Suzuki Vitara vs Ford Escape

What's the difference?

In car years, 11 is ancient.

Back when it was first released, this-generation Vitara’s competitive pricing, progressive yet pretty design, pleasant interior packaging, sporty dynamics and general driving ease helped establish the emerging small SUV segment into the powerhouse it is today.

In some ways, today’s Turbo Hybrid still impresses, especially with its punchy performance, promising economy and no-nonsense packaging. Objectively, it is still a decent proposition, with few actual vices.

But the 2026 Vitara’s high pricing, embarrassingly outdated interior, underwhelming specification and noisy ride leave it feeling too expensive, too old and too exposed against newer and more-sophisticated rivals.

Even the brightest stars eventually need to retire.

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

The Ford Escape PHEV is a good option for a customer who knows they’ll live within the parameters set by the car. That’s the case with any plug-in hybrid, really, so in that regard, this new model is hardly a standout.

And it isn’t particularly outstanding in any other way either. I personally would have appreciated it if Ford had decided to add the plug-in powertrain to the Vignale flagship model instead - that model is more about luxury than sportiness, and would better fit the character of this powertrain in my opinion.

It’s a decent addition to the brand’s SUV range, and a welcome one to the segment, though it won’t be on its own for long.

While the albeit-cheeky Mazda CX-3 clearly looks like a product of last decade, the Vitara’s boxy, broad-stance proportions were prescient, pointing to the upright shapes that prevail today. In other words, the good-looking design has aged remarkably well.

Changes to the headlights, a reshaped bumper, a revised grille, restyled wheels and paint colours are the only ways you can differentiate new from old, ignoring the Hybrid badge out back.

We wonder whether Suzuki should have tried harder visually updating the Vitara?

Measuring in at nearly 4.2 metres long, 1.8m wide and 1.6m high, the square-rigged styling hides the smallness of the Vitara, yet also seems to liberate more space inside than you might expect, aided by deep side windows.

Conversely, Suzuki’s decision to retain the old Vitara dashboard – including much of the same instrumentation – roots it into the middle of last decade. This is very disappointing.

I haven’t really warmed to the “I wish I was a hatchback” styling of the Escape, which has a softer-edged look to it than most of its rivals. I mean, compared to a Hyundai Tucson or Toyota RAV4, the Escape looks like a blob.

That mightn’t be an issue for you, and it’s hardly a reason not to buy the car, but I was also a bit disappointed that there’s no real specific highlights to make you realise you’re buying the PHEV model, which - at $15,000 more than the equivalent petrol version - should have something to differentiate it other than the addition of a small badge and the additional filler cap on the front quarter panel for the plug.

Even a different set of wheels would have sufficed. Alas, it’s an identical looking Escape to the petrol. That means the ST-Line trimmings, such as black highlights on the grille and bumper, side skirts, a rear spoiler, and those 18-inch wheels and lowered sports suspension.

The interior, as mentioned in the pricing section, does have a few changes over the petrol version, but they’re hardly game-changing additions.

The practical shape, ease of access and spacious, airy cabin were reasons to buy the Vitara way back when, and remain relevant today.

But, stepping inside and taking a look around transports you to another time, like hearing Let it Happen by Tame Impala.

In the press release, Suzuki states: “Physical control switches remain a key focus, ensuring ease of use while driving, a touchpoint of Suzuki’s practical design philosophy.” Changing nothing in nearly a dozen years in production to save money seems more like the company’s key focus here. Even the steering wheel is precisely the same.

As we said earlier, nothing changed inside other than some minor trim, save for the new multimedia system that looks cheap and aftermarket compared to Suzuki’s earlier, distinctive and colourful quadrant layout. We welcome the inclusion of a digital speedometer, however.

Broad if flat front seats do the job, ahead of a workable driving position that helps provide good all-round vision as well as an easy reach to the multitude of buttons and switches placed around. The plastics have already proven to be long-lasting, while there is sufficient storage to be found. The climate control is effective, too.

The rear seat environment is spacious and pleasant enough, but lacks amenities like USB-C ports, cupholders and central air vents.

