Workhorse trucks don’t get much attention from the general motoring public, but they nonetheless form an indispensable part of South Africa’s industrial sector. Up till now, the Korean manufacturers had this market segment cornered, but now there’s a new challenger from China. We compare the value proposition on offer from the JAC X200 with those of the established players.
By Martin Pretorius (Auto Trader) | Published: 24 June 2021, 16:05
Click here to view original Link review. Credit to Martin Pretorius.
These are not the most glamorous vehicles on our roads, and they probably count among the slowest as well. But, thanks to their generous loadbay dimensions, decent carrying capacity and low operating costs, forward-control workhorses are very important to small- and medium-sized businesses, delivery drivers, and even building contractors.
The JAC X200 is a new arrival to this market segment, and is very serious about grabbing as much market share from the establishment as possible. Built in China and based around respected mechanical bits, the X200 also has added creature comforts, to entice more buyers to give it serious consideration. So just how solid is its value proposition?
Analysis
Power, performance, and drivetrains
Diesel-fuelled 4-cylinder engines, rear-wheel drive and 5-speed manual gearboxes are common to all three contenders, but the JAC is the only one to employ a turbocharger in search of extra efficiency and more torque. All local Hyundai H-100 variants are naturally-aspirated, but the Kia K2700 has a turbocharged K2500 (2.5-litre) sibling as well, which costs quite a bit more than the K2700.
Based on the geriatric but well-regarded Isuzu 2.8-litre 4-cylinder turbodiesel, the JAC’s engine has the most power and torque in this group, with 80 kW and 240 Nm on tap in this old-but-updated (and now common-rail-injected) application. In modern turbodiesel terms, those outputs are very low indeed, but they come from an under-stressed engine, which makes it very suitable for workhorse applications.
Neither the Hyundai nor the Kia can match these on-paper outputs, and they’ll get left behind by the JAC on the road as well. The H-100 offers 58 kW and 167 Nm, while the K2700 upstages it slightly with 62 kW and 168 Nm. They’re both a lot slower than the Chinese challenger, with a performance disadvantage that will only grow as the load increases.
Analysis
Power, performance, and drivetrains
Diesel-fuelled 4-cylinder engines, rear-wheel drive and 5-speed manual gearboxes are common to all three contenders, but the JAC is the only one to employ a turbocharger in search of extra efficiency and more torque. All local Hyundai H-100 variants are naturally-aspirated, but the Kia K2700 has a turbocharged K2500 (2.5-litre) sibling as well, which costs quite a bit more than the K2700.
Practicality
By their very nature, vehicles of this kind major on practicality. In addition to single-cab tipper- and dropside bodies, all three competitors are available in chassis-cab format, which allows owners to fit customised load bodies to the chassis. The JAC can be also be had as a double cab dropside, which isn’t locally available for the other two (at the time of writing).
That double-cab configuration is unique in this segment and especially significant, seeing as South African law prohibits the transport of people on the back of a bakkie. With a double-cab, this issue is alleviated, because it will allow drivers to legally carry co-workers as well. It’s not a leisure- or family-oriented double-cab, however, so don’t expect it to be as plush as a double-cab Ranger inside…
And then we get to the load capacity, where the JAC X200 single-cab dropside delivers a knock-out punch to the opposition. Its dimensions and configuration matches those of the other two, but a reinforced chassis and uprated springs give it a much higher load rating (than the other two) of 1.5-tons.
In contrast, the Hyundai can carry 1.335-tons, and the Kia manages 1.2-tons. That last 200 kg should make a significant difference for owners who plan to let their workhorses work especially hard, and hands the JAC X200 a definite win in the practicality stakes.
Equipment
Both of the Korean offerings are spartan to the extreme, with no standard-fit infotainment system, and even air conditioning listed as an option (although the Kia does have electric windows and remote central locking as standard). For the rest, they’re pretty basic inside the cabin.
The JAC X200 offers a better-equipped cabin than the other two: it misses out on the Kia’s electric windows, but has remote central locking, air-conditioning, and a Bluetooth-enabled audio system as standard. The latter two features goes a long way toward improving driver contentment, and should boost driving safety as well – it will be easier to concentrate on the road if the driver feels cool and fresh, and incoming- or outgoing phone calls won’t necessitate pulling over.
Safety
All three manufacturers boast of crumple zones and side-impact protection for their workhorses, but the reality is that all of them will likely be life-threatening in the event of a forward collision at anything more than walking speed. None of them have airbags or ABS, and traction- or stability control is not on the menu, either. Better not to crash any one of these, then…
Verdict
It’s difficult to choose between the Kia and the Hyundai in terms of value, but the Hyundai has to be eliminated first: it has the highest pricetag, the least power, and the lowest standard specification level. Yes, it has a wonderful warranty, but its service plan is nothing special, and it’s difficult to see why it costs R 27 000 more than the JAC.
The Kia’s downsides are similar, with the highest fuel consumption in this group and a pricetag that’s not very far off the Hyundai’s, although it has better standard equipment than its Korean cousin. The Kia’s warranty cover is also excellent, but its service plan is only middling.
This leaves us with the JAC X200, which holds more power, lower fuel consumption, more standard equipment, a higher load-carrying capacity, and a superior service plan as advantages over the two Koreans. The fact that it is by far the least-expensive here simply seals the deal, and turns it into the undisputed value leader in this trio.
