Hyundai Kona vs Mahindra Scorpio-N

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
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
VS
Mahindra Scorpio-N in South Africa

Mahindra Scorpio-N

Z8L 4x4 AT Adventure Diesel 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 699,999 ex-showroom
⚡ 129 kW 🔧 400 Nm ⛽ 14.5 km/l
Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Hyundai Kona vs Mahindra Scorpio-N: the short answer

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

Recorded price context Kona: last listed from ZAR 459,900 · Scorpio-N: current from ZAR 489,999

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Kona Scorpio-N
Maximum Power Kona88 kW @ 5500 rpm Scorpio-N128.6 kW @ 3500 rpm
Maximum Torque Kona172 Nm @ 1500 rpm Scorpio-N400 Nm
Engine Size Kona998 cc Scorpio-N2184 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Kona15.5 km/l Scorpio-N14.5 km/l
Ground Clearance Kona165 mm Scorpio-N187 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)

Kona

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

Scorpio-N

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to: Published Performance Published Practicality

Which One's Right for You?

Kona

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

Scorpio-N

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

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 Kona Scorpio-N
Model Introduced Year 2018 Not Available
Generation Second generation Kona on Hyundai's K2 GEN platform; the design is more conservative than the first gen but better resolved Current local listing
Facelift History Second generation launched globally in 2023 and brought to SA; softened styling compared to the sharper first gen, improved interior quality and tech Not listed by current South African source page.
Facelift Launched Since 2023 Original current-generation version
Tare Mass Kg 1460 kg 1825-2070 kg
Facelift Version Ending Not confirmed Current
Body Style Not confirmed SUV
Model Year Not confirmed Current
Production Status Not confirmed Active
Segment Not confirmed SUV
Vehicle Type Not confirmed SUV
Spec Kona Scorpio-N
Length 4355 mm 4662 mm
Width 1825 mm 1918 mm
Height 1570 mm 1905 mm
Wheelbase 2660 mm 2750 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 165 mm 187 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 50 l 57 l
Boot/Cargo Space 466 l 460 l
Kerb Weight 1460 kg -
Seating Capacity 5 seats 7 seats
Doors 5 doors -

In depth: how these cars differ

This Kona and Scorpio-N 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: Kona 40 vs Scorpio-N 69.

Efficiency index: Kona 62 vs Scorpio-N 60.

Safety-equipment index: Kona 87 vs Scorpio-N 90.

Practicality index: Kona 67 vs Scorpio-N 78.

Ownership-cover index: Kona 65 vs Scorpio-N 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

Scorpio-N leads by 11 points

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

Evidence leader 75 /100
Lead 11 points
Data 54% source coverage
75
#1 Evidence leader

Scorpio-N

54% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 90 Check Efficiency 60
Performance 69
Efficiency 60
Safety 90
Practicality 78
Leads by 11 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 Scorpio-N +29 Efficiency Kona +2 Safety Scorpio-N +3 Practicality Scorpio-N +11

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Scorpio-N

Performance 69/100
Efficiency 60/100
Safety 90/100
Practicality 78/100

Kona

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

What the evidence means

Evidence index Mahindra Scorpio-N leads the specification evidence index with 75 pts vs 64 pts for Kona

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

Kona vs Scorpio-N 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.