Isuzu MU-X

Isuzu MU-X: Which Version Should You Buy?

The Isuzu MU-X version to choose depends mainly on whether you value lower fuel consumption, stronger output, AWD, or a manual gearbox. In the available specifications, the first-generation 3.0 AT and 3.0 MT produce 177 hp and 380 Nm, while the second-generation 3.0 AT raises output to 190 hp and 450 Nm. The smaller 1.9 AT and 1.9 MT make 150 hp and 350 Nm.

The Isuzu MU-X version to choose depends mainly on whether you value lower fuel consumption, stronger output, AWD, or a manual gearbox. In the available specifications, the first-generation 3.0 AT and 3.0 MT produce 177 hp and 380 Nm, while the second-generation 3.0 AT raises output to 190 hp and 450 Nm. The smaller 1.9 AT and 1.9 MT make 150 hp and 350 Nm. RWD generally means less weight or lower measured consumption, whereas AWD adds driven-wheel capability but also increases kerb weight. Price and sale data are not provided, so no claim can be made about cost or value for money.

Isuzu MU-X generations and version changes

The first generation began in 2013 as an SUV 5-doors with three listed versions. Its 3.0 AT was offered with either RWD or AWD, while the 3.0 MT came with AWD. All three use the same 2,999 cc turbocharged Diesel engine, producing 177 hp at 3,600 rpm and 380 Nm at 2,000 rpm. The transmissions have 5 speeds, regardless of whether the gearbox is Automatic or Manual.

The first-generation restyling ran from February 2017 through September 2020 and remained an SUV 5-doors. It contained five versions: the existing 3.0 AT RWD, 3.0 AT AWD, and 3.0 MT AWD specifications, plus 1.9 AT RWD and 1.9 MT RWD alternatives. The 1,898 cc engine produces 150 hp at 3,600 rpm and 350 Nm from 1,800–2,600 rpm. Both 1.9 versions have 6-speed transmissions, so their choice comes down to Automatic versus Manual rather than a difference in engine output.

The second generation began in October 2020 as an SUV 5-doors with four listed versions. The 1.9 MT and 1.9 AT retain the 1,898 cc, 150 hp, 350 Nm specification and are both RWD. The 3.0 AT advances to 190 hp and 450 Nm and is available with RWD or AWD. Every listed second-generation version has a 6-speed transmission, and every engine is mounted front, longitudinal.

Isuzu MU-X engine specs and comparison

The 1,898 cc engine develops approximately 79.0 hp per litre, compared with about 59.0 hp per litre for the first-generation 2,999 cc engine and 63.4 hp per litre for the second-generation 2,999 cc engine. Specific torque is approximately 184.4 Nm per litre for the 1.9 versions, 126.7 Nm per litre for the earlier 3.0 versions, and 150.1 Nm per litre for the second-generation 3.0 AT.

Moving from the earlier 3.0 specification to the second-generation 3.0 AT adds 13 hp and 70 Nm. Compared with a 1.9 version, the second-generation 3.0 AT adds 40 hp and 100 Nm. The database does not provide towing, acceleration, or price figures, so those output differences should not be converted into claims about towing ability, real-world speed, or financial value.

Isuzu MU-X performance, fuel economy, and mpg data

Acceleration from 0–100 km/h is not measured for any listed version. Top speed is also not measured for any listed version.

Measured fuel consumption is available only for the earlier 3.0 versions:

The earlier 3.0 AT RWD uses 0.2 L/100 km less than the 3.0 AT AWD in city, highway, and combined figures. Between the AWD transmissions, the 3.0 MT consumes 0.1 L/100 km more in the city and 0.1 L/100 km less on the highway than the 3.0 AT, while both record 8.4 L/100 km combined. No fuel-consumption comparison can be calculated for the 1.9 versions or the second-generation models because their figures are not measured.

Isuzu MU-X weight, clearance, tank, and wheel specifications

Among the earlier 3.0 versions, choosing AWD with the Automatic gearbox adds 100 kg over the 3.0 AT RWD. The 3.0 MT AWD is 85 kg heavier than the RWD Automatic but 15 kg lighter than the AWD Automatic. Each earlier specification has 750 kg between kerb and gross weight.

In the second generation, the 3.0 AT RWD is 130 kg heavier than either 1.9 RWD version. The 3.0 AT AWD adds another 85 kg over the 3.0 AT RWD. Its 80 L tank is 15 L larger than the 65 L tank listed for the first generation and its restyling. Ground clearance is listed as 220 mm for the earlier vehicles and 112 mm for the second generation, a difference of 108 mm. Overall length, width, height, and boot dimensions are not measured in the supplied specifications.

The weight-to-power calculation gives the first-generation 3.0 AT RWD approximately 10.7 kg per hp, the 3.0 MT AWD approximately 11.2 kg per hp, and the earlier 3.0 AT AWD approximately 11.3 kg per hp. In the second generation, both 1.9 RWD versions have 13.0 kg per hp, the 3.0 AT RWD has approximately 10.9 kg per hp, and the 3.0 AT AWD has approximately 11.4 kg per hp. These ratios compare specifications only; acceleration is not measured.

Which Isuzu MU-X version should you choose?

Choose the first-generation or restyled 3.0 AT RWD if the priority is the lowest measured consumption and lowest listed weight among the earlier 3.0 versions. It combines 177 hp and 380 Nm with 1,900 kg kerb weight and 8.2 L/100 km combined consumption. Its trade-off against the comparable 3.0 AT AWD is the absence of AWD.

Choose an earlier 3.0 AT AWD if you want AWD and an Automatic gearbox. It retains 177 hp and 380 Nm, but its 2,000 kg kerb weight is 100 kg above the RWD equivalent, and its combined consumption rises from 8.2 to 8.4 L/100 km.

Choose the 3.0 MT AWD if AWD and a Manual gearbox are both required. Its output and combined consumption match the earlier AWD Automatic at 177 hp, 380 Nm, and 8.4 L/100 km, while its kerb weight is 15 kg lower. The choice is therefore primarily about transmission preference, since the measurable engine output and combined economy do not separate them.

Choose a restyled 1.9 AT or 1.9 MT if you prefer the 1,898 cc engine and RWD. Both deliver 150 hp and 350 Nm through 6-speed gearboxes, with Automatic and Manual being the only listed mechanical distinction. Their fuel consumption and weight are not measured, so the data cannot support a claim that either is cheaper to run or lighter than the 3.0 alternatives.

Choose the second-generation 3.0 AT RWD for the strongest power-to-weight figure in that generation. It has 190 hp, 450 Nm, and a kerb weight of 2,080 kg, compared with 150 hp, 350 Nm, and 1,950 kg for either second-generation 1.9 version. The additional 130 kg is accompanied by 40 hp and 100 Nm more output.

Choose the second-generation 3.0 AT AWD if AWD and the highest listed engine output matter most. It supplies 190 hp and 450 Nm, but weighs 85 kg more than the second-generation 3.0 AT RWD. Because both have the same engine, 6-speed Automatic transmission, 80 L tank, listed clearance, and wheel-size choices, the principal documented distinction is AWD and its accompanying weight increase.

Price, market availability, engine-oil capacity, reliability, and problems are not measured in the supplied data. For that reason, the defensible buying decision rests on engine output, gearbox, drive, weight, measured fuel consumption, clearance, tank capacity, and wheel specifications—not unsupported assumptions about purchase cost or ownership experience.