A year on from getting a facelift, this ‘well-established’ model receives a heart transplant.

MORE new stuff for a car that is somewhat old news.

That’s not being cynical. Just stating a fact. Yes, on the face of it, the S-Cross subject to today’s story is ‘new’. A newer version of the ‘new’ - as in, heavily facelifted - line that released last year. Which in turn, supplanted an inexplicably gothic refresh that hit several years prior to that. The original, then, came out ….? Well, that’s a really goods pub quiz question. From my memory, it’s the same year Gangnam Style became an earworm.

Every rebirth has brought significant change and certainly, when the big exterior revision was release a year ago, it became much fresher in appearance, though slipping into the cabin and spending time at the wheel reminded it was from an earlier time than many obvious competitors. 

Cats are said to have nine lives. Some Suzukis, it seems, have even more. This is a brand that certainly believes in making best use of everything it has. 

A problem? If you like new to be properly so, there are other options. But the S-Cross being a good example of the ‘waste not, want not’ ethos your (or, at least, my) parents used to bang on about might actually fuel its ongoing popularity with a certain crowd. Suzuki is quite open that older folk - those who’ve seen their birthday - are keen buyers.

All the same, Suzuki New Zealand high-ups mentioning, as almost casual afterthought, that the S-Cross will lose its Australasian New Car Assessment Programme score at the end of this year was a reality jolt to how long the basic car has been with us.

On January 1 ANCAP effected a six-year expiry dates on safety scores in recognition that, until then, there was nothing to stop car companies advertising a five-star result that was 10 or more years old. As criteria for that top score has become increasingly stringent in the interim, that has has never seemed right. So now a score is no longer endless and S-Cross - whose test was conducted in December of 2013 - will now adopt a rating from the Vehicle Safety Ratings Register, which is altogether different.

For all that is new but not so much, in respect to sales usefulness, it likely has years to go, not least not it has been given a heart transplant.

The new ticker is the most important engine Suzuki has; 1.4-litre turbocharged four cylinder petrol with 48-volt integrated mild-hybrid system producing 95kW/235Nm. Yes, the same power plant that went into the Vitara earlier this year. The cars share a platform (yes, more canny cost-saving). So even though S-Cross is 125mm longer and a little bit lower, transferring the tech has been simple.

The engine is vital here because of CO2 fines that impact under the Clean Car Standard, which regulates CO2 acceptability on an annually sliding scale. Suzuki doesn’t have an electric car, it’s plug-in hybrid models cannot be availed here. the mild hybrid here is the best defence they have. 

The engine won’t keep the brand from avoiding penalties - because it has other cars which don’t have hybrid choices - but at least it will avoid some pain. And the less Suzuki has to pay out to Government, the less consumers feel inconvenienced because, assuredly, any additional costs are going to be passed on.

The new power plant brings less power - 103kW down to 95kW - but more torque (235Nm incoming, 220Nm before). More relevant to those who keep a watch on economy is that, having been credited with an optimal 6.9 litres per 100km fuel burn before, it can now achieve 5.5-5.9L/100km depending on the drivetrain. Most importantly for Suzuki NZ and its intent to keeps its CO2 penalty payouts as low as possible, is that emissions from the new range from 124g/km in front-drive up to 135g/km with the all-wheel-drive, from 142g/km out of the outgoing line-up of three front-drive choices.

So it saves. Though you also have to spend more. Before last year’s facelift,  S-Cross was an inoffensive but also reasonably-priced car. Afterward, it remained the first, but was rather less so the second. Every model became $6000-$8000 more expensive than the 2022 editions. It’s happened again. Replacing the $37,500, $37,990 and $40,500 pure 1.4-litre versions we’ve had but for a year are two editions, a front drive at $42,990 and an all-wheel-drive at $45,990.

Some of this is because the cars now are to JLX trim, a higher level than the JX fit out that has been served. Some of it has also to do with the drivetrain; hybrids costs more and, also the cars coming here are actually to United Kingdom specification. 

