Toyota Agya vs MG MG3

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

Includes a historical vehicle

Current, upcoming and historical vehicles can be compared side by side. Historical records keep their verified specifications, while price labels show last-listed context rather than current new-car availability.

Toyota Agya Discontinued model
Toyota Agya in South Africa

Toyota Agya

1.0 XR CVT Petrol CVT Discontinued model
ZAR 229,900 last listed
Discontinued model Verified historical specifications remain visible for owner and used-car comparisons.
⚡ 51 kW 🔧 91 Nm ⛽ 18.0 km/l
VS
MG MG3 in South Africa

MG MG3

1.5L Hybrid+ Hybrid 3-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 469,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 75 kW 🔧 128 Nm ⛽ 23.26 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Toyota Agya vs MG MG3: the short answer

MG3 holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Agya.

Recorded price context Agya: last listed from ZAR 189,900 · MG3: current from ZAR 269,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Agya MG3
Maximum Power Agya51 kW @ 6000 rpm MG375 kW @ 6000 rpm
Maximum Torque Agya91 Nm @ 3600 rpm MG3128 Nm @ 4500 rpm
Engine Size Agya998 cc MG31498 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Agya18.0 km/l MG323.26 km/l
Ground Clearance Agya155 mm MG3149 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Agya

Strengths
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Fewer listed safety features
Best suited to: Published Practicality
Specification evidence leader

MG3

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

Which One's Right for You?

Agya

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

MG3

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

Full Specs, Side by Side

Archived cars use verified historical spec records. Rows remain comparable; unavailable historical values are shown plainly rather than estimated.

Spec Agya MG3
Model Introduced Year 2015 2025
Generation Second generation Agya for South Africa Current-generation five-door MG3 offered locally with naturally aspirated petrol and self-charging hybrid powertrains.
Facelift History Updated with refreshed styling and features South African launch specification introduced in 2025.
Facelift Launched Since 2021 2025
Facelift Version Ending 2024 Current
Body Style Hatchback Five-door hatchback
Model Year 2021 2026
Production Status discontinued active
Segment Hatchback Compact Hatchback
Tare Mass Kg 870 kg -
Vehicle Type Hatchback Hatchback
Spec Agya MG3
Length 3760 mm 4113 mm
Width 1665 mm 1797 mm
Height 1520 mm 1502 mm
Wheelbase 2455 mm 2570 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 155 mm 149 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 125 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Fuel Tank Capacity 35 l 36 l
Boot/Cargo Space 235 l 293 l
Kerb Weight 870 kg 1308 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1265 kg 1766 kg
Payload Capacity 395 kg 458 kg
Towing Capacity 1600 kg 500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 2 rows 2 rows
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 4.7 m 5.25 m
Front Headroom 983 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Headroom 951 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Front Legroom 1048 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Legroom 899 mm Not Officially Disclosed

In depth: how these cars differ

This Agya and MG3 comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for South Africa. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.

Performance index: Agya 22 vs MG3 40.

Efficiency index: Agya 70 vs MG3 90.

Safety-equipment index: Agya 71 vs MG3 92.

Practicality index: Agya 51 vs MG3 48.

Ownership-cover index: Agya 43 vs MG3 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

MG3 leads by 16 points

MG3 holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Agya.

Evidence leader 66 /100
Lead 16 points
Data 82% source coverage
66
#1 Evidence leader

MG3

82% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 92 Check Performance 40
Performance 40
Efficiency 90
Safety 92
Practicality 48
Leads by 16 points
50
#2

Agya

87% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 71 Check Performance 22
Performance 22
Efficiency 70
Safety 71
Practicality 51
Ownership 43
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance MG3 +18 Efficiency MG3 +20 Safety MG3 +21 Practicality Agya +3

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

MG3

Performance 40/100
Efficiency 90/100
Safety 92/100
Practicality 48/100

Agya

Performance 22/100
Efficiency 70/100
Safety 71/100
Practicality 51/100
Ownership 43/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index MG MG3 leads the specification evidence index with 66 pts vs 50 pts for Agya

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, MG3 leads. However, Agya may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

Agya vs MG3 questions

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in South Africa 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.