In this paper, we apply model-based testing (MBT) to automate the creation of hardware-in-loop (HIL) test cases. In order to select MBT tools, different tools' properties were compared to each other through a literature study, with the result of selecting GraphWalker and MoMuT tools to be used in an industrial case study. The results show that the generated test cases perform similarly to their manual counterparts regarding how the test cases achieved full requirements coverage. When comparing the effort needed for applying the methods, a comparable effort is required for creating the first iteration, while with every subsequent update, MBT will require less effort compared to the manual process. Both methods achieve 100% requirements coverage, and since manual tests are created and executed by humans, some requirements are favoured over others due to company demands, while MBT tests are generated randomly. In addition, a comparison between the used tools showcased the differences in the models' design and their test case generation. The comparison showed that GraphWalker has a more straightforward design method and is better suited for smaller systems, while MoMuT can handle more complex systems but has a more involved design method.