Source type: Suzuki Uganda / CFAO Mobility
Suzuki Eeco vs Toyota Hiace Van
A proper head-to-head in Uganda — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.
Suzuki Eeco
EECO CARGO 2WD 5D 1197p MT
Petrol
5-Speed Manual
Current
UGX 65,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 59 kW
🔧 104 Nm
⛽ 15.2 km/l
VS
Toyota Hiace Van
HIACE PANEL VAN 2.5L DSL
Diesel
5-Speed Manual
Current
UGX 175,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 75 kW
🔧 260 Nm
⛽ 12.5 km/l
Decision summary
Suzuki Eeco vs Toyota Hiace Van: the short answer
Hiace Van has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Eeco remains close.
Eeco starts UGX 110,000,000 cheaper
Eeco from UGX 65,000,000 · Hiace Van from UGX 175,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | Eeco | Hiace Van |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | Eeco59 kW @ 6000 rpm | Hiace Van75 kW @ 3600 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | Eeco104 Nm @ 3000 rpm | Hiace Van260 Nm @ 1600-2400 rpm |
| Engine Size | Eeco1197 cc | Hiace Van2494 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | Eeco15.2 km/l | Hiace Van12.5 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | Eeco160 mm | Hiace Van195 mm |
Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.
Source type: Toyota Uganda/CFAO specifications; user-supplied estimates for remaining fields
What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)
Eeco
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
Hiace Van
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?
Eeco
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
Hiace Van
- 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
| Spec | Eeco | Hiace Van |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | 2023 | 2023 |
| Generation | Current Uganda-market generation | Current Uganda-market Hiace panel-van generation |
| Facelift History | Current-generation specification | No local facelift confirmed |
| Facelift Launched Since | 2023 | Original current-generation version |
| Facelift Version Ending | Current | Current |
| Body Style | Van | Van |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Light commercial vehicle | Panel van |
| Vehicle Type | Light commercial vehicle | Light commercial van |
| Spec | Eeco | Hiace Van |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 3675 mm | 4695 mm |
| Width | 1475 mm | 1695 mm |
| Height | 1825 mm | 1980 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2350 mm | 2570 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 160 mm | 195 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 150 mm | 170 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 32 l | 70 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 540 l | 1000 l |
| Kerb Weight | 935 kg | 1790 kg |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 1540 kg | 2800 kg |
| Payload Capacity | Not Officially Disclosed | 1010 kg |
| Towing Capacity | 500 kg | 750 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 2 seats | 3 seats |
| Number of Rows | 1 rows | 1 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 4 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 4.5 m | 5 m |
| Front Headroom | 1000 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Rear Headroom | Not Applicable | Not Applicable |
| Front Legroom | 1020 mm | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Rear Legroom | Not Applicable | Not Applicable |
In depth: how these cars differ
This Eeco and Hiace Van comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for Uganda. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.
Performance index: Eeco 28 vs Hiace Van 43.
Efficiency index: Eeco 61 vs Hiace Van 54.
Safety-equipment index: Eeco 36 vs Hiace Van 44.
Practicality index: Eeco 49 vs Hiace Van 68.
Ownership-cover index: Eeco not separately scored vs Hiace Van 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.
Model imagery
Eeco and Hiace Van image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Suzuki Eeco
View 8 more Eeco images
Toyota Hiace Van
View 8 more Hiace Van images
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-index readout
Hiace Van leads by 10 points
Hiace Van has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Eeco remains close.
Evidence leader
52
/100
Lead
10
points
Data
74%
source coverage
52
#1
Evidence leader
Hiace Van
Performance
43
Efficiency
54
Safety
44
Practicality
68
Leads by 10 points
42
#2
Eeco
Performance
28
Efficiency
61
Safety
36
Practicality
49
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
Hiace Van +15
Efficiency
Eeco +7
Safety
Hiace Van +8
Practicality
Hiace Van +19
Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
Hiace Van
Performance
43/100
Efficiency
54/100
Safety
44/100
Practicality
68/100
Eeco
Performance
28/100
Efficiency
61/100
Safety
36/100
Practicality
49/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Hiace Van leads. However, Eeco may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in Uganda.
Related comparisons
Continue with closely related Uganda models and comparable body styles.
Eeco vs Hiace Van questions
There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in Uganda 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.