Speaking of. Suzuki has different levels of hybrid drivetrain for different markets. Some get what we don’t. UK achieves two levels and, as has occurred with Vitara, it’s the configuration they label as  ‘full’ but also tend to describe as strong we miss out on in favour of one less involved and using a smaller electric sub-set. The choice is forced by the type of transmissions involved; the larger only comes with an automated manual Suzuki here feels its customers simply won’t easily adjust to. So, instead, they’ve plumbed for the powertrain that accommodates an auto. Which has taken patience as, until recently, it seemed to only marry to a manual. 

So it’s mild and that’s a fair way to describe the interaction. The 1.4 BoosterJet engine may be getting on a bit now, but still feels up to the task. There’s no absolute brio, but it has briskness and there's definitely a faint improvement in mid-range shove thanks to the hybrid system. But that’s the word for it. And there’s certainly no discernible moment when it goes electric alone. 

That’s not necessarily a disappointment, but it does remind where this brand sits in the greater scheme of things, at a time when you buy a fully electric car of same size for basically the same money or, for that matter, hybrid in the Ford Puma, Toyota C-HR and Yaris Sport or Kia Niro that do enable some battery-pure action.

From experiencing both types on a run out of Auckland, commencing in Beachlands then looping took us through Hunua, Clevedon, and Whitford, it understandably reminded very strongly of the fully petrol car it’s set to bump off in respect the dynamic side. 

Refinement is challenged. Though wind noise is well contained in the main, it suffers as many light cars do on our coarse chip, with perceived tyre roar fairly noticeable. 

Another old hand in Suzuki fare, the six speed is happy to hold gears when you’re toying with the paddles, but it’s better left to its own devices, whereby the more gentle you are with the accelerator, the smoother its shift. 

Handling-wise, it’s solid but no threat to the Swift. The light weight and direct steering speak to keen-ness, the body roll to a different reality. The ride had a slightly unsettled feel, with tendency to jiggle you around a bit on secondary roads, though it never felt too stiff. But no-one ever said it was a GT. The visibility being good and the turning circle small enough to make manoeuvring relatively simple are likely to be stronger selling points.

The outing was way too brief to enable any useful economy data, but just being a light car has to be a positive. Remarkably, in weighing 1335kg at the kerb in AWD and about 75kg less in base, both seem to be porkier than the original, which according to records clocked sub-1200kgs. 

Equipment level enhancement that largely occurred with last year’s car is maintained with the UK provision; so it keeps on the heated seats, leather upholstery with fabric inserts, radar cruise control, satnav, a 360-degree camera, dual-zone climate control, and parking sensors at both ends, plus a solid dose of active safety tech. 

Added into the spec, now, is a panoramic sunroof, not necessarily needed in a car that isn’t massively spacious. There's sufficient room in the front, but the rear space is a little cramped. Legroom is no more than adequate. The front passenger seat is not a good choice for tall navigators; being fixed too high on its lowest setting. After we swapped driving duty, I spent time basically looking down on a fellow writer sharing the car.

No amount of easily-implemented new-age elements - such as it being able to run wireless Apple Car Play - can disguise the overall ambience of being rather cabin’s ambience. Wholesale use of plastics that are quite dull and cheap-feeling lend a budget air that you won’t see from others competing for the same level of spend also won’t help Suzuki’s cause if it’s subject to cross-shopping. Still, build quality isn't that bad, the switchgear feels robust and there's an overwhelming sense of durability.

Enhancing the content is a common ploy to main interest in cars as they reach a certain age. Reducing the price is the other. So, one box ticked, but the other not. When a car is more a follower than a leader, then that might seem a bit of optimistic pitch.

Still, Suzuki NZ is confident in its marketing skills and customers, so expects to sell around 600 S-Cross hybrids next year, a count that will double its current penetration.

How many of those future buyers might arrive with eyes on the Vitara? The car that always been considered more of an all-rounder, through its background as a nuggety off-roader, and is $1000 cheaper at AWD level. But the S-Cross is a larger car.

Summary from last year holds firm still. It’s an easy vehicle to drive but unremarkable, another now long-in-the-tooth product that’s being used to hold the line while Suzuki sorts itself for an electric-involved future here. Which is no time soon, regardless the make has its first nearing production readiness.

S-Cross stands as a robust and trustworthy product, and now there’s the promise of low emissions and fuel economy. But these are the most expensive versions yet of a car that historically looked better settled in its much lower-priced pre-facelift format.

The writer attended this event as a guest of the distributor, with travel and a meal provided.