Kia Carnival vs Suzuki Fronx

What's the difference?

Ok, here's the rub. Everything you just read could well be pointless. You like the Carnival. In fact, it sometimes makes up close to 90 per cent of the sales in its segment, and outsells all of its competitors combined.

So whether I like it or not, I suspect you'll be buying one anyway.

But I can say this - the new Carnival improves the formula right across the board. Well, everything except for price.

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.

Surely the greatest trick the Carnival pulls off, and it does so convincingly, is that it manages to make something so quintessentially uncool, the people-mover, and make it look good. Somehow sporty, even.

I like the Carnival's big, bold and blacked-out front end of the GT-Line, and with its two-tone 19-inch alloys, wide stance and low ride height, it looks almost like some mad attempt at a JDM tune car, rather than a sensible people mover.

Elsewhere, the boxy profile, the sharp body creases and the third-row compartment that kind of juts over the rear tyres like a house that's been extended all somehow work, and give the Carnival far more street cred than you might expect.

Inside, we spent time only in the flagship GT-Line and its GT-Line Lite sibling, and both present as calming, comfortable spaces, and Kia's minimalist approach to combining the climate and audio controls into a single strip (it's functionality can be changed by pushing a button) helps keep the cabin fuss free.

The tech in the top-spec models feels modern and on-point, too, and the materials are all nice under the touch. Be warned though, the cabin plastics get progressively worse the further back you sit, and the third row is cocooned by hard and scratchy plastics.

‘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.

The Carnival measures 5115mm in length, 1995mm in width and 1775mm in height, and it rides on a sizeable 3092mm wheelbase. 

And those mini-van dimensions have a predictably positive impact on luggage space, with room growing from 627 litres with all seating rows in place, to a massive 2827 litres with the third row stowed.

The key practicality perk here, though, is space, and lots of it. At 175cm, there was ample room for me in the middle row, and you can configure the cabin to your liking, too. You can slide the row on rails, for example, to prioritise leg room where you need it, and the middle seat folds down to reveal cupholders in a kind of hard plastic travel tray.

But even in the third row I could easily get comfortable, though head room begins to get a little tighter. There are cupholders and USB connection points, too, and I can honestly say you could send full-size humans back there and not feel overly guilty about it.

The Carnival will tow 2000kgs braked, 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.

There are two ICE options on the table here. The first is what I reckon is the lesser of the two, a 3.5-litre petrol V6, producing a rev-happy 216kW and 355Nm.

The better option, I think, is the 2.2-litre, four-cylinder diesel, which makes 148kW and 440Nm, and just suits the nature of the car a little better.

Both pair with an eight-speed automatic, and send their power to the front tyres.

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.

The petrol engine will sip a claimed 9.6 litres per hundred kilometres on the combined cycle, and produce 220g per kilometre of C02. The diesel lowers both those numbers, to 6.5 litres and 170 grams.

Both models are fitted with a 72-litre fuel tank, which means you’ll be sailing well north of $100 to fill one up.

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.

Forgive the horrific paraphrasing, but it seems rumours of the death of diesel have been greatly exaggerated, at least when it comes to the Kia Carnival.

Get this – diesel sales make up some 90 per cent of the Carnival's total haul, with petrol providing a pittance towards the sales total, presumably being picked up by fleet buyers.

And to be honest, that means nine out of 10 people are making the right choice here. Yes, the petrol makes more power, but it's the torque on offer from the diesel that makes pushing the Carnival around feel far more effortless.

The petrol engine can definitely get you moving, but it feels a bit too rev-happy and thrashy when you really put your foot down, and its significantly thirstier to boot.

The diesel isn't perfect – the thrum of the engine is a constant companion whenever you put your foot down, and there's actually too much torque on offer at times, like if you're accelerating up hill from a standstill on a damp road, and so the front tyres can scrabble and scramble for grip.

But it otherwise so perfectly suits the nature of the Carnival that it is definitely the best and most satisfying choice.

Another big change for this update is the fact that Kia's complete ride and handling program has been rolled out here. Kia says local work done on the outgoing car, the one this replaces, was curtailed by Covid and bushfires, and so ended up being done by correspondence.

This one, though, has had the whole enchilada thrown at it, and it shows. They've succeeded in making a bigger car feel smaller around you. It's not a sports car by any measure, but nor does it ever feel too big and unwieldily.

Part of that is down to the steering, which is direct and confidence inspiring, but mostly I suspect it's because of the ride, which is firmer than you might expect in a family hauler, but also offers a connection to that road below that makes you feel in control.

Whether a firm-ish ride is a perk or negative is up to you, but it definitely works for me.

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.

Like all Kias, the Carnival arrives with a seven-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty, with capped-price servicing throughout.

Kia’s servicing costs are higher than some of its competitors, though, so you might want to compare them, as well as compare what’s included, and the diesel model will usually cost slightly more to maintain than the petrol version.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 15,000kms, and while the brand is still finalising the petrol servicing costs, the diesel prices are $386, $682, $480, $869, $434, $845 and $461, covering the first seven years of ownership.

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.