Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV vs Changan UNI-S

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.

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
VS
Changan UNI-S in South Africa

Changan UNI-S

1.5T AT CE Petrol 7-Speed DCT Current
ZAR 469,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 138 kW 🔧 300 Nm ⛽ 14.49 km/l
Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV vs Changan UNI-S: the short answer

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV and UNI-S are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

UNI-S starts ZAR 50,000 cheaper Tiggo 4 Cross HEV from ZAR 439,900 · UNI-S from ZAR 389,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Tiggo 4 Cross HEV UNI-S
Maximum Power Tiggo 4 Cross HEV150 kW @ 5500 rpm UNI-S138 kW
Maximum Torque Tiggo 4 Cross HEV310 Nm UNI-S300 Nm
Engine Size Tiggo 4 Cross HEV1500 cc UNI-S1500 cc
Combined Fuel Economy Tiggo 4 Cross HEV18.5 km/l UNI-S14.49 km/l
Ground Clearance Tiggo 4 Cross HEV180 mm UNI-SNot Officially Disclosed

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
  • Fewer listed safety features
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: Published Performance Published Efficiency

UNI-S

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

Which One's Right for You?

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

UNI-S

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

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec Tiggo 4 Cross HEV UNI-S
Model Introduced Year 2026 2026
Generation Current South Africa Tiggo 4 Cross HEV range First current South African UNI-S retail generation, offered in CS, CL and CE grades.
Facelift History Current South Africa version listed by official source No South African facelift has been announced since the UNI-S entered local retail sale in 2026.
Facelift Launched Since 2026 Not Applicable
Facelift Version Ending Current Not Applicable
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active active
Segment SUV Compact SUV
Tare Mass Kg 1387 kg -
Vehicle Type SUV Passenger car
Spec Tiggo 4 Cross HEV UNI-S
Length 4351 mm 4539 mm
Width 1831 mm 1865 mm
Height 1662 mm 1680 mm
Wheelbase 2610 mm 2656 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 180 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 180 mm 167 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 51 l 51 l
Boot/Cargo Space 340 l 475 l
Kerb Weight 1387 kg 1505 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 1905 kg 1825 kg
Payload Capacity 518 kg Not Officially Disclosed
Towing Capacity 1300 kg Not Officially Disclosed
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 2 rows 2 rows
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.5 m 5.66 m
Front Headroom 1010 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Headroom 975 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Front Legroom 1040 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Legroom 930 mm Not Officially Disclosed

In depth: how these cars differ

This Tiggo 4 Cross HEV and UNI-S 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: Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 62 vs UNI-S 59.

Efficiency index: Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 75 vs UNI-S 55.

Safety-equipment index: Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 91 vs UNI-S 92.

Practicality index: Tiggo 4 Cross HEV 57 vs UNI-S 68.

Ownership-cover index: Tiggo 4 Cross HEV not separately scored vs UNI-S 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 2 points

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV and UNI-S are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.

Evidence leader 71 /100
Lead 2 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 2 points
69
#2

UNI-S

67% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 92 Check Efficiency 55
Performance 59
Efficiency 55
Safety 92
Practicality 68
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Tiggo 4 Cross HEV +3 Efficiency Tiggo 4 Cross HEV +20 Safety UNI-S +1 Practicality UNI-S +11

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

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

UNI-S

Performance 59/100
Efficiency 55/100
Safety 92/100
Practicality 68/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Chery Tiggo 4 Cross HEV leads the specification evidence index with 71 pts vs 69 pts for UNI-S

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

Tiggo 4 Cross HEV vs UNI-S 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.