Citroen Berlingo vs Nissan Navara

What's the difference?

Given Citroen’s proud heritage of innovation, the Berlingo has a few unique and quirky features, but is overall quite conventional in its design and performance (though in a well thought-out and practical package).

With sub-$20K run-out pricing, it should have plenty of appeal for commercial customers, as it costs much less than its major rivals yet offers a superior payload.

While it won’t appeal on the value front as much as its Mitsubishi Triton engineering twin, the Navara’s tweaks from Premcar make it a more comfortable and livable thing. 

The extra cost is worth it for how much better it is on the road, plus you get more features, regardless.

Whether the changes to the Navara are sexy enough to get people in the dealership door is another question, but anyone who takes this over a Triton won’t be disappointed.

If it's for work, the SL or ST will do. If it's doubling as a family car, the Pro-4X is worth the outlay.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with travel, accommodation and meals provided.

The smallest Berlingo rides on a front-wheel-drive, 2728mm wheelbase with an overall length of 4380mm and width of 1810mm. Compared to the Caddy, the Berlingo is 46mm longer in wheelbase, 28mm shorter and 37mm wider.

Suspension features MacPherson struts up front and a tidy trailing arm arrangement at the rear, which is well designed for carrying heavy loads. Steering is via power-assisted rack and pinion and four-wheel disc brakes provide reassuringly strong braking. The turning circle is a compact 11.0 metres.

The cabin and cargo bay are separated by a removable grey vinyl screen, with a large clear section in the upper half to allow rear vision for the driver. