Making an already frugal car even thriftier sounds like a great idea. But how much cost benefit really comes from going to the country’s cheapest new hybrid when the car it bases off it already so brilliant?

Price: $28,500

Powertrain and economy: 1.2-litre petrol four-cylinder, 61kW/107Nm (plus 50Nm electric motor assist), continuously variable transmission, FWD, combined economy 4.1L/100km, CO2 94g/km.

Vital statistics: 3845mm long, 1735mm wide, 1495mm high, 2450mm wheelbase, luggage capacity 265 litres, 16-inch alloy wheels, 185/55 R16 tyres.

We like: Smooth hybrid-assisted stop-start response, chirpy dynamic character.

We don't like: Impoverished spec, reduced drivetrain sparkle, dubious benefits over the standard Swift.

ALREADY being a paragon of eco goodness hasn’t kept Japan’s biggest small car specialist from avoiding having to enter the electrification age.

Arrival of a hybridised Swift is a big change, but hardly a final step – sooner or later, Suzuki will assuredly have to follow ever other car maker into weaning off fossil fuels, which means either full electrification or hydrogen.

It’s an unavoidable that won’t be easy to achieve; the cost of change is massive and some brands simply won’t be able to wear it.

What’s potentially galling for Suzuki as it drives toward one of the greatest single changes in motoring ever is that a talent that currently serves it so well might not ultimately count for much in the long run.

Through being a specialist in small servings, Suzuki deserves recognition as a developer of cars that mainly serve as exemplars of how to exact especially decent efficiency from every drop of oil-based fuel.

That talent has long been expressed by its most popular model, the Swift. This compact hatch has historically shone so brightly as a sipper you’d have to think cost efficiency is equal to the chirpy styling when cataloguing the reasons why it has dominated light car sales and been an evergreen hit with private buyers.

The car’s inability to consume petrol quickly was highlighted this time last year, when the brand reported how a GL CVT auto, powered by a conventional 1.2-litre petrol engine, made a mockery of its factory-cited 5.5 litres per 100km efficiency by averaging 4.5 litres/100 km over an all-weather, mainly open road 636 kilometre drive.

Impressive, yes, but overshadowed now, with arrival of another 1.2 variant claimed to deliver a 4.1 L/100km on the WLTP (Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure) test. That’s a 15 percent improvement over any conventionally-powered edition. Out of the box, without need for soft-shoeing.

One change. That 2019 champ was a $19,990 range-starter model; the one that beats it isn’t. You pay between $26,500 and $28,500 to access its extra frugality. Were you ready for that?

Well, additional cost to save more money at the pumps is still part and parcel of using hybrid tech. Which Suzuki has to, because like every other maker is being increasingly required – in some key markets - to keep reducing its fuel consumption and emissions. That’s why the hybrid exists.

You needn’t have to follow. There are other Swifts still driving with purely conventional drivetrains that cost less and are almost as efficient. However, it won’t be that way forever; in Europe, for instance, the only Swifts sold have hybrid.

Sure, that premium might leave some fans wondering about how much extra frugality an already frugal car needs to deliver when the buy-in alters so considerably, yet at purely technical level a battery-assisted Swift is an interesting development.

As hybrid systems go, the Swift’s isn’t too complex, but no surprise there. Suzuki is a brand that likes to keep things simple and there’s no evidence it’s audience aren’t appreciative of that approach.

The car coming to New Zealand is one tailored for Europe, so there are detail changes – the most being ‘wrong way around’ wiper and indicator want placements – and it also introduces a four-cylinder engine that, while still tagged a 1.2, is a little smaller in capacity than the one we’ve been used to, being a 1179cc unit; as opposed to the 1242cc unit that shone so brightly in the 2019 test and is now defunct.

The smaller capacity engine creates less power than the previous 1.2 but the starter-generator, which contributes up to 50Nm, helps by filling the lower part of the torque delivery.

The other core elements are a 12-volt long-life lithium-ion battery and belt-driven starter-generator assist that gets the car moving from standstill and can provide a brief acceleration boost from low speeds.

The energy recuperated to the battery during deceleration powers the engine management, air conditioning, instrument display and audio system. The integrated starter generator operates the idle stop/stop function.

The packaging is neat. The under-bonnet layout is a bit different to the standard car’s, but the biggest ingredients - the battery and its control unit – aren’t under the bonnet, but with you in the cabin, being sited under the front passenger seat, for better weight distribution. It also means the chair sits slightly higher.

Other differentiators are geek-level identifiers: A bespoke wheel style, type specific badges and a unique grille. No body panels were altered. Looking around inside, it’s also very standard in respect to general layout. The dash design is generic, but it has specific instrument cluster displays to show the changes between electric assistance and petrol operation. These also show the amount of fuel saved, how much idle stop time has amassed, instant and average fuel consumption.

