Isuzu MU-X vs KIA Tasman

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.

Isuzu MU-X in South Africa

Isuzu MU-X

3.0 DDi LSE 4x4 AT Diesel 6-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 973,800 ex-showroom
⚡ 110 kW 🔧 350 Nm ⛽ 13.2 km/l
VS
KIA Tasman in South Africa

KIA Tasman

2.2D X-Pro 4x4 Double Cab Colour Coded Diesel 8-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 1,004,999 ex-showroom
⚡ 154 kW 🔧 440 Nm ⛽ 12.8 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Isuzu MU-X vs KIA Tasman: the short answer

MU-X and Tasman are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Tasman starts ZAR 72,405 cheaper MU-X from ZAR 752,400 · Tasman from ZAR 679,995

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification MU-X Tasman
Maximum Power MU-X110 kW @ 3600 rpm Tasman154 kW @ 3800 rpm
Maximum Torque MU-X350 Nm Tasman440 Nm @ 1750-2750 rpm
Engine Size MU-X3000 cc Tasman2151 cc
Combined Fuel Economy MU-X13.2 km/l Tasman12.8 km/l
Ground Clearance MU-X235 mm Tasman252 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.

Isuzu MU-X

3.0 DDi LSE 4x4 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

KIA Tasman

2.2D X-Pro 4x4 Double Cab Colour Coded

Hagalu editorial rating
4.4/5

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)

MU-X

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

Tasman

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

Which One's Right for You?

MU-X

  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

Tasman

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

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec MU-X Tasman
360 Degree Camera Standard No
Around View Monitor Standard No
Autonomous Emergency Braking Standard Yes
Automatic High Beam Standard No
Auto Highbeam Standard No
Auto Lights Standard Yes
Blind Spot Monitoring Standard Yes
Blind Spot Warning Standard Yes
Cruise Control Standard Yes
Driver Monitoring Standard -
Emergency Braking Standard Yes
EV Mode Not Available No
Forward Collision Warning Standard Yes
Front Camera Standard Yes
Lane Keep Assist Standard Yes
Multi Collision Braking Standard -
Occupant Detection Sensor Passengers -
Parking Distance Sensors Front & Rear Yes
Parking Sensor Front & Rear Yes
Parking Sensors Front & Rear Yes
Pre-Collision System Standard Yes
Rear View Camera Standard Yes
Rear Cross Traffic Alert Standard Yes
Rear View Camera Standard Yes
Reverse Camera Standard Yes
Reverse Camera Type Standard Yes
Reversing Camera Standard Yes
Surround View Camera Standard No
Rear Parking Sensors Front & Rear Yes
Adaptive Cruise Control Not Available Yes
Adaptive Cruise Control Not Available Yes
Lane Departure Warning Standard Yes
Traffic Sign Recognition Not Available No
Driver Fatigue Alert Not Available Yes
Auto Wipers Not Available Yes
Park Assist Not Available No
Eco Mode - Yes
Sport Mode - Yes
Rain Sensor Wipers - Yes
Spec MU-X Tasman
4WD Engagement Available Electronic selector
4WD Hi Range Available Yes
4WD Lo Range Available where 4WD low range is fitted Yes
4WD Selector Standard Yes
Automatic Shift Paddles Standard No
Axle Layout 4WD / AWD 4WD
Drive Mode Selector 4WD/off-road drive mode support -
Drivetrain 4WD / AWD 4WD
Drivetrain Layout 4WD / AWD 4WD
Front Differential Lock Not Applicable Not Applicable
Number of Gears 4 8
Gear Knob Trim Leather / Piano Black -
Gear Ratio 1st 3.600 -
Gear Ratio 2nd 2.090 -
Gear Ratio 3rd 1.488 -
Gear Ratio 4th 1.000 -
Gear Ratio 5th 0.687 -
Gear Ratio 6th 0.580 -
Gear Ratio Reverse 3.732 -
Gear Shift Type Automatic Automatic
Gearbox Automatic 8-Speed Automatic
Gearbox Type Automatic 8-Speed Automatic
Low Range Available where 4WD low range is fitted Yes
Low Range Ratio Not Applicable 2.72:1
Paddle Shifters Standard No
Rear Differential Lock Standard Yes
Transfer Case Confirmed 4WD derivative Two-speed transfer case
Transfer Case Guard Standard -
Transmission Speeds 4 8
Transmission Type 6 Speed Automatic Automatic Transmission
Differential Lock Not Applicable Yes
LSD Available Not Applicable Yes
Final Drive Ratio Not Applicable 3.94
Clutch Type Not Applicable Torque Converter
Gear Shift Indicator Not Applicable No
Engine Position - Front Transverse
Steering Turns Lock to Lock - 15.2:1

In depth: how these cars differ

This MU-X and Tasman 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: MU-X 63 vs Tasman 72.

Efficiency index: MU-X 52 vs Tasman 51.

Safety-equipment index: MU-X 93 vs Tasman 94.

Practicality index: MU-X 93 vs Tasman 93.

Ownership-cover index: MU-X not separately scored vs Tasman 75.

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

Tasman leads by 2 points

MU-X and Tasman are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 78 /100
Lead 2 points
Data 97% source coverage
78
#1 Evidence leader

Tasman

97% source coverage 4 strong categories
Best at Safety 94 Check Efficiency 51
Performance 72
Efficiency 51
Safety 94
Practicality 93
Ownership 75
Leads by 2 points
76
#2

MU-X

72% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 93 Check Efficiency 52
Performance 63
Efficiency 52
Safety 93
Practicality 93
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Tasman +9 Efficiency MU-X +1 Safety Tasman +1 Practicality Level

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Tasman

Performance 72/100
Efficiency 51/100
Safety 94/100
Practicality 93/100
Ownership 75/100

MU-X

Performance 63/100
Efficiency 52/100
Safety 93/100
Practicality 93/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index KIA Tasman leads the specification evidence index with 78 pts vs 76 pts for MU-X

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

MU-X vs Tasman 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.