Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD vs MG HS PHEV Essence 2WD: We Compare Two of Australia's Most Popular Hybrids

There isn’t a whole lot of competition in this part of the market, with affordable midsize SUVs using hybrid and plug-in hybrid tech currently thin on the ground in Australia.

But one thing is for sure: the aggressive price of the MG HS PHEV might be enough to get people thinking twice about whether a RAV4 Hybrid is right for them.

The MG HS PHEV is priced at $46,990 drive-away, while the Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD lists at $46,415 before on-road costs. (image credit: Rob Cameriere)

The MG HS PHEV is only available in one trim level, Essence, and it is the top-of-the-range variant costing $46,990 drive-away. 

And we went with the top-of-the-range hybrid version of its rival for this test to match them up close on price, with the Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD model listing at $46,415 (MSRP - before on-road costs).

Factor in the on-roads and you’re looking at a straight-up advantage to the MG. We checked drive-away pricing at the time of writing for the RAV4 and for the 2000 postcode in NSW, the on-the-road cost for $50,852. That’s a $3862 price advantage to the MG - but note, you can get a 2WD version of the RAV4 that brings the price down a bit, and would be closer to the MG seen in this test as it’s 2WD only (the price for that spec when we checked was $47,702 - a lot closer to the HS PHEV.

So what about standard equipment? Here’s a rundown to see which justifies its price more.

There’s a big screen size advantage to the MG here, but the usability of the media display  leaves a lot to be desired - more on that in the interior section. It is nice to see the MG has a fully digital instrument cluster though, where the Toyota’s is part-digital, part-analogue.

Next, let’s look at some other interior trim elements.

You might have a favourite in terms of the look of these models - we’ll dive deeper in the design sectio below - but here are some of the exterior differentiators.

We will cover off safety specs and technology in the safety section below - but these two are very closely matched there, too.

The MG just wins this section because of its lower pricing and additional features, but the Toyota remains a value-focused offering in the segment.

MG HS PHEV Essence - 9

Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD - 8

Wow, how quickly the market moves.

The RAV4 was a real breakthrough moment for Toyota when the all-new model launched in 2019, but since then the midsize SUV space has changed a lot, and the interior of the RAV4 is starting to feel a bit out of date already.

That mainly comes down to the media screen and driver info display, both of which are comparatively small. The 8.0-inch multimedia unit at least has hot keys and knobs down the side for easy control, but the sat nav graphics look like they’re from the early 2000s, and the reverse camera/surround view camera display is grainy and poor quality. The driver info screen is configurable to a degree, but being only a 7.0-inch display with part-analogue elements, it doesn’t feel as high-tech as it could.

The MG, on the other hand, scores a pair of much larger screens - but it’s not all flowers and chocolates there, either.

The 10.1-inch touchscreen media system takes a lot of learning, with menus hidden away and no hard buttons or knobs up near the screen to make it easy to jump around. Instead there’s a row of hot keys below, and the lag from the screen can be excruciating at times - like when you start the car and shift to reverse if you’re in a hurry: it mightn’t load in time for the move you’re trying to do (but at least the parking sensors are always on). The fact the climate controls require a button press then interaction with the screen is yet another bugbear, and makes the Toyota’s rubberized controls and simple buttons seem so much more logical.

The 12.3-inch driver info screen is also a bit too laggy. It can take up to 10 seconds to be at the correct screen when you’re starting the car up, so that’s another thing you could get frustrated by. It’s great to have cute loading screens and lovely graphics to take advantage of the displays, but they need to be quicker. No-one’s gaining time in this life.

The look and feel of the cabins of these two are distinctly different, with the RAV4 having a rugged and adventurous design and finishes (it goes beyond the rubberised knobs and handles), while the HS has a more contemporary and conventionally consumable appearance, with the proud and large tablet screen and a more minimalist look.

Storage is better in the RAV4, with a lovely shelf that runs the width of the dashboard, bigger storage sections in front of the gear selector and large door pockets all around. There are cup holders between the front seats and in a fold down in the rear middle seat, but it only has one map pocket.

The MG’s storage options aren’t bad, they’re just not quite as good as the Toyota. There’s less usable room between the front seats and annoyingly the media screen USB port doesn’t have a spot nearby to stow your phone easily. It also gets good cup and bottle storage front and rear, and has two map pockets in the back.

Front seat comfort and adjustment? Well, the Toyota wins that hands down, so long as you’re not a tall front seat occupant because there’s no height adjust for the passenger seat in the RAV4. For the driver, though, you can easily adjust your seat to get the right position, whether you’re tall or not.