Further back, the load area is relatively large and simple to use. Cargo capacity varies from an unremarkable 362 litres to 642L (VDA – to the window height) or 1119L (to the ceiling), with the 60/40 rear backrests dropped providing extra versatility.

Thankfully, a space-saver spare wheel is included.

Overall, then, the Vitara’s cabin is roomy and user-friendly for a small SUV, but it also appears hopelessly out of date. That Suzuki also had the unrelated e-Vitara electric vehicle at the launch event just served to underline that fact.

The Ford Escape looks like it has all the bits to make a midsize SUV buyer happy. And while a fair few of the boxes are ticked, there are some elements that could be better. 

The big party trick is that the second row is on rails, so you can slide it forwards or backwards to improve the space for receipt occupants or improve your boot space. The maximised cargo area is 556 litres to the ceiling, while if prioritise second-row occupant space there is easily enough room for a 182cm / 6’0” adult to fit behind someone of a similar size.

In the boot there are remote levers for the second row seats to fold down, a 12 V outlet, and a soft parcel shelf which is easy to remove, too.

During my time with the car I had the seats slid back as far as they go to maximise cabin space, though I did test out whether it was worth having them forward and the boot space was appreciably better especially for a pram and some baby stuff.

The second-row is a 60:40 split for the backrest, with the smaller portion on the driver’s side. That may sound trivial, but we had our baby seat set up behind the passenger, and had to move it to the driver’s side when we picked up a large parcel as it wouldn’t fit with the smaller portion folded down. There are dual ISOFIX child seat anchor points for the outboard positions, and three top-tether hooks.

The boot space is good too, considering it has some extra hardware to contend with under the body, there is also a space-saver spare wheel under there which is nice. However, there is no dedicated hidey hole for the charge cable, and it doesn’t come in a nice stowable bag either - just a plastic ziplock thing. 

Perhaps the biggest letdown of the interior is the fact that you still get the tiny little tablet-style 8.0-inch touchscreen media display, despite there being a big 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster. The two screens almost look at odds with one another, and what’s even more frustrating is that the driver information screen cannot be configured to include the energy flow screen that you see on the smaller tablet style unit. 

That means you can’t watch what’s happening between engine, electric motor and battery, or a combination where you might expect to see that - instead it can only be seen in illustrative form on the smaller central screen. Big issue? Maybe not, but if you’re an eco-conscious customer who wants to know what their car’s high-tech powertrain is doing, while also wanting to use sat nav, or Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, or change the radio station… Well, you’re out of luck.

There is a much more basic and rudimentary display on the driver info screen that shows a small icon of an engine and battery and illuminates them when each part is in use, but really, Ford should have used the real-estate of the big driver info screen better. Toyota, Kia and Hyundai know how to do it better.

The material quality is okay, but it certainly doesn’t feel like a very special environment.There are rubberised liners on the doors which don’t look terrific or feel fantastic, and why there are soft plastic elbow pads, and up high on the dashboard, it is not of the most pristine quality. 

Storage is pretty good. There are bottle holders in the doors and two cupholders in the centre console, and the storage nook in front of the shift dial houses a wireless phone charger and two USB ports, plus a 12-volt plug. There is a strange little shelf section in front of the centre console bin, which is not fantastic in terms of size. There are rear bottle holders in the doors, map pockets and a flip-down arm-rest with cup holders.

That rotary dial shifter which does take a little bit of getting used to. Unlike some others, there is no ‘P’ for park button - instead you have to dial it all the way left. 

It’s hard to consider the Ford Escape ST-Line PHEV to be tremendous value with a price tag of $53,440 (MSRP), especially considering it attracts a circa-$15k premium over the equivalent petrol-powered ST-Line version of the Escape. And that price will rise once more from July 1, to $54,440, as Ford says it will increase the ask due to “continued material and freight cost increases”. 

