Toyota C-HR vs Ford Everest

In-depth comparison in South Africa covering price, performance, fuel efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership costs.

Toyota C-HR

2.0 HEV GR Sport CVT Hybrid Automatic

Change Car A

ZAR 499,000 ex-showroom

⚡ 135 kW (181 hp)

🔧 185 Nm

⛽ 18.0 km/l

Ford Everest

3.0TD V6 Platinum 10AT 4WD Diesel Automatic

Switch Variant

Change Car B

ZAR 1,099,900 ex-showroom

⚡ 125 kW (168 hp)

🔧 405 Nm

⛽ 14.0 km/l

＋

Add a 3rd car to compare

Choose a car

Quick Winners

⚡ Performance Everest

⛽ Mileage C-HR

🔑 Ownership Everest

Overall Comparison Score

🏆 Winner

Everest

/ 100

pts

C-HR

/ 100

Very close match. Final decision depends on buyer preference.

Executive Summary

Both C-HR and Everest are extremely closely matched, making the final choice dependent on buyer preference.

Key Differences At A Glance

Performance Everest +2 pts

Efficiency C-HR +5 pts

Safety Equal

Practicality Equal

Ownership Everest +4 pts

Category Score Breakdown

🏆 Overall Winner

Everest

Performance 13/20

Efficiency 7/20

Safety 20/20

Practicality 12/20

Ownership 16/20

C-HR

Performance 11/20

Efficiency 12/20

Safety 20/20

Practicality 12/20

Ownership 12/20

Pros & Cons

C-HR

Pros

Better fuel efficiency

Cons

Less powerful engine setup
Shorter warranty coverage

Best For: Fuel Efficiency

🏆 Overall Winner

Everest

Pros

More powerful engine output
Better long-term ownership value

Cons

Lower fuel efficiency

Best For: Highway Driving

Who Should Buy Which?

C-HR

Buyers looking for better fuel efficiency

Everest

Drivers who prioritise strong highway performance and overtaking power
Long-term owners valuing warranty and ownership peace of mind

Full Specification Comparison

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Ground Clearance	165	220
Wheelbase	2640	2900
Length	4390	4914
Width	1820	1923
Height	1565	1842
Kerb Weight	1545	2305
Gross Vehicle Weight	1945	3100
Seating Capacity	5	7
Boot Space	437	259
Towing Capacity	1200	3500

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Engine	2.0L HEV Self-Charging Hybrid	2.0L Single Turbo Diesel
Engine Type	Inline 4-cylinder M20A-FXS Hybrid	Inline 4 Turbocharged
Displacement	1987	1996
Cylinders	4	4
Valves per Cylinder	4	4
Power	135	125
Torque	185	405
Fuel System	Multi-Point Fuel Injection	Common Rail Direct Injection
Top Speed	180	180
0-100 km/h	8.5	11.5
Power @ RPM	5200 rpm	-
Torque @ RPM	4000 rpm	-
Turbocharger	Not Available	-

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Transmission	e-CVT Automatic	6-Speed Automatic
Drive Type	FWD	4x2
Drivetrain Layout	Front Wheel Drive	Rear Wheel Drive
LSD Available	Not Available	Electronic
Transfer Case	Not Applicable	Not Available

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Claimed Mileage	18.0	14.0
City Mileage	16	9
Highway Mileage	20	12
Fuel Tank Capacity	43	80
Emission Standard	Euro 5	Euro 5

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Airbags	8	7
ABS	Standard	Standard
Electronic Stability Control	Standard	Standard
Traction Control	Standard	Standard
Hill Descent Control	Not Available	Not Available
Child Safety Lock	Standard	Standard
ISOFIX Mounts	Standard	Standard
Brake Assist	Standard	Standard
Tyre Pressure Monitor	Not Available	Standard
Engine Immobiliser	Standard	Standard

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Cruise Control	Standard	Standard
Adaptive Cruise Control	Not Available	Not Available
Lane Keep Assist	Not Available	Not Available
Blind Spot Monitoring	Not Available	Not Available
Rear Cross Traffic Alert	Not Available	Not Available
Parking Sensors	Rear	Rear
Rear View Camera	Standard	Standard
360 Degree Camera	Not Available	Not Available
Autonomous Emergency Braking	Not Available	Not Available

