't handy at the time and I'd signed a form saying I'd not put any more than 400km on the clock during its stay with me, which meant having to choose my test loop carefully.

Fortunately, this was before Sydney was plunged into the current COVID lockdown, which makes that 400km now seem vast.

First, the DBX is an SUV anybody could drive, every day. Visibility is great and the ride is fine considering it rolls on 22-inch wheels and wears rubber as wide as some doorways and as thin as my socks (285/40 front and 325/35 rear Pirelli Scorpion Zero). Power delivery is smooth and predictable.

I did drive it every day, doing the shopping, school pick ups, a trip to the garden centre to fill it with plants and (ahem) compost, and it performed exactly as a large SUV should.

A source of frustration was the location of the shifting buttons high on the dashboard. Have a look at the images. Even with my chimpanzee-like long arms I had to stretch to change from Drive to Reverse. And with a not so small turning circle of 12.4m, three-point turns were a bit of an arm workout.

But the bigger frustration was the driver-car connection which didn't feel quite right. A good car-driver connection is essential for any great performance car.

Yes, there wasn't a race circuit where I could get to know the DBX quickly. But a good road, driven often with test cars, reveals a lot, too.

And the DBX didn't feel as good as the Lamborghini Urus, which is not only more comfortable but feels more dynamic and offers a superb connection between the driver and the machine.

The DBX is fast, it's powerful, the huge brakes pull it up quickly (almost violently so, if required) and handling is incredibly good.

It's just that I didn't really feel a part of it much at all. You know, the whole driver and car becoming one, thing. I felt like the third wheel on a date.

That connected feeling has been mastered by Porsche with its SUVs, but I feel the DBX needs more work. It felt unfinished.

I was told at the start that the DBX I was testing was a pre-production vehicle, but I'm sure that doesn't cover the shortcomings in the way it drove.

It's disappointing. I was hoping for better, but I think further development will see that come later.

How you plan to use the Fronx will make a big difference in whether what you’re about to read is a good thing or not. 

The Fronx is a light SUV for a start, so expecting brilliant handling, effortless acceleration and a dead-quiet cabin is going to mean you’re disappointed.

But if you want something easy, engaging and fun, the Fronx might work for you.

Our brief test loop wasn’t entirely indicative of what the Fronx is likely to face day-to-day. With limited time and no preset drive program, the roads within a 20-or-so minute drive of Nagambie, Victoria had to suffice.

The Fronx fared well on the average road, it turned out, with the 1064kg Suzuki managing to feel planted enough to hurl along 100km/h back-roads without complaints. It rides on the same platform used recently by the Suzuki Baleno, something I’ll admit to not having driven.

The rougher roads didn’t faze the light SUV too much, though consistently uneven surfaces made it feel unsettled in some cornering.

Its steering and suspension give enough feedback to make the right inputs easily, though the nature of its light weight and minimal accoutrement in terms of driver assistance make the Fronx feel very rudimentary from the driver’s seat.

At low speeds around the centre of town, the Fronx manages the state’s terrible roads well, though taking off from intersections can be laborious. Much like overtaking, the drivetrain will complain.

And don’t expect its mild hybrid system to do a lot in the way of hard work - or any work at all, really. You could take the hybrid badge off the car, let someone have a drive, and they’d be none the wiser.

From the limited observations on the launch, the Fronx would feel best at home in suburbia or a metropolitan centre more so than on the Hume Highway or the towns dotted alongside it.

Essentially, this is not a refined road trip car for the highway, but its no-fuss approach to getting around means you shouldn’t be surprised if you start seeing them in the car parks at universities or bowls clubs.

A big part of many buyers’ decisions about a new car is safety, and the Fronx is pretty basic on this front.

Six airbags cover front and sides for the front passengers, and there are curtains down the sides of the car, but there’s no front centre airbag and no ANCAP rating has been applied to the Fronx as yet.

In terms of active safety, the Fronx has listed among its standard features auto emergency braking (AEB), ABS and brake assist, lane departure warning, hill hold control, weaving alert, blind spot monitoring, traffic sign recognition, rear cross traffic alert and a surround-view parking camera with front and rear sensors.

There are also outboard ISOFIX seat fastenings in the second row.

The only safety system that activated during the test was a lane departure warning, but only when (under normal conditions) it would have been necessary as the car approached the road’s centre line.

The DBX is covered by Aston Martin's three-year-unlimited kilometre warranty. Also included is roadside assistance.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 16,000km.

Aston Martin doesn't have have capped price servicing for the DBX nor can owners purchase a maintenance plan for the SUV.

We asked Aston Martin for an estimate of how much owners can expect to pay for servicing over the life of the warranty, but a spokesperson told us, "We are unable to provide an estimate on the cost of servicing over three years."

With Aston Martin unable or unwilling to give us any guidance on servicing costs, maybe there are recent model Aston owners out there who can. Let us know in the comments section below.

Suzuki has a five-year, unlimited kilometre warranty for its new cars, which is a little behind the curve compared to many budget-friendly brands these days. 

Suzuki does have a five-year servicing schedule, with intervals every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever comes first. Total cost is $2005 over the five years, with services averaging $401, which is not particularly cheap.