Toyota Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 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 Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab in South Africa

Toyota Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab

4.0 V6 Single Cab MT Petrol 6-Speed Manual Current
ZAR 780,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 202 kW 🔧 381 Nm ⛽ 13 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 Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab vs Ford Ranger Raptor: the short answer

Ranger Raptor holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab.

Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab starts ZAR 592,800 cheaper Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab from ZAR 706,200 · Ranger Raptor from ZAR 1,299,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab Ranger Raptor
Maximum Power Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab202 kW Ranger Raptor292 kW
Maximum Torque Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab381 Nm Ranger Raptor583 Nm
Engine Size Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab3956 cc Ranger Raptor2993 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab13 km/l Ranger Raptor8.7 km/l
Ground Clearance Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab235 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 Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab

4.0 V6 Single Cab MT

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

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)

Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab

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

Ranger Raptor

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

Which One's Right for You?

Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Ranger Raptor

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

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab Ranger Raptor
Model Introduced Year Current local generation year not confirmed 2022
Generation Current South African Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab listing; generation notes should be kept tied to the local model year and confirmed derivative data. Current-generation Ford Ranger
Facelift History Model-year updates can affect trim, wheels, screens, safety equipment and colours. Use the latest South African price list when checking a specific vehicle. 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 Original current-generation version Original current-generation version
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style Pickup Pickup
Body Type Cab Single/extended/double cab as per derivative name Pickup
Color Note Colour availability changes by model year, production batch and dealer stock, check the current colour selector before ordering. Colour availability changes by model year, production batch and dealer stock, check the current colour selector before ordering.
Dealer Stock Note Mid grade in the South Africa lineup Flagship grade in the South Africa lineup
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active active
Segment Pickup Pickup
Tare Mass Kg 1850 kg 2432 kg
Vehicle Type Pickup Pickup
Drivetrain Note - Drive layout derived from the official derivative naming: Raptor 3.0T V6 10AT 4x4
Spec Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab Ranger Raptor
Length 5275 mm 5381 mm
Width 1855 mm 2028 mm
Height 1855 mm 1922 mm
Wheelbase 3085 mm 3270 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 235 mm 272 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 125 mm 185 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 87 l 80 l
Boot/Cargo Space 488 l 477 l
Kerb Weight 1850 kg 2432 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2800 kg 3160 kg
Payload Capacity 950 kg 728 kg
Towing Capacity 3500 kg 2500 kg
Seating Capacity 3 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 2 rows 2 rows
Doors 2 doors 4 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 6.4 m 6.2 m
Front Headroom 997 mm 984 mm
Rear Headroom 944 mm 940 mm
Front Legroom 1037 mm 1043 mm
Rear Legroom 884 mm 896 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 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: Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 78 vs Ranger Raptor 94.

Efficiency index: Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 49 vs Ranger Raptor 40.

Safety-equipment index: Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 50 vs Ranger Raptor 98.

Practicality index: Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 78 vs Ranger Raptor 77.

Ownership-cover index: Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 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 18 points

Ranger Raptor holds a noticeable catalogue-index lead over Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab.

Evidence leader 80 /100
Lead 18 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 18 points
62
#2

Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab

86% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Performance 78 Check Ownership 43
Performance 78
Efficiency 49
Safety 50
Practicality 78
Ownership 43
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Ranger Raptor +16 Efficiency Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab +9 Safety Ranger Raptor +48 Practicality Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab +1

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

Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab

Performance 78/100
Efficiency 49/100
Safety 50/100
Practicality 78/100
Ownership 43/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Ford Ranger Raptor leads the specification evidence index with 80 pts vs 62 pts for Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Ranger Raptor leads. However, Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

Land Cruiser 79 Single Cab 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.