Omoda C9 SHS vs Toyota Land Cruiser 76

A proper head-to-head in South Africa — we cover price, performance, petrol economy, safety and what it'll actually cost you to own each one long term.

Omoda C9 SHS in South Africa

Omoda C9 SHS

C9 SHS AWD Plug-in Hybrid 3-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 999,900 ex-showroom
⛽ 71.4 km/l
VS
Toyota Land Cruiser 76 in South Africa

Toyota Land Cruiser 76

4.0 V6 Station Wagon AT Petrol 4-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 1,065,300 ex-showroom
⚡ 202 kW 🔧 381 Nm ⛽ 13 km/l
Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Omoda C9 SHS vs Toyota Land Cruiser 76: the short answer

C9 SHS holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Land Cruiser 76.

Land Cruiser 76 starts ZAR 19,900 cheaper C9 SHS from ZAR 999,900 · Land Cruiser 76 from ZAR 980,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification C9 SHS Land Cruiser 76
Maximum Power C9 SHSNot Officially Disclosed Land Cruiser 76202 kW
Maximum Torque C9 SHSNot Officially Disclosed Land Cruiser 76381 Nm
Engine Size C9 SHS1500 cc Land Cruiser 763956 cc
Combined Fuel Economy C9 SHS71.4 km/l Land Cruiser 7613 km/l
Ground Clearance C9 SHS165 mm Land Cruiser 76230 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

C9 SHS

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

Land Cruiser 76

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

Which One's Right for You?

C9 SHS

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

Land Cruiser 76

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec C9 SHS Land Cruiser 76
Model Introduced Year 2025 1984
Generation Current South Africa C9 SHS range 70 Series – one of the world's longest-running vehicle nameplates
Facelift History Current South Africa version listed by official source Continuous mechanical updates while retaining core body-on-frame design. Minor updates in 2007, 2014, 2021
Facelift Launched Since 2025 2021
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active published
Segment SUV SUV
Tare Mass Kg Not Available 2100 kg
Vehicle Type SUV SUV
Color Note - White, Beige
Dealer Stock Note - Top grade in the South Africa lineup
Spec C9 SHS Land Cruiser 76
Length 4775 mm 4890 mm
Width 1920 mm 1885 mm
Height 1671 mm 1970 mm
Wheelbase 2800 mm 2730 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 165 mm 230 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 140 mm -
Fuel Tank Capacity 70 l 87 l
Boot/Cargo Space 660 l 909 l
Kerb Weight 2195 kg 2100 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2717 kg 3300 kg
Payload Capacity 522 kg -
Towing Capacity 1500 kg 3500 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 8 seats
Number of Rows 2 rows -
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.8 m 6 m
Front Headroom 1005 mm -
Rear Headroom 970 mm -
Front Legroom 1070 mm -
Rear Legroom 960 mm -

In depth: how these cars differ

This C9 SHS and Land Cruiser 76 comparison uses the exact South African derivatives selected above. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.

Performance index: C9 SHS 92 vs Land Cruiser 76 77.

Efficiency index: C9 SHS 96 vs Land Cruiser 76 49.

Safety-equipment index: C9 SHS 94 vs Land Cruiser 76 50.

Practicality index: C9 SHS 69 vs Land Cruiser 76 96.

Ownership-cover index: C9 SHS not separately scored vs Land Cruiser 76 43.

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

C9 SHS leads by 22 points

C9 SHS holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Land Cruiser 76.

Evidence leader 87 /100
Lead 22 points
Data 55% source coverage
87
#1 Evidence leader

C9 SHS

55% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Efficiency 96 Check Practicality 69
Performance 92
Efficiency 96
Safety 94
Practicality 69
Leads by 22 points
65
#2

Land Cruiser 76

83% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Practicality 96 Check Ownership 43
Performance 77
Efficiency 49
Safety 50
Practicality 96
Ownership 43
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance C9 SHS +15 Efficiency C9 SHS +47 Safety C9 SHS +44 Practicality Land Cruiser 76 +27

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

C9 SHS

Performance 92/100
Efficiency 96/100
Safety 94/100
Practicality 69/100

Land Cruiser 76

Performance 77/100
Efficiency 49/100
Safety 50/100
Practicality 96/100
Ownership 43/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Omoda C9 SHS leads the specification evidence index with 87 pts vs 65 pts for Land Cruiser 76

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, C9 SHS leads. However, Land Cruiser 76 may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

C9 SHS vs Land Cruiser 76 questions

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the exact South African derivatives 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.