For the MG? The driving position is going to be uncomfortable for a lot of people. Everyone one our test found it to be too high a seating position, like you’re sitting on a bar stool when you feel like you’d rather be on the couch. The adjustments aren’t great either.

At the very least, the seats in the MG are very comfortable and supportive - they look like Recaros out of a special edition hot hatch. Compared to the Toyota, the MG’s seats are a lot more special looking, and the highlight stitching front and rear helps break the blackness up, where in the Toyota it’s rather bland look. You can option a “Nutmeg Leather accented” interior if you prefer a lighter look. 

The MG and Toyota are very close for occupant space in the cabin, with both offering good room for adults and kids alike. Both have relatively flat floor sections, and you can fit three adults across the back row at a pinch in both cars.

For me - 182cm or 6’0” tall, sitting behind my own driving position - I had almost the same amount of space for my knees, toes, head and shoulders in both SUVs. 

But I will say this - the seat comfort in the back of the MG is considerably better, with a cushy backrest and base that make it feel more amenable to longer drives. If you’ve got children, there are dual ISOFIX and three top-tether points, plus rear seat directional air-vents and two USB ports in the back for both SUVs, too.

These two are already pretty different in terms of the passenger compartment, but the cargo areas are also contrasting.

The boot capacity test we put these two SUVs through included loading in our CarsGuide suitcases (124L, 95L and 36L) and a pram in the back. 

With some adjustment to the reclining rear seat and the removal of the cargo cover, the MG managed to only just squeeze everything in, though whether you’d want to drive with the smallest suitcase mounted up high will be a matter of personal preference. It couldn’t hide the fact it has a considerably smaller boot space, with 451L of space because it has its battery pack over the rear axle (also means there’s no spare wheel, but you get a repair kit and there’s a storage section for the power cable under the boot floor).

The Toyota managed to fit all the luggage and the pram with a touch more room to spare, and without adjusting the back seat or removing the cargo cover. With up to 580 litres (VDA) of cargo capacity with the base set at the low floor height (or 542L VDA at the high floor setting), there is a clear advantage here, plus you get a space saver spare wheel as well. 

It’s the Toyota that just pips the MG here.

MG HS PHEV Essence - 7

Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD - 8

Toyota doesn’t think the market wants or needs a plug-in hybrid version of the RAV4, so instead it persists with a series-hybrid model. That’s no bad thing, but the brand is at risk of being left behind - I mean, you can get a plug-in version of a MG HS, and there are plenty more rivals to come.

Let’s run through the powertrains in a bit more detail. Both have petrol engines as part of their power equations, but there are other considerations for these two, from battery packs to charging.

The battery pack for the MG HS PHEV is rear mounted, under the boot floor and extending forward under the rear seat. The electric motor is mounted at the front of the car next to the engine. As mentioned, it’s front-wheel drive only. 

To recharge the HS, there’s a flap on the driver’s side behind the back door - the one on the left side of the car is for petrol (and you have to unlock it using a button hidden under the steering column, and it’s motor actuated which means the car must at least be on the Accessories setting for it to work). 

You can open the EV flap when the car is unlocked. There’s a dust protection cap on the receiver, and one on the charge cable that comes with the car - sadly, though, there’s no light in the filling area. Once plugged in, you should see the lights on the charge box illuminate and the driver info screen light up. We had more than one instance of recharging failing to commence on the first attempt, so there might be a knack to it that you learn over time.

The MG's 1.5-litre turbo four-cylinder produces 119kW/250Nm on its own. (image credit: Rob Cameriere)

And you also need to remember that choosing a PHEV might be perfect for your situation, but if you’re regularly exceeding the EV range capabilities of the car, then it will not be as cost effective. See the fuel use section below for more detail.

During my time with the PHEV, I had several runs on full EV charge including one run where I managed to get 63km, bang on the claimed range, before it switched over to petrol driving. Another instance - when we conducted this test - saw a less than compelling 44km of EV driving only before it switched to petrol, and on that morning (a cool 10 degrees at the start of the drive, car parked outside overnight) the car wouldn’t allow us to choose EV mode initially.

In the RAV4 it’s hardly a simple powertrain. We refer to it as a “regular” hybrid, but technically it’s a series-parallel hybrid system, with a pair of electric motor generators up front, a rear axle electric motor that can kick in when needed, a continuously variable transmission and regenerative braking all working together to jump between EV driving and petrol mode depending on what’s required, also while recharging the battery using the petrol engine and regen braking.

