Suzuki Fronx

NR7 said:
There is the possibility that it is made at another factory. Suzuki manufactures these mainly in India but there is an Indonesian factory that supplies the Fronx for ASEAN markets which include Japan and possibly Australia.

ANCAP is very tough. Seems the main issue is that rear seatbelt failure, and rightly so. But I've seen even seat failure in our local global NCAP test for a Mazda 2 so these failures are possible in any brand.

Despite the point deductions for the seatbelt failure, the Fronx is actually safer than the 5 star Global NCAP Mahindra Scorpio N for adult occupant safety. The latter being awarded a zero star ANCAP for lack of autonomous braking.

Makes one wonder which grading agency is "enough" if global ncap/Japan NCAP can be giving a car 4/5 stars and it gets 1/0 in Aussie land.
Click to expand...

I think that I responded to you posting this in another thread. The Australian Fronx is sourced from India, the same as the SA Fronx and Starlet Cross.
 

Suzuki Fronx scores 1 star in ANCAP crash test - Team-BHP​

1766534902294.png

The Suzuki Fronx has been awarded a 1-star rating by ANCAP. The car scored 19.30/40 points for adult occupant protection and 20.06/49 points for child occupant protection.

In the front offset test, the Fronx offered weak protection to the driver’s chest and adequate protection to the lower legs. The driver’s feet showed marginal protection. Protection for the passenger’s chest and lower legs was rated as adequate. The remaining critical body regions showed good protection.

The front structure of the Suzuki Fronx presented a moderate risk to occupants of an oncoming vehicle.

In the full-width frontal test, chest protection for the driver was weak and good for all other critical body regions. Protection for the rear passenger’s chest was poor, with high chest deflection and high seatbelt load. This poor result for the rear passenger causes the score for the full-width test to be capped at zero points.

In addition, the seatbelt retractor for the rear passenger failed and allowed excessive forward movement of the rear dummy, with head protection assessed as poor.

In the side impact test, protection for the head, abdomen and pelvis was good, and chest protection was marginal.

In the frontal offset test, protection of the head and neck of both the 10-year-old and 6-year-old dummies was poor. In the side impact test, protection of the head of the 10-year-old dummy was marginal. The head of the 6-year-old dummy contacted the side of the child restraint occupied by the 10-year-old dummy, resulting in poor protection.

In the pedestrian impact tests, the bonnet and windscreen of the Fronx provided good or adequate protection to the head of a struck pedestrian over most of its surface, with marginal and poor results recorded on the stiff windscreen pillars.
Click to expand...

 
Suzuki Fronx Recalled in Australia and New Zealand After Rare Seatbelt Failure

In a December 2025 ANCAP safety test, the Suzuki Fronx received a one-star safety rating, with a seatbelt failure resulting in recalls in Australia and New Zealand.

ANCAP (Australasian New Car Assessment Program), has announced the Suzuki Fronx recorded a “poor” showing at a December 2025 crash test, scoring a single star for safety, with a “rare” seatbelt failure resulting in recalls in Australia and New Zealand. It is worth noting that, for the time being, this only affects models sold in Australia and New Zealand, and the recalls apply only to the latter two markets. While there’s no official statement from Suzuki Auto South Africa at this stage, the automaker is “monitoring the situation closely and remain aligned with Suzuki Motor Corporation should there be any developments relevant to our market”. We wait to hear how this might affect the Fronx-based Toyota Starlet Cross.

So, how did the Fronx fare in the ANCAP test? In the Adult Occupant Protection category, the Fronx scored 48%. According to ANCAP, the passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal offset test. However, protection for the driver’s chest was “weak”, ANCAP states. Protection for the driver’s lower legs was deemed “adequate”, while protection for the driver’s feet was “marginal” owing to the “excessive” rearward displacement of the pedals. Protection for the driver and passenger’s upper legs was “marginal”. ANCAP noted dummy readings indicated “adequate” protection for the chest and lower legs of the front passenger. Protection for the remaining body regions of both driver and front passenger was “good”

www.carmag.co.za

Suzuki Fronx Recalled in Australia and New Zealand After Rare Seatbelt Failure

The Suzuki Fronx received a one-star ANCAP safety rating, with a seatbelt failure resulting in recalls in Australia and New Zealand...
www.carmag.co.za www.carmag.co.za

1766739517324.png
 
So these cars are not safe at all?

