[McQueen]

Hi, I am trying to figure out certain differences in the two vehicles, namely the Fronx Delta Plus MT (1.2 NA) and the Baleno Alpha MT (1.2 NA). I have a few questions: if you could clarify them, it would be great.

1. Which vehicle has better suspension feel? How does each vehicle feel and handle potholes, speed breakers, highways and cornering at slow and high speeds?
2. Which vehicle is more planted and has less bodyroll at higher speeds, while cornering and during overtakes?
3. Between the Fronx Delta Plus MT (1.2 NA) and the Baleno Alpha MT, which one makes more practical sense for (70%-80%) city use and in what ways? (Assume that some of the missing features like rear parking camera will be installed on the Fronx Delta Plus.)

I read several reviews and everything but these questions keep bothering me. Found two comparisons, one on T-BHP and one on a different site, and they were contradictory.

[GTO]

I'd pick the Fronx over the Baleno. Even though it's priced at a pretty premium over the Baleno.

- I like the styling of the Fronx a lot more. It does look nice, especially that front-end.

- The lovely 1.0L turbo-petrol is an option and comes with a nice MT gearbox or a proper 6-speed AT (no AMTs for me...ever).

Of course, the Baleno is value-for-money in comparison and if on a tight budget, then the Baleno is probably more suitable.

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by GTO

I'd pick the Fronx over the Baleno. Even though it's priced at a pretty premium over the Baleno.
..
Of course, the Baleno is value-for-money in comparison and if on a tight budget, then the Baleno is probably more suitable.

The person I'm assisting does not care about the gearbox (as long as it's manual) or the engine. As far as the styling is concerned, they liked both styles.

The higher ground clearance is also not a matter of concern as it'll be driven in proper cities most of the time.

The extended budget only allows the Fronx Delta Plus MT (NA) with some necessary mods and the Baleno Alpha MT.

I hope these details help.

[gt3t0uring]

If you are only looking to buy the 1.2L K12 engine, hands down Baleno is the better buy. Zeta variant (priced similarly as the Delta+ Fronx) of the Baleno gets more features (keyless entry, rear wiper, better instrument cluster etc) and in my opinion, looks better as well. Fronx should be the option only if you want the booster jet engine and high ground clearance (can be managed if driven carefully).
All the best!

Regards

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by gt3t0uring

If you are only looking to buy the 1.2L K12 engine, hands down Baleno is the better buy.

Thanks for the reply! Would it possible for you to respond to my first two questions as well? Thanks again.

[silverado]

Originally Posted by McQueen

Hi, I am trying to figure out certain differences in the two vehicles, namely the Fronx Delta Plus MT (1.2 NA) and the Baleno Alpha MT (1.2 NA). I have a few questions: if you could clarify them, it would be great.

I am guessing the reason for your comparision is same price. If thats the case it boils down to what you want.

If its SUV'ish looks/ Slightly higher suspension and GC then its Fronx.
For everything else its Baleno.

Personally if my budget is set and these are the 2 variants to choose from, then i will go with Baleno Alpha MT since its very well kitted and you do need features to enjoy your car ownership for a long period of time.

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by silverado

I am guessing the reason for your comparision is same price. If thats the case it boils down to what you want.

If its SUV'ish looks/ Slightly higher suspension and GC then its Fronx.
For everything else its Baleno.

Personally if my budget is set and these are the 2 variants to choose from, then i will go with Baleno Alpha MT since its very well kitted and you do need features to enjoy your car ownership for a long period of time.

The higher GC isn't a necessity. The tallboy looks do not matter either.

I actually got confused after reading this review.

• The reviewer said that he found Fronx's suspension very mature, or enough to drive over a patchy highways without having to slow down. He emphasized that the bumps didn't bother him either. I wanted to know how this compares to the Baleno.
  
• He additionally mentioned that the Fronx felt "noticeably" heavier and more well built than the Baleno. Here, I wanted to confirm if those are true in general or there's a slight (cognitive) bias as he was planning to buy the Fronx (and eventually did so). I doubt if the 10 kg weight difference in favour of Fronx Delta+ along with a higher CG really does that, or the opposite!

[shashi792]

I would pick Fronx between the two. BTW, baleno scored zero star in the crash testing. Fronx is based on the same platform.

[GoBabyGo]

Hi McQueen - Baleno offers better VFM compared to Fronx in MT, however, do check out Toyota Glanza VMT (or GMT) because look & feel of exterior & interior of Glanza is better than Baleno (or Fronx).

Some months ago I checked out both Baleno & Glanza for my daughter and found Glanza look & feel wise more premium than Baleno. I haven't yet bought any as I am trying to sort out charging issue in my high rise apartment building and if it is resolved then will buy an EV (XUV400 may be).

[007maverick]

Originally Posted by McQueen

Hi, I am trying to figure out certain differences in the two vehicles, namely the Fronx Delta Plus MT (1.2 NA) and the Baleno Alpha MT (1.2 NA). I have a few questions: if you could clarify them, it would be great.

1. Which vehicle has better suspension feel? How does each vehicle feel and handle potholes, speed breakers, highways and cornering at slow and high speeds?
2. Which vehicle is more planted and has less bodyroll at higher speeds, while cornering and during overtakes?
3. Between the Fronx Delta Plus MT (1.2 NA) and the Baleno Alpha MT, which one makes more practical sense for (70%-80%) city use and in what ways? (Assume that some of the missing features like rear parking camera will be installed on the Fronx Delta Plus.)

I read several reviews and everything but these questions keep bothering me. Found two comparisons, one on T-BHP and one on a different site, and they were contradictory.

I hope you have decided first to own Maruti.

