1991 Honda Beat versus 1993 Suzuki Cappuccino
Clayton Seams: In the early 1990s, the Japanese auto industry was booming. The yen was high and no idea was too wild to try. Turbochargers, twin camshafts, all-wheel drive and high-tech electronics were all being pioneered in Japanese performance cars of the time. And that try-anything attitude trickled down even to the smallest and most affordable segment of Japanese cars: Kei cars.
Kei (pronounced “key”) cars are a class of subcompacts in Japan that must adhere to strict rules that govern the dimensions, engine size and power output. Critically, they could only be 3.3 metres long and 1.4 metres wide, and were limited to a 660-c.c. engine that could officially generate no more than 63 horsepower. While most Kei cars are ho-hum hatchbacks and mini-trucks, some were full-on sports cars. Brian, what do we have the pleasure of driving? Brian Harper: We have the rare opportunity to test a pair of early-1990s convertibles — the Honda Beat and the Suzuki Cappuccino — thanks to our benefactor, 87-year-old Dick Hamilton. He’s a longtime MG enthusiast, racer, race-car builder and genuinely cool guy. Both of these cars are his; he picked them up a halfdozen years ago and he offered to let us try them out before he sold them. He admits that, at his age, he’s finding them difficult to climb out of.
Kei cars are Japanese homemarket vehicles that were never intended to be exported. I can see why: they are laughably small and would never pass North American crash tests. They’re also some of the most fun cars I have ever had the privilege to test, especially the Cappuccino, a car I first saw at the 1991 Tokyo Motor Show and was smitten with. And despite the strict rules regarding Kei car manufacture, the two are refreshingly different.
CS: Brian, you may have fallen in love with the Cappuccino at the auto show, and I can see why. It’s a rear-wheel-drive, two-seat, front-engined sports car with a fun, turbocharged in-line threecylinder engine at its heart. The styling is reminiscent of a threequarter-scale version of the Shelby Series 1 and it features a trick, three-way folding hardtop.
But my heart beats quicker for the Honda Beat. Unlike the Suzuki, the Honda stashes its engine amidships, just behind the seats, and its three-cylinder engine didn’t even need a turbo to reach the 63-hp. cap. It uses individual throttle bodies and pure revs to make the power it does, and it sounds like onequarter of a V-12 while doing it. From behind the wheel, the Beat is the raciest of the two, and you can hear all the delightfully mechanical noises of combustion and gearing just behind your head. It’s a joy! How could the driving of the Cappuccino even come close?
BH: How can the Beat be more racy if both cars put out the same 63 hp.? That’s just it, isn’t it? Sixty-three horses is the “official” rating; I suspect both Honda and Suzuki were conservative in their reporting. As to how the Cappuccino can come close, let me remind you of the sweet zing of the engine’s turbocharger. And, oh my, can you ever rev the snot out of both of these Lilliputian rockets.
Once the Cappuccino’s turbo kicks in, it just takes off. I will acknowledge the Beat’s tighter five-speed manual transmission, though; the Suzuki needed a little more finesse, especially the firstto-second shift, but that could just be condition. Remember, both of these cars are more than 25 years old.
CS: When it comes to manual shifters, it’s hard to beat an old- school Honda. Sure, both these cars shriek their little heads off at 110 km/ h down the highway, but that’s not really what they’re about. Both are dubiously practical and the Honda even more so than the Suzuki. Open the Honda’s rear trunk (there is no front trunk) and you can fit little more than a two-litre bottle of soda and a toothbrush. The Suzuki has a larger trunk and feels a bit more spacious inside, but these are both cars that you fall into and crawl out of. Once you’ve wriggled yourself in behind the steering wheel, you won’t want to leave for a very long time. The truth is, nothing on the roads today drives like these pint-sized sports cars and both will easily put a smile on your face. But only one can win our comparison. How are you going to choose, Brian?
BH: There was never any doubt in my mind, Clayton. Given the equal power ratings and raucous performance, I choose the Suzuki’s more rounded, organic styling to the Honda’s slab-sided profile. The other point is that the Cappuccino’s admittedly more complicated removable roof panels allow it to function as a hardtop, a targa top or as a convertible.
Still, you hit the nail on the head: neither of these cars are practical. They are designed and function best for innercity use, ideally suited to the cut and thrust of downtown congestion — as long as they don’t get steamrollered by some two-tonne SUV. I doubt either car will ever be a true collectible; the few models that appear online sell for less than $10,000. They are more curiosity pieces, representative of a time in Japan when “small but mighty” was anything but oxymoronic.
CS: Both of these cars offer a truly unique driving experience. The lightest cars you can buy new in 2018 still outweigh these little sprites by 500 pounds. The Honda has a racier soundtrack, and a tighter shifter but the Suzuki is the more complete sports car. It has more power, slightly more comfortable accommodations, and it looks great. I’d be happy to fit either of these into my garage. And with their small size, I might not have to choose. Driving.ca