Ford Everest vs GWM Tank 500

As of mid-2026 the Everest is cheaper to get into. Its Active opens near $60,000 driveaway, currently on a Ford driveaway offer, where the cheapest Tank 500 Lux runs about $70,000 driveaway, so the Ford undercuts the GWM by roughly $10,000 at entry. Both are quoted driveaway, so the comparison is like for like. Higher up the Everest climbs to about $92,000 for the Platinum V6, while the Tank 500 tops out near $80,000 for the plug-in Ultra. So the Everest spans a wider, lower-starting range, while the Tank 500 sits in a narrower band and answers the price gap with more standard kit.

The Tank 500 wins power outright. Its petrol-hybrid makes 255kW and 648Nm and the plug-in hybrid 300kW and 750Nm, against the Everest's 125kW 2.0-litre or 184kW 3.0-litre V6 diesel. So even the base Tank 500 hybrid comfortably beats the Everest's strongest engine on power, and the plug-in is in another league. The Everest's V6 diesel is torquey, proven and better suited to steady towing than sprinting, and outright power is not what most Everest buyers chase. Its hybrid punch is most obvious away from the lights. But if straight-line performance matters, the Tank 500 is the stronger of the two by a clear margin.

The Everest has the towing edge that counts in this class. It is rated to 3500kg braked, the outback benchmark, while the Tank 500 tops out at 3000kg. For a big caravan or boat near the upper limit, that 500kg is the difference between legal and not, and it is a genuine reason serious towers stay with the Ford. The Everest also carries a little more payload at 855kg to the Tank's 790. The Tank 500 still pulls a substantial trailer and has the power to do it easily, but it is the wrong pick if you regularly tow heavy. For lighter loads either is comfortable.

Both are five-star cars, so neither is unsafe, but they split the detail. The Everest carries nine airbags to the Tank 500's six, and it scored higher for adult occupant and safety-assist. The Tank 500's rating is the fresher of the two, stamped 2024 against the Everest's 2022, and it scored higher for vulnerable road user protection at 81 per cent to the Ford's 74. Both run autonomous emergency braking, lane-keep assist, blind-spot monitoring and adaptive cruise control as standard. So the Everest leads on airbag count, the Tank 500 on rating recency, and both clear the bar comfortably. Neither buyer is choosing an unsafe car.

The Tank 500 wins ownership terms. GWM backs it with a seven-year warranty to Ford's five, and its capped-price servicing runs about $2,000 over five years at 12-month, 15,000km intervals. The Everest's servicing is dearer and more frequent by comparison. The catch is that GWM is a newer brand in Australia, so its long-term reliability and resale are not yet proven the way Ford's are, which is where the Everest's cheaper-to-hold ownership case sits. So the Tank 500 wins the up-front ownership terms; the Everest counters with a proven track record and stronger resale that a warranty cannot buy. Both reassure in their own way.

Both work as seven-seat family 4WDs, and both split five or seven seats by grade. The Everest seats five in the base Active and seven from the Sport up; the Tank 500 seats seven on its hybrid grades and drops to five on the plug-in, whose battery takes the third row. The Tank 500 brings the more generously equipped cabin, with heated and ventilated seats and the bigger screen. The Everest counters with the lighter body, the extra airbags and the stronger tow rating. Both fold their rear rows for a big load bay. For outright kit the Tank 500; for proven family-hauler credentials the Everest.

It is a genuine alternative, and that is new for the class. The Tank 500 matches the Everest's brief as a seven-seat body-on-frame family 4WD, then beats it on power, standard equipment, warranty and price, which is why Australian reviewers treat it as a real challenger. What it cannot match is the Everest's 3500kg tow rating, its nine airbags, its lighter body, and above all the proven reliability and resale that come from years in the Australian market. Buyers led by the head and the budget will find the Tank 500 compelling; buyers who tow heavy or value certainty still have their answer in the Everest.

Drivetrain and driving split it. The Everest's 2.0-litre diesel claims 7.1L/100km, a little thriftier than the Tank 500 hybrid's 8.4, so on a straight diesel-versus-hybrid basis over distance the Ford edges it. The Tank 500 plug-in changes the maths: charge it regularly and short trips run on electricity for a claimed 2.1L/100km, but leave it flat and it drinks like any heavy petrol SUV. So a diesel Everest is the safer bet for consistent long-distance economy, while a plugged-in Tank 500 PHEV can be much cheaper around town. Servicing costs then tip the balance further toward the GWM over years of ownership.