Ford Everest vs Toyota Land Cruiser 79

A proper head-to-head in Uganda — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.

Ford Everest in Uganda

Ford Everest

Active 2.0 Single Turbo 6AT 4WD Diesel 6-Speed Automatic Current
UGX 275,000,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 125 kW 🔧 405 Nm
VS
Toyota Land Cruiser 79 in Uganda

Toyota Land Cruiser 79

LC79 4.2L Pick-up Double Cab 5-MT 4x4 Diesel 5-Speed Manual Current
UGX 360,000,000 ex-showroom
⚡ 96 kW 🔧 285 Nm ⛽ 12.5 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Ford Everest vs Toyota Land Cruiser 79: the short answer

Everest has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Land Cruiser 79 remains close.

Everest starts UGX 85,000,000 cheaper Everest from UGX 275,000,000 · Land Cruiser 79 from UGX 360,000,000

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification Everest Land Cruiser 79
Maximum Power Everest125 kW @ 3500 rpm Land Cruiser 7996 kW @ 3800 rpm
Maximum Torque Everest405 Nm @ 1750-2500 rpm Land Cruiser 79285 Nm @ 2200 rpm
Engine Size Everest1996 cc Land Cruiser 794164 cc
Combined Fuel Economy EverestNot Officially Disclosed Land Cruiser 7912.5 km/l
Ground Clearance Everest229 mm Land Cruiser 79235 mm

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

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

Everest

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

Land Cruiser 79

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

Which One's Right for You?

Everest

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

Land Cruiser 79

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

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec Everest Land Cruiser 79
Model Introduced Year 2023 2023
Generation Current market generation Uganda-listed 70 Series LC79 double cab with 4.2-litre 1HZ diesel and five-speed manual; not the later 2.8-litre automatic specification.
Facelift History Current-generation specification No local facelift confirmed
Facelift Launched Since 2023 Original current-generation version
Facelift Version Ending Current Current
Body Style SUV Pick-up double cab
Model Year 2026 2026
Production Status active active
Segment Mid-size body-on-frame SUV Heavy-duty double-cab pickup
Vehicle Type Passenger SUV Pickup
Spec Everest Land Cruiser 79
Length 4914 mm 5095 mm
Width Not Officially Disclosed 1790 mm
Height 1844 mm 1960 mm
Wheelbase 2900 mm 3180 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 229 mm 235 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 160 mm 220 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 80 l 130 l
Boot/Cargo Space Not Officially Disclosed 1000 l
Kerb Weight Not Officially Disclosed 2280 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) Not Officially Disclosed 3200 kg
Payload Capacity Not Officially Disclosed 1120 kg
Towing Capacity 1500 kg 1500 kg
Seating Capacity 7 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 3 rows 2 rows
Doors 2 doors 4 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.5 m 6.3 m
Front Headroom 1000 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Headroom Not Officially Disclosed Not Officially Disclosed
Front Legroom 1030 mm Not Officially Disclosed
Rear Legroom 880 mm Not Officially Disclosed

In depth: how these cars differ

This Everest and Land Cruiser 79 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: Everest 61 vs Land Cruiser 79 51.

Efficiency index: Everest 47 vs Land Cruiser 79 54.

Safety-equipment index: Everest 89 vs Land Cruiser 79 44.

Practicality index: Everest 76 vs Land Cruiser 79 82.

Ownership-cover index: Everest not separately scored vs Land Cruiser 79 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

Everest leads by 11 points

Everest has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Land Cruiser 79 remains close.

Evidence leader 69 /100
Lead 11 points
Data 69% source coverage
69
#1 Evidence leader

Everest

69% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 89 Check Efficiency 47
Performance 61
Efficiency 47
Safety 89
Practicality 76
Leads by 11 points
58
#2

Land Cruiser 79

74% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Practicality 82 Check Safety 44
Performance 51
Efficiency 54
Safety 44
Practicality 82
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance Everest +10 Efficiency Land Cruiser 79 +7 Safety Everest +45 Practicality Land Cruiser 79 +6

Moderate difference in the source-backed catalogue index.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

Everest

Performance 61/100
Efficiency 47/100
Safety 89/100
Practicality 76/100

Land Cruiser 79

Performance 51/100
Efficiency 54/100
Safety 44/100
Practicality 82/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Ford Everest leads the specification evidence index with 69 pts vs 58 pts for Land Cruiser 79

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Everest leads. However, Land Cruiser 79 may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in Uganda.

Everest vs Land Cruiser 79 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.