Toyota Land Cruiser 76 vs Mitsubishi Triton Single 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.

Toyota Land Cruiser 76 in South Africa

Toyota Land Cruiser 76

4.0 V6 Station Wagon AT Petrol 4-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 1,065,300 ex-showroom
⚡ 202 kW 🔧 381 Nm ⛽ 13 km/l
VS
Mitsubishi Triton Single Cab in South Africa

Mitsubishi Triton Single Cab

2.4L 4x2 GL M/T Diesel 5-Speed Manual Current
ZAR 499,990 ex-showroom
⚡ 81 kW 🔧 200 Nm ⛽ 12.5 km/l
＋ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Toyota Land Cruiser 76 vs Mitsubishi Triton Single Cab: the short answer

Land Cruiser 76 holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Triton Single Cab.

Triton Single Cab starts ZAR 480,010 cheaper Land Cruiser 76 from ZAR 980,000 · Triton Single Cab from ZAR 499,990

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Land Cruiser 76 Triton Single Cab
Maximum Power Land Cruiser 76202 kW Triton Single Cab81 kW @ 4000 rpm
Maximum Torque Land Cruiser 76381 Nm Triton Single Cab200 Nm @ 1000-3750 rpm
Engine Size Land Cruiser 763956 cc Triton Single Cab2442 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Land Cruiser 7613 km/l Triton Single Cab12.5 km/l
Ground Clearance Land Cruiser 76230 mm Triton Single Cab200 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 Land Cruiser 76

4.0 V6 Station Wagon AT

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

Mitsubishi Triton Single Cab

2.4L 4x2 GL M/T

Hagalu editorial rating
4.3/5

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)

Specification evidence leader

Land Cruiser 76

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • No obvious weak spots to flag.
Best suited to: Published Performance Published Practicality

Triton Single Cab

Strengths
  • Nothing stands out clearly here.
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Fewer listed safety features
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: General Use

Which One's Right for You?

Land Cruiser 76

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

Triton Single Cab

  • Buyers who prefer this derivative's confirmed specification mix

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec Land Cruiser 76 Triton Single Cab
Model Introduced Year 1984 2024
Generation 70 Series – one of the world's longest-running vehicle nameplates Sixth-generation Triton
Facelift History Continuous mechanical updates while retaining core body-on-frame design. Minor updates in 2007, 2014, 2021 Next-Gen Triton launched in South Africa in November 2024.
Facelift Launched Since 2021 Current specification
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV Single-cab pickup
Color Note White, Beige -
Dealer Stock Note Top grade in the South Africa lineup -
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active active
Segment SUV One-ton single-cab pickup
Tare Mass Kg 2100 kg -
Vehicle Type SUV Light commercial vehicle
Spec Land Cruiser 76 Triton Single Cab
Length 4890 mm 5320 mm
Width 1885 mm 1865 mm
Height 1970 mm 1700 mm
Wheelbase 2730 mm 3130 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 230 mm 200 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 125 mm 185 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 87 l 75 l
Boot/Cargo Space 909 l 1904 l
Kerb Weight 2100 kg 1625 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 3300 kg 2570 kg
Payload Capacity 1200 kg 945 kg
Towing Capacity 3500 kg 0 kg
Seating Capacity 8 seats 2 seats
Number of Rows 3 rows 1 rows
Doors 5 doors 2 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 6 m 6.35 m
Front Headroom 993 mm 1007 mm
Rear Headroom 954 mm Not Applicable
Front Legroom 1040 mm 1059 mm
Rear Legroom 887 mm Not Applicable

In depth: how these cars differ

This Land Cruiser 76 and Triton Single 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: Land Cruiser 76 77 vs Triton Single Cab 34.

Efficiency index: Land Cruiser 76 49 vs Triton Single Cab 49.

Safety-equipment index: Land Cruiser 76 50 vs Triton Single Cab 32.

Practicality index: Land Cruiser 76 98 vs Triton Single Cab 72.

Ownership-cover index: Land Cruiser 76 43 vs Triton Single 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

Land Cruiser 76 leads by 20 points

Land Cruiser 76 holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Triton Single Cab.

Evidence leader 66 /100
Lead 20 points
Data 86% source coverage
66
#1 Evidence leader

Land Cruiser 76

86% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Practicality 98 Check Ownership 43
Performance 77
Efficiency 49
Safety 50
Practicality 98
Ownership 43
Leads by 20 points
46
#2

Triton Single Cab

79% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Practicality 72 Check Safety 32
Performance 34
Efficiency 49
Safety 32
Practicality 72
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Land Cruiser 76 +43 Efficiency Level Safety Land Cruiser 76 +18 Practicality Land Cruiser 76 +26

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Land Cruiser 76

Performance 77/100
Efficiency 49/100
Safety 50/100
Practicality 98/100
Ownership 43/100

Triton Single Cab

Performance 34/100
Efficiency 49/100
Safety 32/100
Practicality 72/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Toyota Land Cruiser 76 leads the specification evidence index with 66 pts vs 46 pts for Triton Single Cab

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Land Cruiser 76 leads. However, Triton Single 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.

Land Cruiser 76
Land Cruiser 76
VS
Ranger Sport
Ranger Sport
Land Cruiser 76 vs Ranger Sport →
Land Cruiser 76
Land Cruiser 76
VS
RD6
RD6
Land Cruiser 76 vs RD6 →
Land Cruiser 76
Land Cruiser 76
VS
Tiggo 8 PHEV
Tiggo 8 PHEV
Land Cruiser 76 vs Tiggo 8 PHEV →
Land Cruiser 76
Land Cruiser 76
VS
MU-X
MU-X
Land Cruiser 76 vs MU-X →
Land Cruiser 76
Land Cruiser 76
VS
Tunland V9 Double Cab
Tunland V9 Double Cab
Land Cruiser 76 vs Tunland V9 Double Cab →
Land Cruiser 76
Land Cruiser 76
VS
C10 REEV
C10 REEV
Land Cruiser 76 vs C10 REEV →
Triton Single Cab
Triton Single Cab
VS
Ranger Sport
Ranger Sport
Triton Single Cab vs Ranger Sport →
Triton Single Cab
Triton Single Cab
VS
RD6
RD6
Triton Single Cab vs RD6 →

Land Cruiser 76 vs Triton Single 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.