ge5546941459147221531
ge5373686968473765178
ge4841117914479795608
ge5441909825810187929
ge5387219472224966526
Matt Brogan3 Oct 2015
REVIEW

4WD Dual-Cab Ute 2015 Comparison: Verdict

They’ve been put through their paces on bitumen, dirt, loaded and towing, but which one comes out on top?
Models Tested
4WD Dual-Cab Ute 2015 Comparison: Verdict
Review Type
Comparison

With six new or heavily revised dual-cab ute models entering the Australian market this year, our eight model comparison was always going to be a close run affair. As such, we put them through an exhaustive testing program that including dirt and bitumen on-road driving, hard-core off-road work, caravan towing plus an evaluation of technology features and tray size and capacities. Has last year’s winner, the Volkswagen Amarok, got the goods to knock off the latest contenders from Toyota, Nissan et al. Read on...

Ford Ranger XLT v Holden Colorado LTZ v Isuzu D-MAX LS-Terrain v Mazda BT-50 XTR v Mitsubishi Triton Exceed v Nissan Navara ST-X v Toyota HiLux SR5 v Volkswagen Amarok Highline TDI420 4MOTION
Comparison Test


There are really no duds here. Each of the utes on test is certainly capable and clearly very comparable. But as each is designed to be a vehicle adept at a wide range of skills, our range of tests have helped reveal the best all-rounder; not necessarily the one more qualified to carry out any one specific task.

The Isuzu D-MAX has changed little since its 2012 launch, and inside especially feels out of place amongst its rivals with dated decor and no dual-zone climate control. Oddly, however, it did offer push-button start and keyless entry.

When it comes to towing the Isuzu's low-torque output belied its performance, though a noisy engine, poor front-end grip and low clearance hurt the Isuzu's result in road testing elsewhere.

The D-MAX offered one of the best payload ratings on test and in spite of its short tray bed provided middle-of-the-field tray width and depth. The Isuzu also ‘passed’ with four load anchor points, and bettered all except the Colorado with a low tray floor height of 800mm.

Holden’s Colorado may have offered the most torque on test (500Nm), but was criticised for its tendency to sway and pitch when towing. The engine was also noted as noisy, and although it felt solid in urban environs, was challenged by lumpy asphalt and loose gravel roads.

Off-road, the Colorado scraped its belly on several obstacles and lacked the finesse of throttle modulation shown in others. Engine braking was also noted as poor, the model relying on electronics and hill-descent control to properly traverse steep declines.

Our judges also found the Colorado poor at delivering drive when one (or more) wheel was lifted, and in spite of a low tray bed height (equal to the D-MAX at 800mm), the lack of tie-down points and on-test-worst payload figure of just 825kg counted against it.

The new Mitsubishi Triton may have offered only average carrying capacity and tray dimensions, but was cheaper than all on test – and had one of the most cohesive infotainment and HVAC arrangements.

Off-road the Triton's turning circle and clearance were admired, as was its excellent Super Select four-wheel drive system. The model's wading ability and placement of water-prone parts was not as good as some, but steady torque delivery and steering wheel paddle shifters made it a decent load hauler and tow tug.

On-road, the Triton impressed with accurate steering, predictable braking and good ergonomics; but lost points on gravel where poorer body control and a firm rear-end created a 'nervous' footing.

The new Nissan Navara’s combination of twin-turbo diesel engine, seven-speed automatic and car-like coil-sprung rear suspension makes it an enticing proposition for recreational buyers. But as we during on-road testing, the Navara's undisciplined body movements hampered straight-line stability and unsettled the vehicle over mid-corner bumps.

Off-road the softer set-up meant the Nissan scraped its belly on obstacles that failed to challenge most rivals. It did gain points in the mud for good throttle control and a predictable hill-descent system, but disappointed with some 'slouch' in the rear when towing and carrying weight.

The Navara was praised for a great array of technology and safety equipment, including a driver's knee airbag (joining only Triton and HiLux), while extra points were awarded for the fitment of a rear opening window, sunroof, sat-nav and seat heaters. The Nissan's middle-of-the-road payload capacity and dimensions were heightened by a clever, heavy-duty 'rail-style' tie-down system.

Mazda's (lightly) revised BT-50 showed a new face and new infotainment features, but was criticised for its small reversing camera and convoluted infotainment menu. It offered the biggest payload of all utes, and fared well where tray width, length and tie-down points were concerned.

On road, the Mazda BT-50 felt sure-footed and refined. It had excellent body control and high grips levels relative to its rivals, only hampered by poor braking performance.

Like the Ranger, the BT-50 was noted as 'rock solid' when towing, while off-road, excellent throttle control and low-range reduction assisted crawling and hill descents even without using the electronic hill-descent control.

The long-awaited new Toyota HiLux mightn't have stretched the boundaries of payload size and capacity, but its improved towing capacity, on and off-road stability and technology offerings did score points with our judges.

However, the HiLux was the slowest against the stopwatch, redeeming itself in stopping performance from 60km/h (second only to the lighter Navara).

The Volkswagen Amarok impressed with its car-like driveability and cabin refinement, especially on the bitumen. It was smooth when towing, but required revs to motivate the 2200kg test caravan properly. Off-road, the VW's rear diff lock and clever electronics masked deficiencies in low-speed gearing and throttle modulation.

On a negative note, brake pedal feel and location of accessory power outlets were criticised in the otherwise well-equipped Amarok. On the plus side, the Amarok's tray was the only one to fit a full-size Australian pallet between the arches.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the locally-tuned Ford Ranger impressed over all road types, mopping up bumps and providing better body control than the SUV-like Amarok.

The engine was strong and relatively quiet, though the transmission was slow at times. The Ranger also excelled at load hauling, towing and off-roading. It bettered the HiLux on our off-road course, felt sharper on-road and was comparably equipped. However, its relatively steep asking price was third only to HiLux and Amarok.

Technology highlights on the Ranger included the SYNC 2 infotainment system and adaptive cruise control, while the rear-view camera with its adaptive guidance lines was a clear winner in this company.

As the vehicle that came closest to a jack-of-all-trades, as many utes today are required to be, the Ford Ranger was judged the best on this test. In most situations, the Ranger presents as a thoroughly capable and modern vehicle with the rugged underpinnings required of an off-road load hauler.

carsales' 4WD Dual-Cab 2015 comparison













>> <a href="/editorial/details/4wd-dual-cab-ute-comparison-volkswagen-amarok-54539/?__source=editorialArticle&driver_crosssell=editorial.in.article.link" data-article-id="ED-ITM-54539">Volkswagen Amarok Highline TDI420 4MOTION video review<br></a>
The award goes to:

Share this article
Written byMatt Brogan
See all articles
Our team of independent expert car reviewers and journalistsMeet the team
Stay up to dateBecome a carsales member and get the latest news, reviews and advice straight to your inbox.
Looking for a tradie car?Get the latest advice and reviews on tradie car that's right for you.
Explore the Tradie Hub
Tradie
Disclaimer
Please see our Editorial Guidelines & Code of Ethics (including for more information about sponsored content and paid events). The information published on this website is of a general nature only and doesn’t consider your particular circumstances or needs.

If the price does not contain the notation that it is "Drive Away", the price may not include additional costs, such as stamp duty and other government charges.
Download the carsales app
    AppStoreDownloadGooglePlayDownload
    App Store and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc. Google Play and the Google Play logo are trademarks of Google LLC.
    © CAR Group Ltd 1999-2024
    In the spirit of reconciliation we acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of Country throughout Australia and their connections to land, sea and community. We pay our respect to their Elders past and present and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples today.