But it does offer a few little extras over that petrol model in terms of standard gear, including partial-leather seat trim, a 10-way power-adjustable driver’s seat, and a 10-speaker sound system. That’s in addition to the standard kit you’d find on any ST-Line Escape, which includes 18-inch alloy wheels, LED headlights, sporty-looking front and rear bumpers, lower suspension, keyless entry and push-button start, wireless phone charging, a 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster, flat-bottom steering wheel, Ford’s 8.0-inch touchscreen media system with sat nav, digital radio, Apple CarPlay and Android Auto connectivity, and also a reversing camera and front and rear parking sensors.

There are plenty of other safety inclusions that you’d expect at this price point - check the safety breakdown below for more info.

If you need additional gear to make your ST-Line feel even more special, you can choose the ST-Line Pack option, which adds a power tailgate, heated front seats and matrix-style adaptive LED headlights. That pack costs $1950. Really, it shouldn’t be an option on this top-dollar Escape.

Other plug-in hybrid models close to the Escape PHEV include the Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross Plug-in Hybrid EV (starting from $46,990), but it’s a fair bit smaller, and so is the Kia Niro PHEV (from $46,590). 

In the same size bracket as the Escape, there’s only the still-to-arrive Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV (likely to be $60,000 or more) and the MG HS Plus EV, which kicks off at $46,990 drive-away. Soon there’ll be the Mazda CX-60 PHEV, but it’ll likely play closer to the Kia Sorento PHEV (which kicks off at $80,330).

In short, there’s not too much competition, and that could play to the Escape’s advantage. But does it deliver real-world fuel economy savings that you can’t get with, say, a Toyota RAV4 Hybrid (from $36,900)? More on that below.

If your curious about colours, there are three no-cost options - Frozen White, Blazer Blue and Agate Black - while the optional premium paint options include Blue Metallic, Magnetic grey, Solar Silver, White Platinum and Rapid Red, as seen in this review, all of which will add $650 to the bill.

If you’re expecting a Toyota-style series-parallel hybrid system here, forget it.

Instead, Suzuki offers a far-simpler, lighter and cheaper alternative that, by and large, does reduce fuel consumption. In other words, this is a mild-hybrid electric vehicle (MHEV) that, unlike others like Mazda’s, you can feel working away.

On paper, things look a bit shaky, since power drops noticeably compared to the previous 1.4-litre, four-cylinder, turbo-petrol BoosterJet engine this unit is based on.

This version makes just under 81kW of power at 4500rpm, instead of 103kW at 5500rpm, in the interests of economy. Torque jumps though, from 220Nm to 235Nm, between a low 2000rpm to 2500rpm.

More importantly, it is coupled to a 48-volt integrated starter motor generator acting as an electric motor, and 48V 8Ah lithium-ion battery, adding an additional 12kW/50Nm to simultaneously boost acceleration and reduce consumption and emissions.

Power is sent to the front wheels via a six-speed torque-converter automatic transmission, while the AWD version also sends drive to the rear axle when slippage is detected.

The whole MHEV system adds just 15kg, and is nestled between the MacPherson strut front axle and torsion beam rear end, for even weight distribution.

The Escape PHEV is the only model in the range to get a 2.5-litre petrol engine, which runs on the more efficient Atkinson cycle, and has a continuously variable transmission feeding power to the front wheels - that’s right, this Escape is 2WD/FWD.

The tricky bit is that it also houses a clever electric motor and generator, which is teamed to a 14.4kWh battery pack - which is big for a plug-in hybrid car. 

The electric motor is capable of 96kW of power, while the petrol engine can produce up to 112kW. All told, the combined system output is pegged at 167kW, though there is no peak torque output figure. Even so, that amount of power is a sizeable number for any midsize SUV, even if this particular one weighs in at more than 1800kg.

Speaking of weight, the PHEV is the least capable towing vehicle in the Escape range. It has a maximum braked towing capacity of 1200kg, where all the others can tow up to 1800kg. Unbraked capacity is unchanged, at 750kg.

The Vitara Turbo Hybrid 2WD returns a combined average 5.8 litres per 100km, while the AWD version is rated at 5.9L/100km. This translates to between 130 grams and 139g/km of carbon-dioxide emissions, respectively.

