These two pickups are, on paper, the same vehicle twice. Both measure 5,340 millimetres long and 1,940 millimetres wide. Both sit on a 3,110 millimetre wheelbase. Both carry a cargo box of exactly 1,520 by 1,580 by 440 millimetres. Both seat five in a double cab with left-hand drive and four-wheel drive. The overall heights differ by ten millimetres.

And then one costs $33,884 and carries 515 kilograms, while the other costs $22,306 and carries 800. Everything useful about this comparison lives inside those two sentences.

What you are comparing

The e-TUNLAND is a battery-electric double cab listed for Ethiopia, running an 88.02 kWh pack and a dual-motor four-wheel drive system. The TUNLAND G7 listed here is a petrol version of the same body offered into Peru and Venezuela, powered by a Mitsubishi engine through a six-speed manual. Same shell, entirely different definition of work.

Payload: what the battery costs you

Start with the number that decides most pickup purchases. Both manufacturers publish their own figures, and here they are: 515 kilograms for the electric truck and 800 for the petrol one. That is 285 kilograms less load every single trip, and on the electric vehicle's own sheet the figure is explicitly calculated excluding passengers.

Note what had to happen for the electric version to be legal on the road at all. Its gross vehicle weight had to be raised to 3,200 kilograms, up from the petrol truck's 2,730, purely to absorb the mass of the battery pack and motors. Its kerb weight is 2,310 kilograms against 1,930. So yes, the electric truck is permitted to work harder in total, but almost all of that extra allowance is spent carrying itself.

If your routine load sits near half a tonne, the electric pickup works. If your routine load routinely exceeds it, no amount of running-cost saving will put those 285 kilograms back.

There is a second-order effect worth thinking about. Tyres change too, from 245/70R16 on the petrol truck to 265/65R17 alloy wheels on the electric one, which fits the higher gross weight but also changes your replacement cost per corner. Check both local prices before you decide.

What the electric gives back, and it is substantial

Now the other side of the ledger, and it genuinely is impressive. Two motors rather than one engine: 70 kW peak at the front axle and 150 kW at the rear, combining to 220 kW and 500 N·m. Against the Mitsubishi's 155 kW and 340 Nm, that is 65 kW and 160 Nm more, delivered without a gearbox to manage it. The published results are a 140 km/h top speed and 40 per cent gradeability, figures the petrol sheet does not publish at all.

Safety is the widest gap in the whole comparison. The electric lists four-wheel disc brakes, dual airbags and ten separate electronic systems: ABS, EBD, ESC, VDC, TCS, HBA, HBA hydraulic brake assist, hill-hold control, brake override assist, hill descent control and emergency brake light flashing. The petrol truck lists ABS and EBD. For operators who put untrained drivers on difficult ground, that difference is not a specification quirk, it is a risk decision.

The feature nobody puts in the headline: it is a generator

The e-TUNLAND can export power. Vehicle-to-load is offered two ways: AC output at 220 volts and 3 kW through the slow-charge port, and DC output at up to 0.3 C through the fast-charge port. In plain terms, you can run lights, pumps, welders, small tools or charge other devices directly from the truck, at a remote site, with no engine running and no separate generator being towed along.

Read the small print carefully though, because it matters outside China. The sheet notes both V2L functions are GB standard only. Confirm before you buy whether the connector standard suits your equipment and your market, because a generator outlet you cannot plug into is not a feature.

For site support work — named explicitly as one of its duties alongside off-road hauling — this single capability can justify the purchase on its own. If you currently haul a generator to every job, price that generator, its fuel and its maintenance into your comparison, and the $11,578 stops looking quite so large.

Running cost: do the arithmetic with your own prices

The honest way to compare these two is not to ask which is cheaper to run in the abstract, but to put your own numbers in. Dividing the 88.02 kWh pack by the 350 km WLTC range gives roughly 252 Wh per kilometre. Multiply that by your electricity tariff per kWh and you have the electric cost per kilometre.

For the petrol truck, take your real litres per hundred kilometres at the loads you actually carry, multiply by your pump price, and put the two figures side by side. Real-world consumption will be worse than the WLTC-derived figure once you account for loaded running, terrain and rough ground, so adjust the electric number upward rather than down. Also remember what disappears: no engine oil, no spark plugs, no fuel filtration, no exhaust system maintenance.

Overlay operating pattern last. Petrol can be carried in a jerry can to a remote site. Electricity cannot. If your work is within comfortable daily reach of a reliable charge point, the electric case strengthens. If your sites move weekly or sit hours from a grid connection, it collapses, and no amount of favourable tariff arithmetic changes that.

So which one belongs in your fleet

Choose the e-TUNLAND if your daily work stays inside its range and near a reliable charge point; if replacing a towed site generator is worth real money to you; if you value 500 N·m, 40 per cent gradeability and ten stability systems over 285 kilograms of payload; if zero tailpipe emissions open doors in your contracts; and if you can support high-voltage diagnosis locally.

Choose the TUNLAND G7 petrol if 285 kilograms of payload is more valuable than any running-cost saving; if you operate far from reliable electricity; if you want the multi-link rear suspension; if a lower purchase price lets you buy two vehicles instead of one; and if your market already supports Euro IV petrol models with parts and service you can find.