Hiace Van High Roof DSL AT vs Hiace Van High Roof DSL MT Comparison
Car Information
Engine / Motor
4
4
Dimensions
3
3
2360
2355
16
16
5915
5915
1950
1950
2280
2280
3860
3860
3500
3500
6.4m
6.4m
3180 - 1760 - 1605
3180 - 1760 - 1605
9.3m³
9.3m³
1140
1145
Fuel Economy
12.6 Km/L
13.0 Km/L
70
70
Comfort
✓
✓
✓
✓
Interior
4.2
4.2
✓
✓
Driver Seat
Driver Seat
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Safety
Driver & Front Passenger
Driver & Front Passenger
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Infotainment
8
8
✓
✓
✓
✓
2
2
Transmission
6-Speed Automatic Transmission
6-Speed Manual Transmission
Chassis & Steering
Rear Drive
Rear Drive
Macpherson Strut
Macpherson Strut
Leaf spring rigid
Leaf spring rigid
Wheels/brakes
✓
✓
✓
✓
Drum
Drum
215/70R16C
215/70R16C
215/70R16C
215/70R16C
Key Spec
2.5 L - 3.5 L
2.5 L - 3.5 L
88 BHP - 277
88 BHP - 277
6-Speed Automatic & 6-Speed Automatic Transmission & 6-Speed Manual & 6-Speed Manual Transmission & Automatic & Manual
6-Speed Automatic & 6-Speed Automatic Transmission & 6-Speed Manual & 6-Speed Manual Transmission & Automatic & Manual
Diesel & Gasoline & Petrol
Diesel & Gasoline & Petrol
TBD
TBD
3 - 13 Seater
3 - 13 Seater
Exterior
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓
Engine
2.8
2.8
Diesel
Diesel
174
174
450
420
Technologies
✓
✓
✓
/
Comparison of configuration highlights
Hiace Van High Roof DSL AT
- Parking sensor rear
- Rear Camera
- Number of Airbags
- Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)
- ABS
- Remote Central Door Locking
Hiace Van High Roof DSL MT
- Parking sensor rear
- Rear Camera
- Number of Airbags
- Vehicle Stability Control (VSC)
- ABS
- Remote Central Door Locking
Review Comparison
Positive
- Spacious and versatile space
- High durability and reliability
- Excellent stability and driving quality
Negative
- Simple interior design and limited passenger comfort
- Fuel economy is lower than expected
- Sound insulation and suspension system need to be improved
Positive
- Spacious and versatile space
- High durability and reliability
- Excellent stability and driving quality
Negative
- Simple interior design and limited passenger comfort
- Fuel economy is lower than expected
- Sound insulation and suspension system need to be improved
Related comparisons
Expert / Editor Recommendation
Choose Hiace Van High Roof DSL AT if you care more about overall equipment; choose Hiace Van High Roof DSL MT if you care more about price.
Popular Car Comparisons
Q&A
- According to fuel consumption data, Hiace Van High Roof DSL AT has a fuel consumption of 7.94, while Hiace Van High Roof DSL MT has a fuel consumption of 7.69. Therefore, Hiace Van High Roof DSL MT is more fuel-efficient.
- In terms of interior space, Hiace Van High Roof DSL AT has a wheelbase of 3860, while Hiace Van High Roof DSL MT has a wheelbase of 3860. Generally, the model with the longer wheelbase, No data, offers more room.
- Check drive type, ground clearance and torque together. Hiace Van High Roof DSL AT uses Rear Drive, while Hiace Van High Roof DSL MT uses Rear Drive.