The previous 1.4-litre turbo equivalents were 5.9L and 6.2L/100km, so that mild-hybrid tech seems to make some difference. Our box-fresh test car’s trip computer driving around Sydney’s outer suburbs displayed 6.2L/100km.

Filling the 47L fuel tank with the required 95 RON premium-unleaded petrol, expect to average around 810km of range.

Beware the PHEV fuel consumption figure. That’s a great thing to keep in mind if you’re shopping for one of these cars.

That’s because the combined cycle official figure only takes into account a mix of conditions across 100km of driving. That’s right - only the first 100km. So the best case scenario, for a car that is designed to use its battery to run emissions free until it runs out, before sparingly using the petrol engine to keep going.

As such, it is no surprise that the official combined cycle fuel consumption is just 1.5 litres per 100 kilometres, with CO2 emissions claimed at just 33g/km. That takes into account the WLTP battery range of 56 kilometres stated on Ford’s website.

For reference, I completed my test of the car with a total of 462.7 kilometres travelled, of which, the trip computer stated 292.3km was fully electric. Meaning the remaining 170.4km was driving using petrol.

The indicated energy efficiency was 20.0kWh/100km, which isn’t great against a claimed EV driving efficiency figure supplied by Ford, of 14.8kWh/100km to 15.6kWh/100km. 

While the indicated fuel consumption average was 3.1L/100km, so more than double the windscreen sticker’s indicated economy. 

However, when I did the maths, I used a real-world average of 3.9L/100km of petrol ($36.15 worth of petrol) and 43.2kWh of electricity (meaning a cost of $9.82 based on the NSW average energy price of $0.2274c/kWh).

So, to do 462.7km I paid $45.97. I think that’s okay, but bear in mind I included several longer trips (Sydney to Glenbrook, Glenbrook to the Southern Highlands and back, and Glenbrook to Sydney and back). 

As is always the case, if your intended operation for a PHEV is to use it primarily for urban running within its EV range capabilities, you will be better off than if you push it beyond and use the petrol engine excessively.

For reference, the fuel tank size is 45 litres, which is 12L less than the petrol-only versions. It can run on E10, but only if you can find E10 that is also 95RON premium unleaded.

If you wish, there’s also an app called Ford Pass Connect, which allows you to monitor your car’s state of charge, adjust its start and finish times for recharging and even works as a key for the car to allow remote access, too.

Worth noting the maximum charge rate on a 10-amp plug at home is 2.3kW, while on public charging (which typically runs a higher amperage rate) the max rate is 3.7kW.

Suzuki allowed only a frustratingly limited amount of time for us to drive the Vitara Turbo Hybrid 2WD, over some outer-suburban Sydney back roads, in convoy with a lead car and in heavy traffic, so first impressions are limited.

But, unsurprisingly, it’s all very familiar, after years of testing earlier iterations.

Essentially, acceleration now feels leisurely in 'Eco' and 'Auto' when previously the 1.4L BoosterJet always felt punchy, but it becomes much stronger in 'Sport', suggesting the MHEV’s economy focus is the priority. The latter mode makes the Vitara feel lively and moves things along fairly quickly, but leaving it in Sport mode would defeat the purpose of trying to save fuel.

Meanwhile, the Vitara’s chassis calibration remains on the sporty side, with keen steering response and a decent level of handling agility there for the taking. And even the ride comfort wasn’t too bad, considering that too little suspension travel and too much road noise betray the age of this vehicle’s platform – though that may have also had something to do with us driving this back-to-back with the smoother e-Vitara EV.

Finally, the ADAS tech didn’t seem to interfere at all, though a longer drive may reveal otherwise.

The Vitara still drives okay, then, but its refinement and noise suppression may be issues for some people used to newer SUVs. The bigger problem for us is just how old the driving experience feels sitting inside such a dated cabin. Stale sums it up.

We also had a brief stint around a moderately-demanding off-road 4WD course to test the Turbo Hybrid AWD’s AllGrip set-up. The limited off-road aids – 4WD Lock, hill-descent control, a paltry 175mm ground clearance – helped see it navigate several carefully-chosen sections fairly confidently, but we can’t imagine this being the deal maker or breaker.

