Suzuki Twin

Suzuki Twin: which version to buy (0.7 MT vs 0.7 AT)

If the choice is between the two Suzuki Twin versions in the data, 0.7 MT is the lighter, shorter-geared car on paper and 0.7 AT is the heavier automatic with the same engine. Both are 1 generation cars (2003-01-01 to 2005-12-31), Mini 3-doors, Gasoline, 44 hp / 32 kW, 57 Nm, 658 cm³, FWD, tank 21 l, ground clearance 135 mm.

If the choice is between the two Suzuki Twin versions in the data, 0.7 MT is the lighter, shorter-geared car on paper and 0.7 AT is the heavier automatic with the same engine. Both are 1 generation cars (2003-01-01 to 2005-12-31), Mini 3-doors, Gasoline, 44 hp / 32 kW, 57 Nm, 658 cm³, FWD, tank 21 l, ground clearance 135 mm. Acceleration to 100, top speed, fuel consumption, CO2, eco class, wheel sizes and gross weight are not measured for either version, so the buying split is kerb weight, gearbox type and gear count — not power or economy figures that are missing.

There is no second generation in this dataset to “wait for.” The Twin here is one generation, two modifications. Restyling is not listed as a separate generation.

Suzuki Twin generations: what actually changed (and what did not)

1 generation (2003-01-01–2005-12-31) is Mini 3-doors with 2 versions: 0.7 MT and 0.7 AT. Both versions share the same start and stop dates. Body type does not change between them. Engine displacement (658), power (44 hp / 32 kW at 5500 rpm), torque (57 Nm at 3500 rpm), cylinder count (3), cylinder layout (Inline), valves per cylinder (4), boost (No), engine position (Front, transverse), fuel system (Distributed injection (multi-point)), compression ratio (10.5), bore × stroke (68 × 60.4), fuel (92), drive (FWD), tank (21), clearance (135 mm), front suspension (Independent, spring), rear suspension (Semi-independent, springorts hélicoïdaux, sem), front brakes (Disc) and rear brakes (Drum) are the same on both.

What the generation does not split: there is no later Twin generation in these numbers, so you cannot buy a “newer Twin” from this catalogue block. The only in-generation choice is 0.7 MT versus 0.7 AT.

Suzuki Twin specs: engine, gearbox and drive (exact version names)

Power per litre is the same on both: 44 hp ÷ 0.658 l ≈ 66.9 hp per litre. Torque per litre is also the same: 57 Nm ÷ 0.658 l ≈ 86.6 Nm per litre. The extra money, if any, does not buy more horsepower, more torque, a larger engine, turbocharging, or a different drive layout — those fields match.

What it does buy, in the numbers: 0.7 AT replaces the 5-speed Manual of 0.7 MT with a 4-speed Automatic. That is one fewer gear and a different gearbox family, on the same 44 hp / 57 Nm Gasoline 658 cm³ Inline 3, boost No, FWD package.

Performance and economy (mpg, 0–100, top speed)

For 0.7 MT: 0–100 is not measured; top speed is not measured; city consumption is not measured; highway consumption is not measured; mixed consumption is not measured; CO2 is not measured; eco class is not measured.

For 0.7 AT: 0–100 is not measured; top speed is not measured; city consumption is not measured; highway consumption is not measured; mixed consumption is not measured; CO2 is not measured; eco class is not measured.

You cannot rank these two Twin versions on mpg or on a 0–100 time from this dataset. A claim that the automatic is slower or thirstier would be a number that is not here. The only mass-related proxy that is here is kerb weight (next section): 0.7 AT is 150 kg heavier than 0.7 MT at the same 44 hp, which is a worse kg-per-hp ratio, but that is not a measured 0–100 or a measured mpg.

Dimensions and weight: the real numerical split

Kerb weight is the largest numeric difference between the two Suzuki Twin versions.

• 0.7 MT: kerb weight 580 kg; gross weight not measured; ground clearance 135 mm; tank 21 l; wheel sizes not measured.
• 0.7 AT: kerb weight 730 kg; gross weight not measured; ground clearance 135 mm; tank 21 l; wheel sizes not measured.