I’d rather stick to the Germans
 
FiestaST said:
Suzuki Fronx Recalled in Australia and New Zealand After Rare Seatbelt Failure

In a December 2025 ANCAP safety test, the Suzuki Fronx received a one-star safety rating, with a seatbelt failure resulting in recalls in Australia and New Zealand.

ANCAP (Australasian New Car Assessment Program), has announced the Suzuki Fronx recorded a “poor” showing at a December 2025 crash test, scoring a single star for safety, with a “rare” seatbelt failure resulting in recalls in Australia and New Zealand. It is worth noting that, for the time being, this only affects models sold in Australia and New Zealand, and the recalls apply only to the latter two markets. While there’s no official statement from Suzuki Auto South Africa at this stage, the automaker is “monitoring the situation closely and remain aligned with Suzuki Motor Corporation should there be any developments relevant to our market”. We wait to hear how this might affect the Fronx-based Toyota Starlet Cross.

So, how did the Fronx fare in the ANCAP test? In the Adult Occupant Protection category, the Fronx scored 48%. According to ANCAP, the passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal offset test. However, protection for the driver’s chest was “weak”, ANCAP states. Protection for the driver’s lower legs was deemed “adequate”, while protection for the driver’s feet was “marginal” owing to the “excessive” rearward displacement of the pedals. Protection for the driver and passenger’s upper legs was “marginal”. ANCAP noted dummy readings indicated “adequate” protection for the chest and lower legs of the front passenger. Protection for the remaining body regions of both driver and front passenger was “good”

www.carmag.co.za

Suzuki Fronx Recalled in Australia and New Zealand After Rare Seatbelt Failure

The Suzuki Fronx received a one-star ANCAP safety rating, with a seatbelt failure resulting in recalls in Australia and New Zealand...
www.carmag.co.za www.carmag.co.za

View attachment 1873624
Click to expand...

It's disappointing that Suzuki SA hasn't said anything yet. If they don't respond soon, I wonder if Toyota will force their hand.
 
cr@zydude said:
It's disappointing that Suzuki SA hasn't said anything yet. If they don't respond soon, I wonder if Toyota will force their hand.
Click to expand...
Why would they? Also Toyota wouldn't either as the Starlet Cross is a Fronx basically
 
Lupus said:
Why would they? Also Toyota wouldn't either as the Starlet Cross is a Fronx basically
Click to expand...
I think they'll both have to say something early in the new year. Either simply a "we've checked, and this doesn't affect our vehicles because..." or "we note with concern the results and are speaking to our engineers to remedy the problems".
 
Lupus said:
Why would they? Also Toyota wouldn't either as the Starlet Cross is a Fronx basically
Click to expand...

Suzuki SA should say something. It is a safety issue, and the current press coverage may hurt Fronx sales in SA.

Toyota SA probably won't want their brand imaged damaged by the current situation. Toyota SA may push Suzuki SA to do something.
 
Speedster said:
I think they'll both have to say something early in the new year. Either simply a "we've checked, and this doesn't affect our vehicles because..." or "we note with concern the results and are speaking to our engineers to remedy the problems".
Click to expand...
Not sure they would do that in SA for Aus results though? But will need to see
 
cr@zydude said:
Suzuki SA should say something. It is a safety issue, and the current press coverage may hurt Fronx sales in SA.

Toyota SA probably won't want their brand imaged damaged by the current situation. Toyota SA may push Suzuki SA to do something.
Click to expand...
Don't know if they will, but will have to wait and see
 
REVIEW: Suzuki Fronx is a winning formula for South African buyers

VERDICT

Priced between R299,900 (GL manual) and R368,900 (GLX auto), the Suzuki Fronx represents strong value as a cheaper but not-too-much-smaller alternative to the Suzuki Grand Vitara, which starts at R381,900. It comes at a R29,000 premium over the equivalent Baleno, but the sales figures show that many buyers are happy to pay that premium for the more adventurous looks.

It’s a solid package all round, being well equipped, yet simple enough to limit the amount of things that can go wrong in the long-run. It’s a successful formula that has seen Suzuki steal second place on South Africa’s sales charts.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X