KIA K2700 vs Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

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.

KIA K2700 in South Africa

KIA K2700

2.7D Workhorse Tipper Diesel 5-Speed Manual Current
ZAR 404,995 ex-showroom
⚡ 56 kW 🔧 152 Nm ⛽ 10.5 km/l
VS
Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV in South Africa

Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

Comfort HEV Hybrid Current
ZAR 439,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 150 kW 🔧 310 Nm ⛽ 18.5 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

KIA K2700 vs Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV: the short answer

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over K2700.

K2700 starts ZAR 87,905 cheaper K2700 from ZAR 351,995 · Tiggo 4 Cross HEV from ZAR 439,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification K2700 Tiggo 4 Cross HEV
Maximum Power K270056 kW @ 3200 rpm Tiggo 4 Cross HEV150 kW @ 5500 rpm
Maximum Torque K2700152 Nm @ 2000 rpm Tiggo 4 Cross HEV310 Nm
Engine Size K27002665 cc Tiggo 4 Cross HEV1500 cc
Combined Fuel Economy K270010.5 km/l Tiggo 4 Cross HEV18.5 km/l
Ground Clearance K2700195 mm Tiggo 4 Cross HEV180 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

K2700

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

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

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

Which One's Right for You?

K2700

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

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

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec K2700 Tiggo 4 Cross HEV
Model Introduced Year 1997 2026
Generation Long-running light commercial vehicle; established in SA commercial fleet market Current South Africa Tiggo 4 Cross HEV range
Facelift History Updated in 2005, 2012; current model ongoing production with specification updates Current South Africa version listed by official source
Facelift Launched Since 2012 2026
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style Van SUV
Color Note White (standard fleet specification) -
Dealer Stock Note Flagship grade in the South Africa lineup -
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active active
Segment Van SUV
Tare Mass Kg 1880 kg 1387 kg
Vehicle Type Van SUV
Spec K2700 Tiggo 4 Cross HEV
Length 4870 mm 4351 mm
Width 1840 mm 1831 mm
Height 2060 mm 1662 mm
Wheelbase 2685 mm 2610 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 195 mm 180 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 145 mm 180 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 70 l 51 l
Boot/Cargo Space 3000 l 340 l
Kerb Weight 1880 kg 1387 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2850 kg 1905 kg
Payload Capacity 1300 kg 518 kg
Towing Capacity 1180 kg 1300 kg
Seating Capacity 2 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 1 rows 2 rows
Doors 2 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 11.4 m 5.5 m
Front Headroom 1010 mm 1010 mm
Rear Headroom Not Applicable 975 mm
Front Legroom 1040 mm 1040 mm
Rear Legroom Not Applicable 930 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This K2700 and Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 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: K2700 32 vs Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 62.

Efficiency index: K2700 43 vs Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 75.

Safety-equipment index: K2700 0 vs Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 91.

Practicality index: K2700 68 vs Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 57.

Ownership-cover index: K2700 49 vs Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 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

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV leads by 34 points

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV has a large lead in Hagalu's source-backed catalogue index over K2700.

Evidence leader 71 /100
Lead 34 points
Data 65% source coverage
71
#1 Evidence leader

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

65% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 91 Check Practicality 57
Performance 62
Efficiency 75
Safety 91
Practicality 57
Leads by 34 points
37
#2

K2700

84% source coverage 0 strong categories
Best at Practicality 68 Check Safety 0
Performance 32
Efficiency 43
Safety 0
Practicality 68
Ownership 49
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Tiggo 4 Cross HEV +30 Efficiency Tiggo 4 Cross HEV +32 Safety Tiggo 4 Cross HEV +91 Practicality K2700 +11

Large difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

Performance 62/100
Efficiency 75/100
Safety 91/100
Practicality 57/100

K2700

Performance 32/100
Efficiency 43/100
Safety 0/100
Practicality 68/100
Ownership 49/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV leads the specification evidence index with 71 pts vs 37 pts for K2700

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Tiggo 4 Cross HEV leads. However, K2700 may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

K2700 vs Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 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.