It’s astounding to watch the energy flow illustration on the driver info screen and yet feel as though you still don’t know what’s going to happen and why, but rest assured that while there is an EV button you can push and run the car on battery power, it will only work in some situations, and it’s probably not going to give you the full-fat electric car experience you’re after if you’re thinking it’s this, or a Model X.

The RAV4 has a combined total output of 163kW. (image credit: Rob Cameriere)

What is cool about the rear axle motor is that the RAV4 can channel up to 80 per cent of drive torque to the rear (commonly referred to by Toyota as eFour all-wheel drive), and there’s also a Trail mode for off-road specific driving.

Bottom line, the system can drive all four wheels using petrol or electric power, and it regenerates power when braking and without you having to plug it in.

You might be surprised by the high scores for this part of the test, but looking at the segment - which still has its fair share of old-tech, naturally-aspirated, non-hybrid powertrains - these two stand out for their complexity and technology.

MG HS PHEV Essence - 9

Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD - 9

There is a huge difference in terms of the official combined cycle fuel consumption you see here for these two models.

But you need to bear in mind that figure is calculated via a complicated lab test stipulated by ADR 81/02, and in reality your litres per 100km depends on how far you drive after the electric charge is depleted. The further you drive, the more dinosaur juice you'll use. 

Plus, if you are going to exceed the EV range regularly, you’re paying twice - first to fill the battery (see cost calculation above), and also to fill the tank to keep things moving. Here’s a rundown of our findings. 

Again, it’s time to reiterate that the MG HS PHEV is going to have to be a decision based on your lifestyle. If you can drive within the battery pack’s range limitations, it will be a great commuter companion. And if you fall into that category, MG can help you out by connecting you with Jet Charge to set up a home wall box for faster charging than the regular 10-amp three-pin plug (which is included at the time of purchase). The maximum charge input for the system is 7kW on AC using a Type 2 plug - not the Type 2 CCS combination plug, because it doesn't have DC charging available... so there's no point going to a DC fast charger outputting 350kW, because it won't be usable.

In terms of electricity recharge costs at home, it’ll depend on what your electricity plan is. If you have solar and a storage capture, it could be free. If you’re like me and have an off-peak plan, you might wish to take advantage of that: for me, the cost is about $0.10/kWh for off-peak, and almost $0.30/kWh during peak times. So if you can remember to plug in at 10pm, you will save yourself money. For instance, to charge on-peak for me would be about $4.50; off-peak would be $1.66. But the thing is, there’s no timer setting to choose when you’d like to charge, and there is no smartphone app to control charge settings, like you get in a Tesla.

The maximum charge input for the system is 7kW on AC using a Type 2 plug. (image credit: Rob Cameriere)

But with the real world consumption and fuss-free electrified driving on offer in the RAV4 - where the drivetrain will do the thinking for you, switching between petrol and electric readily, using the brakes and engine to recharge the battery pack - we can kinda see where Toyota Australia is coming from with its approach that plug-free means a less taxing ownership experience. 

We have spent enough time in RAV4 hybrid models to know that the return we’ve seen here is entirely repeatable, and that just furthers the case that maybe this is the best technology for most people.

A final note here: fleet buyers with strict emissions requirements may be enticed by the sticker figure of the HS, and we can understand why - 39g/km is one of the lowest CO2 ratings for a vehicle with a petrol engine in Australia.

MG HS PHEV Essence - 8

Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD - 9

Advanced safety technology is the norm in this part of the market, but not long ago, challenger brands like MG didn’t offer the same level of safety tech as their mainstream rivals. That’s no longer the case, with these two offering up every similar setups.

Both the MG HS and Toyota RAV4 have the maximum five-star ANCAP safety crash test rating against 2019 criteria - but for the MG, it’s only applicable to the regular petrol models, not the PHEV. ANCAP says there is no plan to test the PHEV version.

Here’s a rundown of the inclusions for both models.

The Toyota has daytime cyclist detection, where the MG doesn’t have cyclist detection - but the MG’s safety systems do operate from a lower speed, which is commendable. The MG’s reverse camera is excellent compared to the Toyota’s, which looks pixelated and dark.

Neither car has any form of rear autonomous emergency braking (AEB), however, which means both are falling behind already, and neither has front centre airbag protection, nor rear occupant alert or safe exit assist.

Oh and if you’re wondering “Where is the Toyota RAV4 made?”, the answer is Japan. Asking “Where is the MG HS made?”, the answer is China.

MG HS PHEV Essence - 8

Toyota RAV4 Cruiser Hybrid AWD - 8