Now coming to your questions :

(1) Fronx has higher GC. So it's no brainer that it will relatively provide you better comfort on potholes and speed breakers.
(2) Technically Higher GC means more roll. Hence the quality of Ride & Handling will be poor for such a vehicle on relative basis
(3)Don't decide the new car -varient based on features like Reverse Camera. Evaluate it based on Build quality, Cabin aesthetics, inside space /legroom for passengers, Safety feature, key features that add to great convenience such as gear knob, ABC ergonomics, auto climate control, cornering lamps, hand rests, Air bags.

Between the two Fronx will be notch better simply because it's a new Cabin, easier egress - ingress and might fetch a better Resale value over Baleno if the SUV fever continuous for some more time in the market.

Suggest also test drive i20 and Honda Amaze as well. These are great cars if SUV /Cross overs is not your genuine requirement and you would like to consider beyond Maruti.

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by 007maverick

Fronx has higher GC. So it's no brainer that it will relatively provide you better comfort on potholes and speed breakers.

In terms of absorption or stability or lesser chances of scaping? (I feel the absorption will be similar, the stability will relatively decrease and the chances of scraping will be lesser.. but I'm strictly interested in knowing about the absorption rate and general stability at higher speeds. In relative terms, that is.)

Originally Posted by 007maverick

Technically Higher GC means more roll. Hence the quality of Ride & Handling will be poor for such a vehicle on relative basis

I don't know - that's what I expected as well. The reviews had varying opinions due to Fronx's allegedly stiffer suspension, hence the question.

Originally Posted by 007maverick

Suggest also test drive i20 and Honda Amaze as well. These are great cars if SUV /Cross overs is not your genuine requirement and you would like to consider beyond Maruti.

The people I'm assisting tested the Amaze and didn't like its interior or the dealership, and were slightly concerned about Honda's diminishing presence in the country.

[Gedaliah]

In addition to the points noted by fellow BHPians, I would like to add the below:

1. The selection should also be based on the user category. A younger person might find Baleno more likeable because of the lower seating position and sporty driving. An older person might like the Fronx because it would be easier to get in and out due to the higher stance.

2. Baleno has been in the market for a long time now. Fronx is a newer offering which would mean better quality and modern design.

[silverado]

Originally Posted by 007maverick

Between the two Fronx will be notch better simply because it's a new Cabin, easier egress - ingress and .

You will be surprised , but there is hardly any noticeable difference in ingress and egress between Fronkx and Baleno, atleast i was unable to find any difference. I checked it when i went to service my car with Maruti, so the comparision was on the spot.

Google shows the difference in height is 50mm, 5cms is hardly a noticeable height difference.

[SlowDough]

I have a Fronx Alpha Turbo AT and I have driven 4500 km.

1. Suspension feel - Not wobbly like Brezza, not too hard edged like older Kia Seltos. Perfect balance - comfortable yet very, very sporty. Body role seems negligible and I am always pushing myself in the corners like I have never before. On highways, I do not have to slow down for the sake of losing stability. However, on very sharp rumble strips, it triggers my dash cam - that much of a hard edge you will definitely feel, but even with that, and the 5 odd family members I have driven it with, no one complained about the suspension. I've also actually put it in a deep pothole in the city which was hidden in the dark - it would have hurt a Baleno for sure but the Fronx somehow survived. I pass it regularly and cannot pat myself enough for getting a better ground clearance. We had driven a Baleno during the test-drive process, and everyone in my family liked Fronx's suspension better.

2. City mileage: I've seen 8 to 10 kmpl in heavy congestion, 10-14 kmpl in medium congestion, 14-22 kmpl in low congestion. Highway mileage, if driven with a patient (not sedate) foot around 90 to 100 kmph, I get 18 to 20kmpl easily, even in manual mode with fast (but not silly) overtakes. I live in Delhi, most of my drives are on wide roads. I am a patient driver.

3. Build quality: The front doors, front hood feel much better built than the Baleno. I've compared them side by side and wouldn't have bought the Fronx if it had Baleno's build quality. Do compare yourself.

Advice for you:

1. Fronx has a lot better & usable ground clearance, better build (as per me), and great suspension that you will never have to complain about.

2. Since you are buying an MT, you can go for both Turbo and 1.2 engines. I don't see a big difference. Only case for buying 1.2 in terms of mileage: if you drive in extremely congested areas and you need to drive more than 2000 km in a month, in which case you might see a significant difference in your fuel costs. Or if you like to drive pedal-to-the-metal. Otherwise, the better power with an extra gear is good to pay for in the long term perspective.

3. Think about service: Maruti hasn't trained people about the needs of the turbo engine yet. I've been in touch with 4 service centres and some Maruti folks on the phone - they don't even know the correct grade of oil and oil filter. 2 of the centres didn't have the oil and filter in stock. 1.2 will be more idiot proof in that case, although, truth be told, I've seen them mess up the oil grade with that too based on their own wits and availabilities. If you get the turbo engine, you'll need to put in some more due diligence for proper service.

[McQueen]

Originally Posted by Gedaliah

(..) Fronx is a newer offering which would mean better quality (..)

The question is if there's actually any change in quality. The two are built on the same platform and likely have the same type of materials used.. or maybe not?

Someone on YouTube tested the latest Glanza and the Fronx using a thickness-gauge and found Fronx's thickness at certain places to be slightly more (by a fraction of a millimeter) than that of the Baleno. (Link). Given Maruti decided to send Baleno to BNCAP and will most likely send Fronx in the upcoming edition (as hinted by the crash testing teaser), I doubt how much of a difference is going to be there and in whose favour, if at all.