Toyota HiAce Touring

Toyota HiAce Touring: which version to buy

The Toyota HiAce Touring was sold as one generation of Minivan, from 1999-01-01 to 2002-12-31, in four versions: two 2.7 AT gasoline cars at 145 hp and two 3.0 AT diesel cars at 140 hp. The buying choice is not between generations — there is only one — and not between gearboxes — every version is Automatic with 4 gears.

The Toyota HiAce Touring was sold as one generation of Minivan, from 1999-01-01 to 2002-12-31, in four versions: two 2.7 AT gasoline cars at 145 hp and two 3.0 AT diesel cars at 140 hp. The buying choice is not between generations — there is only one — and not between gearboxes — every version is Automatic with 4 gears. The real split is engine (Gasoline 2693 cm³ versus Diesel 2982 cm³) and drivetrain (AWD with a front, transverse engine versus RWD with a front, longitudinal engine). The numbers below are taken only from those four cards.

Which HiAce Touring version to buy

If the priority is the lowest kerb weight and the highest ground clearance, the 2.7 AT RWD (145 hp, Gasoline) is the lightest and tallest of the four: 1850 kg and 195 mm. That is 130 kg lighter than the 2.7 AT AWD (1980 kg) and 230 kg lighter than the heaviest car in the line, the 3.0 AT AWD (2080 kg).

If the priority is pulling torque rather than peak horsepower, both 3.0 AT versions beat both 2.7 AT versions: 343 Nm at 2000 rpm versus 227 Nm at 3600 rpm. That is 116 Nm more, and the diesel peak arrives 1600 rpm earlier. The gasoline cars still win on peak power by 5 hp (145 hp at 4800 rpm versus 140 hp at 3600 rpm).

If AWD is required, the buyer is choosing between the 2.7 AT AWD at 1980 kg / 180 mm clearance and the 3.0 AT AWD at 2080 kg / 175 mm. AWD costs 130 kg versus the gasoline RWD and 150 kg versus the diesel RWD. Ground clearance on AWD is 15 mm lower than RWD on the gasoline pair (180 mm versus 195 mm) and 20 mm lower on the diesel pair (175 mm versus 195 mm).

Fuel consumption, 0–100 km/h, top speed, CO2, eco class, gross weight and wheel sizes are not measured on any of the four cards, so they cannot decide the purchase. Tank size cannot decide it either: every version has a 65 L tank.

Generations: what one generation actually offers

The HiAce Touring has 1 generation. That generation ran from 1999-01-01 to 2002-12-31 as a Minivan with 4 versions. There is no second generation to compare, and no restyling listed as a separate generation. All four versions share the same production window, the same Automatic 4-speed gearbox family, independent spring suspension front and rear, and ventilated disc brakes front and rear. What changes inside the generation is engine, layout, drive, weight and clearance.

Engines and specs: four versions, two names

Two names cover four cars. Distinguish them by power, fuel, drive and engine layout, not by the badge alone.

Both 2.7 AT engines are naturally aspirated Gasoline, 4 Inline cylinders, 4 valves per cylinder, distributed injection (multi-point), compression 9.5, bore × stroke 95 × 95, fuel 92. Both 3.0 AT engines are Turbo Diesel, 4 Inline cylinders, 4 valves per cylinder, distributed injection (multi-point), compression 21, bore × stroke 96 × 103, fuel Diesel.

The AWD cars put the engine front, transverse. The RWD cars put the engine front, longitudinal. That pairing is consistent: there is no transverse RWD and no longitudinal AWD in this catalogue.

Specific output from the given figures:

• 2.7 AT Gasoline: 145 hp / 2.693 L ≈ 53.8 hp per litre; 227 Nm / 2.693 L ≈ 84.3 Nm per litre.
• 3.0 AT Diesel: 140 hp / 2.982 L ≈ 46.9 hp per litre; 343 Nm / 2.982 L ≈ 115.0 Nm per litre.

The gasoline engine is the more powerful per litre; the diesel is the stronger per litre on torque. Absolute power still favours the 2.7 AT by 5 hp; absolute torque favours the 3.0 AT by 116 Nm.

Performance, mpg and economy: what is measured and what is not

0–100 km/h is not measured for the 2.7 AT AWD, the 2.7 AT RWD, the 3.0 AT AWD or the 3.0 AT RWD.

Top speed is not measured for any of the four.

City, highway and combined fuel consumption (mpg in search terms) are not measured for any of the four.

CO2 is not measured. Eco class is not measured.

What can still be compared is mass per horsepower, which is arithmetic on the given kerb weights and power figures:

• 2.7 AT RWD: 1850 kg / 145 hp ≈ 12.8 kg per hp (lightest per hp).
• 2.7 AT AWD: 1980 kg / 145 hp ≈ 13.7 kg per hp.
• 3.0 AT RWD: 1930 kg / 140 hp ≈ 13.8 kg per hp.
• 3.0 AT AWD: 2080 kg / 140 hp ≈ 14.9 kg per hp (heaviest per hp).

The gasoline RWD therefore carries the least mass per horsepower. The diesel AWD carries the most. The diesel RWD and the gasoline AWD sit within about 0.1 kg per hp of each other (13.8 versus 13.7), so those two are close on this ratio even though one has 5 hp more and the other has 116 Nm more.

Torque per tonne, again from given figures:

• 2.7 AT RWD: 227 Nm / 1.850 t ≈ 123 Nm per tonne.
• 2.7 AT AWD: 227 / 1.980 ≈ 115 Nm per tonne.
• 3.0 AT RWD: 343 / 1.930 ≈ 178 Nm per tonne.
• 3.0 AT AWD: 343 / 2.080 ≈ 165 Nm per tonne.