Overall, based on our brief time with it, the Vitara Turbo Hybrid remains an easy, competent and even enjoyable small SUV from behind the wheel, but one that feels dated in too many areas, especially at its asking price.

Being the ST-Line grade, you - like it or not - have to deal with the lowered ride and sportier suspension, which makes this car ride a bit more firmly than you might want.

I found the suspension to be the biggest detracting element in terms of the drive experience – the suspension picked up a lot of the small inconsistencies in the road surface and transmitted them into the cabin. It was fidgety a lot of the time, and on road surfaces with very poor quality, it could be a bit uncomfortable.

The steering was also bit too tuned for sportiness for a car that doesn’t really need to be quite so aggressively angled that way. It took a bit of getting used to – it was somehow both twitchy on centre but not quite as responsive across the radius of lock to lock as I’d thought it might be, given the initial steering response.

Having said all that, I threw it through a couple of twisty corners and there was a nice handling balance from the chassis and decent grip from the tyres, but I did notice that - being front-wheel drive, with all that power going through the front tyres, there were some instances of it scrabbling for traction, notably on wet roads and looser surfaces but also out of offset driveways.

Other gripes included brake pedal response that was quite abrupt and very sensitive to stopping inputs.

Now, let’s consider the driving modes.

There are different drivetrain setups depending on what you plan to do. EV Auto does the thinking for you, dipping between EV, hybrid and petrol modes. EV Now prioritises electric driving. EV Later saves your battery charge for when you think you’ll need it. And EV Charge means you’ll use petrol power to drive, and also to replenish the battery pack.

The throttle response was decent in EV mode, and in hybrid mode it is nice and quiet, and it drives in a very smooth way unless you really plant your foot hard, then it can be a bit vocal - but less raucous than a RAV4 under full throttle. 

The transition between the different drive modes was relatively seamless, as it will readily go between petrol or electric as required, and the four-cylinder is mostly hushed enough so that you won’t hear it too much, especially if you’re driving at higher speeds when it does.

Indeed it was relatively quiet for the most part, though the tyre noise was quite excessive at higher speeds on very coarse-chip surfaces. And in those instances I noticed I could feel the road surface through the steering wheel and the suspension, as it was quite jittery at times.

There is a low speed warning sound that is omitted below about 25km/h and it was quite handy while driving in enclosed car parks - no more accusations of creeping around silently at the shops.

Further, there are multiple drive modes, including Normal, Eco, Sport, Slippery, and Snow/Sand Assist, all of which are designed to make different situations easier to deal with. They will adjust engine transmission and steering response as well as stability and traction control limitations. I kept it in Normal, though a dabble in Sport showed that you’re allowed a bit more aggression from the powertrain in terms of acceleration.

Standard safety equipment for the Escape PHEV is on par with the majority of rivals in the class.

It has front autonomous emergency braking (AEB) with pedestrian detection (not cyclist detection, though), adaptive cruise control, lane departure warning and lane-keeping assist, blind-spot monitoring and rear cross-traffic alert, driver fatigue monitoring, traffic sign recognition and a rear-seat occupant reminder system that’ll chime in to tell you to check the back seat before you get out.

There are six airbags - dual front, front side and full-length curtain airbags, but unlike some newer rivals there is no front centre airbag to prevent head clashes.

Suzuki offers an industry-average five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty, along with five years of roadside assistance if the vehicle is serviced at an authorised dealer.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 10,000km, while the basic capped-price servicing costs are $329, $429, $339, $539 and $349 annually for the first five years or 100,000km, respectively. That's an average of $397.

At the time of publishing Suzuki listed 90 dealers throughout Australia.

As with the rest of the Ford range, you get a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty on the car, while the battery pack has its own eight-year/160,000km warranty plan.

And just like most other models in Ford’s range, there is a lifetime capped-price servicing plan, with the first four maintenance visits (due every 12 months/15,000km, whichever occurs first) incurring a $299 fee, which is cheap for the class.

You also get up to seven years of roadside assist if you service your car with Ford’s dealers.