Toyota GR Supra vs Ford Ranger Raptor

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.

Toyota GR Supra in South Africa

Toyota GR Supra

3.0T Manual Petrol 6-Speed Manual Current
ZAR 1,561,600 ex-showroom
⚡ 285 kW 🔧 500 Nm ⛽ 12 km/l
VS
Ford Ranger Raptor in South Africa

Ford Ranger Raptor

Raptor 3.0T V6 10AT 4x4 Petrol 10-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 1,299,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 292 kW 🔧 583 Nm ⛽ 8.7 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Toyota GR Supra vs Ford Ranger Raptor: the short answer

Ranger Raptor has a modest catalogue-index lead, while GR Supra remains close.

Ranger Raptor starts ZAR 225,800 cheaper GR Supra from ZAR 1,524,800 · Ranger Raptor from ZAR 1,299,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification GR Supra Ranger Raptor
Maximum Power GR Supra285 kW Ranger Raptor292 kW
Maximum Torque GR Supra500 Nm Ranger Raptor583 Nm
Engine Size GR Supra2998 cc Ranger Raptor2993 cc
Combined Fuel Economy GR Supra12 km/l Ranger Raptor8.7 km/l
Ground Clearance GR Supra117 mm Ranger Raptor272 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.

Toyota GR Supra

3.0T Manual

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

Ford Ranger Raptor

Raptor 3.0T V6 10AT 4x4

Hagalu editorial rating
4.1/5

Desk research · Exact variant

Hagalu Editorial Team ·

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)

GR Supra

Strengths
  • Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: Published Efficiency
Specification evidence leader

Ranger Raptor

Strengths
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to: Published Practicality

Which One's Right for You?

GR Supra

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

Ranger Raptor

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec GR Supra Ranger Raptor
Model Introduced Year 2021 2022
Generation A90 fifth generation – co-developed with BMW on the CLAR platform Current-generation Ford Ranger
Facelift History Manual gearbox and power upgrade (280 kW→285 kW) in 2023 Model-year updates can affect trim, wheels, screens, safety equipment and colours. Use the latest South African price list when checking a specific vehicle.
Facelift Launched Since 2023 Original current-generation version
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style Sedan Pickup
Color Note Matte White, Nitro Yellow, Renaissance Red, Gravure Grey, Tungsten Silver, Black Colour availability changes by model year, production batch and dealer stock, check the current colour selector before ordering.
Dealer Stock Note Flagship grade in the South Africa lineup Flagship grade in the South Africa lineup
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active active
Segment Sedan Pickup
Tare Mass Kg 1545 kg 2432 kg
Vehicle Type Sedan Pickup
Body Type Cab - Pickup
Drivetrain Note - Drive layout derived from the official derivative naming: Raptor 3.0T V6 10AT 4x4
Spec GR Supra Ranger Raptor
Length 4380 mm 5381 mm
Width 1865 mm 2028 mm
Height 1294 mm 1922 mm
Wheelbase 2470 mm 3270 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 117 mm 272 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 125 mm 185 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 52 l 80 l
Boot/Cargo Space 290 l 477 l
Kerb Weight 1545 kg 2432 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1870 kg 3160 kg
Payload Capacity 325 kg 728 kg
Towing Capacity 1600 kg 2500 kg
Seating Capacity 2 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 1 rows 2 rows
Doors 4 doors 4 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 6.3 m 6.2 m
Front Headroom 995 mm 984 mm
Rear Headroom Not Applicable 940 mm
Front Legroom 1040 mm 1043 mm
Rear Legroom Not Applicable 896 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This GR Supra and Ranger Raptor 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: GR Supra 94 vs Ranger Raptor 94.

Efficiency index: GR Supra 47 vs Ranger Raptor 40.

Safety-equipment index: GR Supra 98 vs Ranger Raptor 98.

Practicality index: GR Supra 40 vs Ranger Raptor 77.

Ownership-cover index: GR Supra 43 vs Ranger Raptor 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

Ranger Raptor leads by 13 points

Ranger Raptor has a modest catalogue-index lead, while GR Supra remains close.

Evidence leader 80 /100
Lead 13 points
Data 80% source coverage
80
#1 Evidence leader

Ranger Raptor

80% source coverage 3 strong categories
Best at Safety 98 Check Efficiency 40
Performance 94
Efficiency 40
Safety 98
Practicality 77
Leads by 13 points
67
#2

GR Supra

90% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 98 Check Practicality 40
Performance 94
Efficiency 47
Safety 98
Practicality 40
Ownership 43
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Level Efficiency GR Supra +7 Safety Level Practicality Ranger Raptor +37

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Ranger Raptor

Performance 94/100
Efficiency 40/100
Safety 98/100
Practicality 77/100

GR Supra

Performance 94/100
Efficiency 47/100
Safety 98/100
Practicality 40/100
Ownership 43/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Ford Ranger Raptor leads the specification evidence index with 80 pts vs 67 pts for GR Supra

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Ranger Raptor leads. However, GR Supra 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.

GR Supra
GR Supra
VS
Mustang
Mustang
GR Supra vs Mustang →
GR Supra
GR Supra
VS
i4
i4
GR Supra vs i4 →
GR Supra
GR Supra
VS
E-Class
E-Class
GR Supra vs E-Class →
GR Supra
GR Supra
VS
5 Series
5 Series
GR Supra vs 5 Series →
GR Supra
GR Supra
VS
CLA Electric
CLA ElectricUpcoming
GR Supra vs CLA Electric →
GR Supra
GR Supra
VS
D-Max Arctic Trucks AT35
D-Max Arctic Trucks AT35
GR Supra vs D-Max Arctic Trucks AT35 →
Ranger Raptor
Ranger Raptor
VS
Mustang
Mustang
Ranger Raptor vs Mustang →
Ranger Raptor
Ranger Raptor
VS
i4
i4
Ranger Raptor vs i4 →

GR Supra vs Ranger Raptor 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.