Ford Everest vs Hyundai Kona

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.

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.

Hyundai Kona Discontinued model
Ford Everest in South Africa

Ford Everest

3.0TD V6 Platinum 10AT 4WD Diesel 10-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 1,340,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 184 kW 🔧 600 Nm ⛽ 11.8 km/l
VS
Hyundai Kona in South Africa

Hyundai Kona

1.0T DCT Executive Petrol 7-Speed DCT Discontinued model
ZAR 565,900 last listed
Discontinued model Verified historical specifications remain visible for owner and used-car comparisons.
⚡ 88 kW 🔧 172 Nm ⛽ 15.5 km/l
Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Ford Everest vs Hyundai Kona: the short answer

Everest has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Kona remains close.

Recorded price context Everest: current from ZAR 825,000 · Kona: last listed from ZAR 459,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Everest Kona
Maximum Power Everest184 kW @ 3250 rpm Kona88 kW @ 5500 rpm
Maximum Torque Everest600 Nm Kona172 Nm @ 1500 rpm
Engine Size Everest2993 cc Kona998 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Everest11.8 km/l Kona15.5 km/l
Ground Clearance Everest226 mm Kona165 mm

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

Evidence for Hyundai Kona 1.0T DCT Executive

Source type: Hagalu catalogue record

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

Everest

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

Kona

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?

Everest

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

Kona

  • 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 Everest Kona
Model Introduced Year 2015 2018
Generation Currently sold Everest belongs to the latest generation with enhanced comfort and safety systems Second generation Kona on Hyundai's K2 GEN platform; the design is more conservative than the first gen but better resolved
Facelift History Major generational update in 2022 with improved safety, technology, and design Second generation launched globally in 2023 and brought to SA; softened styling compared to the sharper first gen, improved interior quality and tech
Facelift Launched Since 2022 2023
Facelift Version Ending Current Not confirmed
Body Style SUV Not confirmed
Color Note White, Black, Silver, Grey, Blue Not confirmed
Dealer Stock Note Flagship grade in the South Africa lineup Not confirmed
Drivetrain Note Drive layout derived from the official derivative naming: 3.0TD V6 Platinum 10AT 4WD Not confirmed
Model Year 2026 Not confirmed
Production Status active Not confirmed
Segment Large SUV Not confirmed
Tare Mass Kg 2450 kg 1460 kg
Vehicle Type SUV Not confirmed
Spec Everest Kona
Length 4914 mm 4355 mm
Width 1923 mm 1825 mm
Height 1842 mm 1570 mm
Wheelbase 2900 mm 2660 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 226 mm 165 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) Not Officially Disclosed Not confirmed
Fuel Tank Capacity 80 l 50 l
Boot/Cargo Space 259 l 466 l
Kerb Weight 2450 kg 1460 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 3150 kg Not confirmed
Payload Capacity 680 kg Not confirmed
Towing Capacity 3500 kg Not confirmed
Seating Capacity 7 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 3 rows Not confirmed
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.9 m Not confirmed
Front Headroom 972 mm Not confirmed
Rear Headroom 953 mm Not confirmed
Front Legroom 1058 mm Not confirmed
Rear Legroom 912 mm Not confirmed

In depth: how these cars differ

This Everest and Kona 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: Everest 91 vs Kona 40.

Efficiency index: Everest 52 vs Kona 62.

Safety-equipment index: Everest 81 vs Kona 87.

Practicality index: Everest 77 vs Kona 67.

Ownership-cover index: Everest not separately scored vs Kona 65.

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

Everest leads by 13 points

Everest has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Kona remains close.

Evidence leader 77 /100
Lead 13 points
Data 67% source coverage
77
#1 Evidence leader

Everest

67% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Performance 91 Check Efficiency 52
Performance 91
Efficiency 52
Safety 81
Practicality 77
Leads by 13 points
64
#2

Kona

89% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 87 Check Performance 40
Performance 40
Efficiency 62
Safety 87
Practicality 67
Ownership 65
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Everest +51 Efficiency Kona +10 Safety Kona +6 Practicality Everest +10

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Everest

Performance 91/100
Efficiency 52/100
Safety 81/100
Practicality 77/100

Kona

Performance 40/100
Efficiency 62/100
Safety 87/100
Practicality 67/100
Ownership 65/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Ford Everest leads the specification evidence index with 77 pts vs 64 pts for Kona

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

Everest vs Kona 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.