Honda CR-V vs JAC T9 Double Cab

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.

Honda CR-V in South Africa

Honda CR-V

2.0 Hybrid e:HEV Hybrid e-CVT Current
ZAR 819,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 204 kW 🔧 335 Nm ⛽ 20 km/l
VS
JAC T9 Double Cab in South Africa

JAC T9 Double Cab

T9 2.0L CTi Hunter 4x2 Diesel 8-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 629,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 144 kW 🔧 487 Nm ⛽ 12.66 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Honda CR-V vs JAC T9 Double Cab: the short answer

CR-V and T9 Double Cab are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

T9 Double Cab starts ZAR 140,000 cheaper CR-V from ZAR 689,900 · T9 Double Cab from ZAR 549,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification CR-V T9 Double Cab
Maximum Power CR-V204 kW T9 Double Cab144 kW @ 3014 rpm
Maximum Torque CR-V335 Nm T9 Double Cab487 Nm
Engine Size CR-V1993 cc T9 Double Cab1999 cc
Combined Fuel Economy CR-V20 km/l T9 Double Cab12.66 km/l
Ground Clearance CR-V198 mm T9 Double Cab210 mm

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.

Honda CR-V

2.0 Hybrid e:HEV

Hagalu editorial rating Not yet rated

No complete editorial rating is published for this exact variant. This is not a zero score.

How Hagalu rates cars

JAC T9 Double Cab

T9 2.0L CTi Hunter 4x2

Hagalu editorial rating Not yet rated

No complete editorial rating is published for this exact variant. This is not a zero score.

How Hagalu rates cars

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)

Specification evidence leader

CR-V

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

T9 Double Cab

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?

CR-V

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

T9 Double Cab

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec CR-V T9 Double Cab
Wheelbase 2700 mm 3110 mm
Length 4690 mm 5330 mm
Width 1860 mm 1965 mm
Height 1690 mm 1920 mm
Kerb Weight 1750 kg Not Officially Disclosed
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2250 kg 2945 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats Not Officially Disclosed
Boot/Cargo Space 497 l Not Officially Disclosed
Towing Capacity 1500 kg 3500 kg
Fuel Tank Capacity 57 l 76 l
Doors 5 doors Not Officially Disclosed
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 198 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Payload Capacity 500 kg 1000 kg
Number of Rows 2 rows Not Officially Disclosed
Minimum Turning Radius 5.7 m 6.2 m
Front Headroom 970 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Headroom 970 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Front Legroom 1049 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Legroom 1041 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Ground Clearance (Default) 198 mm 210 mm
Spec CR-V T9 Double Cab
Gearbox eCVT Automatic ZF 8-speed automatic
Drivetrain Layout All Wheel Drive RWD
LSD Available Electronic AWD Control Not Officially Disclosed
Transfer Case Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Transmission Type Automatic Automatic
Gearbox Type eCVT Automatic ZF 8-speed automatic
Gear Shift Type eCVT Automatic Not Officially Disclosed
Drivetrain AWD RWD
Axle Layout AWD 4×2
Differential Lock Electronic AWD Lock Not Officially Disclosed
4WD Engagement Available Not Officially Disclosed
4WD Hi Range Available Not Officially Disclosed
Low Range Ratio Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Number of Gears Not Applicable 8
Transmission Speeds Not Applicable 8
4WD Lo Range Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
4WD Selector Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Low Range Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Front Differential Lock Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Differential Lock Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Paddle Shifters Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Automatic Shift Paddles Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Final Drive Ratio Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Clutch Type Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed
Gear Shift Indicator Not Applicable Not Officially Disclosed

In depth: how these cars differ

This CR-V and T9 Double Cab 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: CR-V 77 vs T9 Double Cab 74.

Efficiency index: CR-V 80 vs T9 Double Cab 54.

Safety-equipment index: CR-V 91 vs T9 Double Cab 85.

Practicality index: CR-V 66 vs T9 Double Cab 86.

Ownership-cover index: CR-V 60 vs T9 Double Cab 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

CR-V leads by 0 points

CR-V and T9 Double Cab are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 76 /100
Lead 0 points
Data 94% source coverage
76
#1 Evidence leader

CR-V

94% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Safety 91 Check Ownership 60
Performance 77
Efficiency 80
Safety 91
Practicality 66
Ownership 60
Leads by 0 points
76
#2

T9 Double Cab

59% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Practicality 86 Check Efficiency 54
Performance 74
Efficiency 54
Safety 85
Practicality 86
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance CR-V +3 Efficiency CR-V +26 Safety CR-V +6 Practicality T9 Double Cab +20

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

CR-V

Performance 77/100
Efficiency 80/100
Safety 91/100
Practicality 66/100
Ownership 60/100

T9 Double Cab

Performance 74/100
Efficiency 54/100
Safety 85/100
Practicality 86/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Honda CR-V leads the specification evidence index with 76 pts vs 76 pts for T9 Double Cab

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, CR-V leads. However, T9 Double Cab may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

Related comparisons

Continue with closely related South Africa models and comparable body styles.

CR-V
CR-V
VS
Tiggo 8 Pro Max
Tiggo 8 Pro Max
CR-V vs Tiggo 8 Pro Max →
CR-V
CR-V
VS
E5 EM-i
E5 EM-i
CR-V vs E5 EM-i →
CR-V
CR-V
VS
03T
03T
CR-V vs 03T →
CR-V
CR-V
VS
Tiggo 7 PHEV
Tiggo 7 PHEV
CR-V vs Tiggo 7 PHEV →
CR-V
CR-V
VS
SEALION 6 DM-i
SEALION 6 DM-i
CR-V vs SEALION 6 DM-i →
CR-V
CR-V
VS
06
06
CR-V vs 06 →
T9 Double Cab
T9 Double Cab
VS
Tiggo 8 Pro Max
Tiggo 8 Pro Max
T9 Double Cab vs Tiggo 8 Pro Max →
T9 Double Cab
T9 Double Cab
VS
E5 EM-i
E5 EM-i
T9 Double Cab vs E5 EM-i →

CR-V vs T9 Double Cab 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.