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Seat Material	Fabric	Fabric
Seat Adjustment	Manual	Manual
Heated Seats	Not Available	Not Available
Ventilated Seats	Not Available	Not Available
Steering Type	Electric Power Steering	Power Assisted
Steering Adjustment	Tilt and Telescopic	Tilt & Telescopic
Ambient Lighting	Not Available	Not Available

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Climate Control	Manual	Dual Zone
Power Windows	All Doors	Standard
Keyless Entry	Remote Key	Standard
Push Button Start	Standard	Standard
Wireless Charging	Not Available	Not Available
Sunroof	Not Available	Not Available
Electric Tailgate	Not Available	Not Available

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Infotainment Screen	8-inch Touchscreen	10-inch Touchscreen
Apple CarPlay	Standard	Wireless
Android Auto	Standard	Wireless
Bluetooth Connectivity	Standard	Standard
Number of Speakers	6	8
Navigation System	Not Available	Standard

Specification	C-HR	Everest
LED Headlamps	LED Projector	Standard
Daytime Running Lamps	LED	LED
Fog Lamps	Front	Standard
Roof Rails	Standard	Standard
Alloy Wheel Design	20-inch Black Alloy Wheels	18-inch Alloy

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Approach Angle	18	30
Departure Angle	20	25
Wading Depth	350	600
Terrain Modes	Not Available	Normal
Locking Differential	Not Available	Electronic

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Tyre Size	225/40 R20	255/65 R18
Wheel Type	Steel with Covers	Alloy
Front Brake Type	Disc	Disc
Rear Brake Type	Disc	Disc

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Front Suspension	MacPherson Strut	Independent Double Wishbone
Rear Suspension	Torsion Beam	Multi-link Coil Spring
Chassis Type	Monocoque	Ladder Frame

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Service Interval	10000 km / 12 months	15000 km / 12 months
Approx Service Cost	Moderate	Moderate
Battery Warranty	24 Months	2 Years

Specification	C-HR	Everest
Warranty Years	3	4
Warranty Kilometers	100000	120000
Roadside Assistance	3 Years	4 Years

Specification	C-HR	Everest
CO2 Emissions	98	190
Start Stop System	Standard	Standard
Hybrid System Type	Self-Charging HEV	Not Applicable

Final Verdict

🏆 Ford Everest wins with 68 pts vs 67 pts for C-HR

In structured scoring, Everest emerges as the stronger overall package. However, C-HR may appeal to buyers prioritising different factors. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

People Also Compare

Popular comparisons among buyers considering similar options.

Frequently Asked Questions

Based on structured category scoring, Everest performs better overall in South Africa. However, final choice depends on driving priorities.

C-HR scores 12 while Everest scores 7 in efficiency. Real-world mileage may vary based on driving conditions.

In safety scoring, C-HR scores 20 and Everest scores 20. Both offer competitive safety packages in this segment.

C-HR scores 12 versus Everest scoring 16. Warranty coverage and ownership value influence this result.

Practicality scoring gives C-HR 12 and Everest 12, reflecting cabin space and usability.

Performance category shows C-HR scoring 11 compared to Everest scoring 13, indicating stronger overtaking capability.

While resale depends on market demand, ownership and brand positioning suggest Everest may hold stronger long-term value.

Off-road suitability depends on drivetrain and ground clearance. Refer to the full specification comparison for detailed technical differences.

Efficiency and ownership categories influence running costs. Everest performs slightly stronger overall in structured scoring.

Value depends on feature set, performance and ownership coverage. Structured comparison gives Everest the overall advantage.

Detailed Comparison Analysis

The comparison between C-HR and Everest in South Africa evaluates performance, efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership value.

Performance: C-HR scores 11 vs 13.

Efficiency: C-HR scores 12 vs 7.

Safety: C-HR scores 20 vs 20.

Practicality: C-HR scores 12 vs 12.

Ownership: C-HR scores 12 vs 16.

Final structured scoring gives Everest the advantage in this comparison.

Toyota C-HR vs Ford Everest

Toyota C-HR

Ford Everest

Quick Winners

Overall Comparison Score

Everest

C-HR

Executive Summary

Key Differences At A Glance

Category Score Breakdown

Everest

C-HR

Pros & Cons

C-HR

Everest

Who Should Buy Which?

C-HR

Everest

Full Specification Comparison

Final Verdict

Related Comparisons

People Also Compare

Frequently Asked Questions

Detailed Comparison Analysis