About that. My turn with the car was affected by some unexpected issues, all of my own making. Fortunately, contributing writer Colin Smith had driven the same car previously and was able to get a better handle on what it might be expected to deliver.

The pros and cons are fairly evident. First, the system has some pretty obvious impacts on economy, though as is often the case, it depends where you drive it.

On his highway run the car averaged 5.2L/100km. Around his home town, Tauranga, it achieved 4.5L/100km in peak traffic condition. Emissions counts aren’t of much consequence in this market, but these also reduce. So, the two primary targets are met. Another beneficial influence is how particularly smooth the stop-start experience is in busy city traffic with the starter-generator nudging the car forward before the engine starts. It’s more refined than stop-starts that rely on the starter motor to crank into life.

Yet, there’s also an effect on power and acceleration, enough to result in a different driving sensation than arrives with purely fossil fuel-dependent Swifts.

Though the total hybrid system only adds a little extra weight (all up, just 25kg) and the assisted drivetrain generates more torque in a richer stream, it’s still pretty obvious that this is 1.2 has less power than the purely fossil fuel-reliant Swift engines we’ve become used to.

The end result is that there’s less of that zippy effervescence that’s long been a Swift trait. It’s noticeably slower for step-off and never seems to reduce the gap when moving. Swift engines always have an appetite for revs but this one seems to work harder and more vocally.

Energy recuperation is all part of the hybrid game. Grabby brakes and an obvious resistance when lifting off the throttle are sensations that arrive with all hybrid systems; it’s just the car optimising opportunity to reclaim lost power and store it into the battery. Here, though, the sensations are quite strong. Too obtrusive? Well, it’s certainly more committed to the cause than some hybrids and there’s no way to make adjustment.

In respect to broader driving traits, it’s typical Swift, with an agile road feel, eager turn-in, and light but responsive steering. The suspension absorbs sharp hits pretty well. This generation’s stiffer platform has been massively beneficial to the handling but also makes it a quieter, more refined car and though it is right-sized for the city, that doesn’t make it wrong for taking on long, open road drives. It feels okay for those big adventures.

There’s another factor with this engine that might also require thinking about. It runs at a higher compression than other petrol Swift engines, so demands the highest octane fuel; 95 or better. Sure, it only has a 37-litre tank, so the additional cost over 91 isn’t huge. Yet simply having to use the most expensive choice on the forecourt might seem an anathema to some.

Also worthy of consideration is the specification level; while the Euro spec isn’t too far away from what we are used, there are content differences.

For instance, the hybrids drop a space saver spare wheel for an emergency inflator kit (the plus is that this yields an additional 23 litres of boot space), have manual wind-up windows in the rear – we’re used to electric operation all round – and the push button start and remote key facility that arrives in a NZ-specific high spec is lost. In the hybrids, you put the keys into the ignition. Little things, but also cost-savings that might irk given the cars’ price placement.

Another quirk: The in-built sat nav that’s facilitated across most NZ-spec Swifts is absent. If you want to use a map, it’ll be via the Apple Car play or Android Auto functionality that didn’t seem to want to activate in the test car.

That’s not to say it’s a pauper. Adaptive cruise control, LED projector and auto levelling headlamps, advanced forward detection system, front fog lamps, reverse camera, speed limiter, hill hold control, brake override system, heated mirrors and tyre pressure monitoring are standard in both hybrid model grades and the LTD grade adds lane departure warning and prevention, door mirror blind spot monitor indicator, Dual-Sensor Brake Support, rear parking sensors and rear cross traffic alert. However, in general ambience, the hybrid does seem a bit downtrodden.

Small hybrids are not in abundance, but it’s hardly fortunate for Suzuki that Toyota’s new Yaris Hybrid has also just the market.

The latter costs a bit more, but is a brand new, more advanced design which delivers better technology and superior fuel consumption – Toyota claims 3.3L/100km, I easily achieved 3.8. In short, it spells trouble with a capital T.

Driving the Swift Hybrid was intriguing, yet outcomes only enforced something Suzuki itself tacitly concede – that in as much as gains exist, none are massive, given the regular Swift is already a paragon of efficiency anyway.

Comparing a conventional base model Swift GL auto with the GLX Hybrid, for instance, suggests you’re looking at the latter delivering an advantage of 0.7 litres per 100km. The difference in list price buys a lot of petrol.

Suzuki can see potential. Specifically, it expects half of all hybrid sales will be to fleet and business customers and it also considers it likely that 24 percent of all new Swift sales will use this format. Yet in all probability it’ll sell more on strength of having the ‘right’ badge than anything further factor.

This model reminds just how makers have had to bend to international legislative pressure to improve on economy and emissions. It’s a car Suzuki felt compelled to build. But that doesn’t mean you should feel equally compelled to buy in when others in the family still do a great job.