Arithmetic on those figures:

• 0.7 AT kerb weight minus 0.7 MT kerb weight = 150 kg (730 − 580). That is about 25.9% more kerb mass on the automatic (150 ÷ 580).
• kg per horsepower, 0.7 MT: 580 ÷ 44 ≈ 13.2 kg/hp.
• kg per horsepower, 0.7 AT: 730 ÷ 44 ≈ 16.6 kg/hp.
• Difference: 0.7 AT carries about 3.4 kg more per horsepower than 0.7 MT (16.6 − 13.2).
• Litres of tank per 100 kg of kerb weight: 0.7 MT 21 ÷ 5.80 ≈ 3.62 l per 100 kg; 0.7 AT 21 ÷ 7.30 ≈ 2.88 l per 100 kg. The tank volume is identical (21 l); the heavier car simply has less tank relative to mass.
• Ground clearance does not change: 135 mm on both. Clearance is not a reason to pick one Twin version over the other.
• Wheel sizes are not measured on both, so tyre choice is not a catalogue differentiator here.
• Gross weight is not measured on both, so payload (gross minus kerb) cannot be calculated.

Suspension and brakes do not split the versions: Independent, spring front; Semi-independent, springorts hélicoïdaux, sem rear; Disc front; Drum rear — same labels on 0.7 MT and 0.7 AT.

Which Suzuki Twin version to choose

Choose 0.7 MT if the numbers that exist are what you want to minimise. It is the 5-speed Manual, FWD, 44 hp / 32 kW, 57 Nm, 658 cm³ Gasoline Twin at 580 kg. Versus 0.7 AT you give up the Automatic and one gear-count style (5 vs 4), and you keep 150 kg less kerb weight and ~13.2 kg/hp instead of ~16.6 kg/hp. Engine, boost (No), drive (FWD), tank (21), clearance (135), fuel (92), compression (10.5) and 68 × 60.4 bore × stroke do not change. 0–100, top speed and mpg remain not measured, so this is not a “faster on paper” pick from a sprint time — it is the lighter, more gears, Manual pick.

Choose 0.7 AT if the gearbox type is the requirement. It is the 4-speed Automatic, FWD, same 44 hp / 32 kW at 5500 rpm and 57 Nm at 3500 rpm, same 658 cm³ Inline 3, boost No. What you pay for in mass is explicit: 730 kg kerb, 150 kg more than 0.7 MT, ~3.4 kg/hp worse, same 21 l tank. You do not get more power, more displacement, AWD, or a different body: still Mini 3-doors, still 1 generation, still 2003-01-01 to 2005-12-31. Economy and 0–100 are still not measured, so “the automatic costs X mpg” is not a statement this catalogue can make.

What the extra specification does not buy. Power is 44 hp on both; kW is 32 on both; Nm is 57 on both; rpm of peak power is 5500 on both; rpm of peak torque is 3500 on both. Displacement 658, cylinders 3, layout Inline, valves per cylinder 4, boost No, Front, transverse, Distributed injection (multi-point), compression 10.5, 68 × 60.4, fuel 92, FWD, tank 21, clearance 135 — identical. There is no “more engine” Twin in this set. There is no diesel, no other displacement, and no other generation.

Problems and reliability. This dataset does not list faults, recalls, or reliability scores. A version cannot be ranked as “the reliable Twin” from these fields. What can be said without inventing failures: both versions share the same Gasoline 658 cm³, 3 Inline, 4 valves per cylinder, boost No, multi-point injection, 10.5 compression, 92 fuel specification. Gearbox is the mechanical split (Manual 5 vs Automatic 4). Weight is the numeric split (580 vs 730). Missing measured items (0–100, top speed, consumption, CO2, eco class, wheels, gross weight) are missing on both, not on one.

Short decision rule using only these numbers. Same years, same Mini 3-doors body, same 44 hp engine: pick 0.7 MT for 580 kg and 5-speed Manual; pick 0.7 AT for 4-speed Automatic at 730 kg. Do not pick between them on mpg, 0–100, top speed, wheels or gross weight — those values are not measured. Do not pick a “later generation” Twin from this block — pokoleniy is 1.