Source type: Toyota Uganda/CFAO specifications; user-supplied estimates for remaining fields
Toyota Fortuner vs Isuzu mu-X
A proper head-to-head in Uganda — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.
Toyota Fortuner
2.8L Executive 6-AT 4x4
Diesel
6-Speed Automatic
Current
UGX 285,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 150 kW
🔧 500 Nm
⛽ 12.5 km/l
VS
Isuzu mu-X
mu-X 1.9L 4x4 6AT
Diesel
6-Speed Automatic
Current
UGX 275,000,000
ex-showroom
⚡ 110 kW
🔧 350 Nm
⛽ 11.8 km/l
Decision summary
Toyota Fortuner vs Isuzu mu-X: the short answer
Fortuner and mu-X are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
mu-X starts UGX 10,000,000 cheaper
Fortuner from UGX 285,000,000 · mu-X from UGX 275,000,000
Five key differences
Exact selected derivatives| Specification | Fortuner | mu-X |
|---|---|---|
| Maximum Power | Fortuner150 kW @ 3000-3400 rpm | mu-X110 kW @ 3600 rpm |
| Maximum Torque | Fortuner500 Nm @ 1600-2800 rpm | mu-X350 Nm @ 1800-2600 rpm |
| Engine Size | Fortuner2755 cc | mu-X1899 cc |
| Combined Fuel Economy | Fortuner12.5 km/l | mu-X11.8 km/l |
| Ground Clearance | Fortuner279 mm | mu-X220 mm |
Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.
Source type: MAC Uganda / Isuzu
What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)
Specification evidence leader
Fortuner
Strengths
- More powerful engine output
- Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
- Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to:
Published Performance
Published Efficiency
mu-X
Strengths
- Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
- Less powerful engine setup
- Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to:
Published Practicality
Which One's Right for You?
Fortuner
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
- Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use
mu-X
- Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures
Full Specs, Side by Side
| Spec | Fortuner | mu-X |
|---|---|---|
| Model Introduced Year | 2023 | 2022 |
| Generation | Ladder-frame, three-row Fortuner in the current Uganda Executive 4x4 specification. | Current Isuzu Uganda-listed generation |
| Facelift History | No local facelift confirmed | Current Uganda-listed generation; 2026 catalogue planning specification |
| Facelift Launched Since | Original current-generation version | 2024 |
| Facelift Version Ending | Current | Current |
| Body Style | SUV | SUV |
| Model Year | 2026 | 2026 |
| Production Status | active | active |
| Segment | Seven-seat ladder-frame SUV | Seven-seat body-on-frame SUV |
| Vehicle Type | Passenger SUV | Passenger SUV |
| Spec | Fortuner | mu-X |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4795 mm | 4850 mm |
| Width | 1855 mm | 1870 mm |
| Height | 1835 mm | 1790 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2745 mm | 2855 mm |
| Ground Clearance (Default) | 279 mm | 220 mm |
| Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) | 210 mm | 195 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 l | 80 l |
| Boot/Cargo Space | 253 l | 311 l |
| Kerb Weight | 2185 kg | Not Officially Disclosed |
| Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) | 2740 kg | 3100 kg |
| Payload Capacity | 570 kg | 1000 kg |
| Towing Capacity | 1500 kg | 3500 kg |
| Seating Capacity | 7 seats | 7 seats |
| Number of Rows | 3 rows | 3 rows |
| Doors | 5 doors | 5 doors |
| Minimum Turning Radius | 5.8 m | 6.1 m |
| Front Headroom | Not Officially Disclosed | 1005 mm |
| Rear Headroom | Not Officially Disclosed | 980 mm |
| Front Legroom | Not Officially Disclosed | 1050 mm |
| Rear Legroom | Not Officially Disclosed | 900 mm |
In depth: how these cars differ
This Fortuner and mu-X 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: Fortuner 73 vs mu-X 52.
Efficiency index: Fortuner 54 vs mu-X 47.
Safety-equipment index: Fortuner 96 vs mu-X 96.
Practicality index: Fortuner 67 vs mu-X 83.
Ownership-cover index: Fortuner not separately scored vs mu-X 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
Fortuner and mu-X image comparison
Open an image for its full canonical file or visit the model page for the complete vehicle record.
Toyota Fortuner
View 8 more Fortuner images
Isuzu mu-X
View 8 more mu-X 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
Fortuner leads by 4 points
Fortuner and mu-X are close on the comparable published fields, so buyer priorities should decide.
Evidence leader
74
/100
Lead
4
points
Data
76%
source coverage
74
#1
Evidence leader
Fortuner
Performance
73
Efficiency
54
Safety
96
Practicality
67
Leads by 4 points
70
#2
mu-X
Performance
52
Efficiency
47
Safety
96
Practicality
83
Performance 24%
Safety 22%
Practicality 22%
Efficiency 17%
Ownership 15%
Category leaders
What moves the verdict
Performance
Fortuner +21
Efficiency
Fortuner +7
Safety
Level
Practicality
mu-X +16
Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.
Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader
Fortuner
Performance
73/100
Efficiency
54/100
Safety
96/100
Practicality
67/100
mu-X
Performance
52/100
Efficiency
47/100
Safety
96/100
Practicality
83/100
What the evidence means
In Hagalu's specification evidence index, Fortuner leads. However, mu-X 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.
Fortuner vs mu-X 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.