Toyota Land Cruiser 78 vs Toyota Rush

A proper head-to-head in Kenya — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.

Toyota Land Cruiser 78 in Kenya

Toyota Land Cruiser 78

Land Cruiser 78 4.2D Troopy Diesel 5-Speed Manual Current
KES 8,500,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 96 kW 🔧 285 Nm
VS
Toyota Rush in Kenya

Toyota Rush

1.5L Petrol AT 4x2 Petrol 4-Speed Automatic Current
KES 5,100,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 77 kW 🔧 136 Nm ⛽ 15.2 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Toyota Land Cruiser 78 vs Toyota Rush: the short answer

Land Cruiser 78 and Rush are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Rush starts KES 3,700,000 cheaper Land Cruiser 78 from KES 8,500,000 · Rush from KES 4,800,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Land Cruiser 78 Rush
Maximum Power Land Cruiser 7896 kW Rush77 kW @ 6000 rpm
Maximum Torque Land Cruiser 78285 Nm Rush136 Nm @ 4200 rpm
Engine Size Land Cruiser 784164 cc Rush1496 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Land Cruiser 78Not Officially Disclosed Rush15.2 km/l
Ground Clearance Land Cruiser 78235 mm Rush220 mm

Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.

Evidence for Toyota Land Cruiser 78 Land Cruiser 78 4.2D Troopy

Source type: Toyota Kenya

Evidence for Toyota Rush 1.5L Petrol AT 4x2

Source type: Toyota Kenya

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

Land Cruiser 78

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Fewer listed safety features
Best suited to: Published Performance Published Practicality

Rush

Strengths
  • Better fuel efficiency
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: Published Efficiency

Which One's Right for You?

Land Cruiser 78

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Rush

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec Land Cruiser 78 Rush
Model Introduced Year Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Generation Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Facelift History Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Facelift Launched Since Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Facelift Version Ending Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Production Status Active Active
Segment Kenya-market SUV Kenya-market SUV
Vehicle Type SUV SUV
Spec Land Cruiser 78 Rush
Length 5130 mm 4435 mm
Width 1800 mm 1695 mm
Height 2080 mm 1705 mm
Wheelbase 2980 mm 2685 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 235 mm 220 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 235 mm 200 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 90 l 45 l
Boot/Cargo Space 2000 l 213 l
Kerb Weight 2230 kg 1280 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 3200 kg 1870 kg
Payload Capacity 970 kg 590 kg
Towing Capacity 3500 kg 800 kg
Seating Capacity 13 seats 7 seats
Number of Rows 4 rows 3 rows
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 6.8 m 5.2 m
Front Headroom Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Headroom Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Front Legroom Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Legroom Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed

In depth: how these cars differ

This Land Cruiser 78 and Rush comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for Kenya. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.

Performance index: Land Cruiser 78 54 vs Rush 35.

Efficiency index: Land Cruiser 78 36 vs Rush 60.

Safety-equipment index: Land Cruiser 78 28 vs Rush 54.

Practicality index: Land Cruiser 78 97 vs Rush 60.

Ownership-cover index: Land Cruiser 78 not separately scored vs Rush not separately scored.

These figures are Hagalu catalogue-comparison indicators, not customer ratings, crash-test scores, resale guarantees or a substitute for a road test. Each page shows its weighted source coverage beside the result.

Specification Evidence Index

A transparent comparison of published catalogue fields. This is not a road-test score, owner rating or editorial review rating, and it appears only when every vehicle clears the same comparable-data threshold.

Evidence / 100
Evidence-index readout

Land Cruiser 78 leads by 4 points

Land Cruiser 78 and Rush are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 55 /100
Lead 4 points
Data 68% source coverage
55
#1 Evidence leader

Land Cruiser 78

68% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Practicality 97 Check Safety 28
Performance 54
Efficiency 36
Safety 28
Practicality 97
Leads by 4 points
51
#2

Rush

69% source coverage 0 strong categories
Best at Efficiency 60 Check Performance 35
Performance 35
Efficiency 60
Safety 54
Practicality 60
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Land Cruiser 78 +19 Efficiency Rush +24 Safety Rush +26 Practicality Land Cruiser 78 +37

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Land Cruiser 78

Performance 54/100
Efficiency 36/100
Safety 28/100
Practicality 97/100

Rush

Performance 35/100
Efficiency 60/100
Safety 54/100
Practicality 60/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Toyota Land Cruiser 78 leads the specification evidence index with 55 pts vs 51 pts for Rush

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Land Cruiser 78 leads. However, Rush may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in Kenya.

Land Cruiser 78 vs Rush questions

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in Kenya on price, safety equipment, space, powertrain and ownership cover. The category indicators summarise published catalogue data; they are not a road test or customer rating.

Compare the published consumption or mileage rows for the exact derivatives using the same unit and test basis. A catalogue figure is useful for like-for-like comparison, but traffic, speed, load, weather and driving style can change actual fuel use.

Compare only equipment explicitly listed for each derivative, including airbags, stability control and driver-assistance systems. Confirm the exact trim with the manufacturer, and treat any independent crash-test result separately because equipment and ratings can differ by market.

A reliable five-year total cannot be calculated from catalogue data alone. Add the exact purchase and finance cost, fuel or electricity, insurance quotes, scheduled servicing, tyres and expected resale value. Check whether the selected derivative includes a service or maintenance plan.

Use the seating, boot or load-space, ISOFIX and safety rows as a first check. Then test the exact cars with your child seats, passengers and typical luggage, because published dimensions do not show every access or comfort difference.

Compare the published power, torque and 0–100 km/h rows when they are available for both exact derivatives. Vehicle weight, gearing and power delivery also matter, so catalogue outputs alone do not establish real-world overtaking or response.