On torque per tonne the diesel RWD leads; the gasoline AWD is last. That ranking is the opposite of the horsepower-per-litre ranking.

The 65 L tank is identical on all four, so range cannot be ranked without consumption figures, and those figures are not measured.

Dimensions, weight and ground clearance

Gross weight is not measured on any version. Wheel sizes are not measured on any version.

Kerb weight and ground clearance are measured and they move together with drive:

• 2.7 AT RWD: 1850 kg, 195 mm.
• 3.0 AT RWD: 1930 kg, 195 mm. Same clearance as the gasoline RWD; 80 kg heavier (diesel versus gasoline on RWD).
• 2.7 AT AWD: 1980 kg, 180 mm. 130 kg heavier than gasoline RWD; 15 mm less clearance.
• 3.0 AT AWD: 2080 kg, 175 mm. 150 kg heavier than diesel RWD; 20 mm less clearance. 100 kg heavier than gasoline AWD; 5 mm less clearance than gasoline AWD.

The two RWD cars share 195 mm. The two AWD cars do not share a clearance: the diesel AWD sits 5 mm lower than the gasoline AWD. The spread from tallest to lowest is 20 mm (195 mm minus 175 mm). The spread from lightest to heaviest is 230 kg (2080 minus 1850).

Front and rear suspension is Independent, spring on all four. Front and rear brakes are Ventilated disc on all four (rear listed as Disc ventilated in the source labels). Those items do not separate the versions.

Engine layout: what AWD actually changes besides weight

On this model, choosing AWD is also choosing a front, transverse engine. Choosing RWD is also choosing a front, longitudinal engine. The buyer does not get a mix-and-match of drive and layout.

AWD premium in mass:

• Gasoline: 2.7 AT AWD is 130 kg heavier than 2.7 AT RWD (1980 − 1850).
• Diesel: 3.0 AT AWD is 150 kg heavier than 3.0 AT RWD (2080 − 1930).

Diesel premium in mass:

• RWD: 3.0 AT RWD is 80 kg heavier than 2.7 AT RWD (1930 − 1850).
• AWD: 3.0 AT AWD is 100 kg heavier than 2.7 AT AWD (2080 − 1980).

The heaviest combination is diesel plus AWD. The lightest is gasoline plus RWD. Adding both diesel and AWD to the lightest car is 2080 − 1850 = 230 kg.

Head-to-head: same name, different car

2.7 AT versus 2.7 AT. Same 145 hp, 107 kW, 227 Nm, 2693 cm³, Gasoline, No boost, Automatic 4, fuel 92, compression 9.5, 95 × 95. The difference is AWD / front, transverse / 1980 kg / 180 mm versus RWD / front, longitudinal / 1850 kg / 195 mm. Power and torque do not change; mass and clearance do.

3.0 AT versus 3.0 AT. Same 140 hp, 103 kW, 343 Nm, 2982 cm³, Diesel, Turbo, Automatic 4, fuel Diesel, compression 21, 96 × 103. The difference is AWD / front, transverse / 2080 kg / 175 mm versus RWD / front, longitudinal / 1930 kg / 195 mm. Again, the engine card is the same; the chassis card is not.

2.7 AT versus 3.0 AT (RWD). Gasoline 145 hp and 227 Nm in 1850 kg versus Diesel Turbo 140 hp and 343 Nm in 1930 kg. Clearance is a tie at 195 mm. The diesel is 80 kg heavier, 5 hp down, 116 Nm up. Specific power favours the 2.7 AT (53.8 versus 46.9 hp/L). Torque per litre and torque per tonne favour the 3.0 AT.

2.7 AT versus 3.0 AT (AWD). Gasoline 145 hp in 1980 kg with 180 mm versus Diesel 140 hp in 2080 kg with 175 mm. The diesel AWD is 100 kg heavier and 5 mm lower. The same 5 hp / 116 Nm engine trade-off applies as on RWD.

Which version to choose: a ranking from the numbers

1. 2.7 AT RWD (145 hp, Gasoline, front, longitudinal) — lowest kerb weight (1850 kg), joint-highest clearance (195 mm), best kg per hp (≈12.8), highest peak power in the line. Choose this when AWD is not required and peak horsepower plus mass matter more than low-rpm torque.

2. 3.0 AT RWD (140 hp, Diesel, Turbo, front, longitudinal) — same 195 mm clearance as the gasoline RWD, 80 kg more mass, 116 Nm more torque, peak torque at 2000 rpm instead of 3600. Best torque per tonne in the line (≈178). Choose this when RWD is enough and the extra 116 Nm is the point of the purchase.

3. 2.7 AT AWD (145 hp, Gasoline, front, transverse) — 145 hp retained, 130 kg over the gasoline RWD, clearance 180 mm. Better kg per hp than either diesel. Choose this when AWD is required and the 5 hp gasoline advantage plus 100 kg less than the diesel AWD matter more than 343 Nm.

4. 3.0 AT AWD (140 hp, Diesel, Turbo, front, transverse) — maximum torque with AWD (343 Nm), maximum mass (2080 kg), minimum clearance (175 mm), weakest kg per hp (≈14.9). Choose this only when both AWD and the diesel torque curve are required together; that combination is the heaviest and lowest of the four.

There is no later generation that changes this ranking. Prices are not in the data. Fuel use, acceleration and top speed are not measured, so they cannot overturn the weight, clearance, power and torque comparison above.