Changan Alsvin vs Changan CS75 Pro

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.

Changan Alsvin in South Africa

Changan Alsvin

1.5 AT CE Petrol 5-Speed DCT Current
ZAR 289,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 78 kW 🔧 145 Nm ⛽ 14.49 km/l
VS
Changan CS75 Pro in South Africa

Changan CS75 Pro

1.5T AT 5S CE Petrol 7-Speed DCT Current
ZAR 474,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 138 kW 🔧 300 Nm ⛽ 13.33 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Changan Alsvin vs Changan CS75 Pro: the short answer

CS75 Pro holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Alsvin.

Alsvin starts ZAR 180,000 cheaper Alsvin from ZAR 249,900 · CS75 Pro from ZAR 429,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Alsvin CS75 Pro
Maximum Power Alsvin78 kW CS75 Pro138 kW
Maximum Torque Alsvin145 Nm CS75 Pro300 Nm
Engine Size Alsvin1500 cc CS75 Pro1494 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Alsvin14.49 km/l CS75 Pro13.33 km/l
Ground Clearance Alsvin150 mm CS75 ProNot Officially Disclosed

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

Independent editorial assessment

Hagalu editorial ratings

When a variant is selected, its rating out of five applies only to that exact derivative; a model-range review is not inherited. Editorial ratings are separate from the Specification Evidence Index out of 100 and are not customer ratings.

Changan Alsvin

1.5 AT CE

Hagalu editorial rating
3.9/5

Desk research · Exact variant

Editorial assessment, not a customer rating. Not road-tested for this review.

Read the review and score breakdown

Changan CS75 Pro

1.5T AT 5S CE

Hagalu editorial rating
4.3/5

Desk research · Exact variant

Editorial assessment, not a customer rating. Not road-tested for this review.

Read the review and score breakdown

Not yet rated means a complete review is not published; it does not mean the vehicle scored zero. Read the rating methodology.

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Alsvin

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

CS75 Pro

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

Which One's Right for You?

Alsvin

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

CS75 Pro

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec Alsvin CS75 Pro
Model Introduced Year 2025 2025
Generation Current South African Alsvin generation launched with two locally named derivatives in 2025. Current South African CS75 Pro generation with two equipment grades and two seating configurations.
Facelift History No South African facelift has been announced since the current range entered local retail sale. No South African facelift has been announced since the present CS75 Pro range entered local sale.
Facelift Launched Since Not Applicable Not Applicable
Facelift Version Ending Not Applicable Not Applicable
Body Style Sedan SUV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active active
Segment Compact sedan Mid-size SUV
Vehicle Type Passenger car Passenger car
Spec Alsvin CS75 Pro
Length 4390 mm 4730 mm
Width 1725 mm 1870 mm
Height 1490 mm 1720 mm
Wheelbase 2535 mm 2786 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 150 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Fuel Tank Capacity 45 l 55 l
Boot/Cargo Space 390 l 620 l
Kerb Weight 1069 kg 1550 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1470 kg 1925 kg
Payload Capacity Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Towing Capacity 705 kg Not Officially Disclosed
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 2 rows 2 rows
Doors 4 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.5 m Not Officially Disclosed
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 Alsvin and CS75 Pro 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: Alsvin 35 vs CS75 Pro 59.

Efficiency index: Alsvin 56 vs CS75 Pro 52.

Safety-equipment index: Alsvin 32 vs CS75 Pro 76.

Practicality index: Alsvin 54 vs CS75 Pro 79.

Ownership-cover index: Alsvin not separately scored vs CS75 Pro 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

CS75 Pro leads by 24 points

CS75 Pro holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Alsvin.

Evidence leader 67 /100
Lead 24 points
Data 65% source coverage
67
#1 Evidence leader

CS75 Pro

65% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Practicality 79 Check Efficiency 52
Performance 59
Efficiency 52
Safety 76
Practicality 79
Leads by 24 points
43
#2

Alsvin

66% source coverage 0 strong categories
Best at Efficiency 56 Check Safety 32
Performance 35
Efficiency 56
Safety 32
Practicality 54
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance CS75 Pro +24 Efficiency Alsvin +4 Safety CS75 Pro +44 Practicality CS75 Pro +25

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

CS75 Pro

Performance 59/100
Efficiency 52/100
Safety 76/100
Practicality 79/100

Alsvin

Performance 35/100
Efficiency 56/100
Safety 32/100
Practicality 54/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Changan CS75 Pro leads the specification evidence index with 67 pts vs 43 pts for Alsvin

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, CS75 Pro leads. However, Alsvin may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

Alsvin vs CS75 Pro 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.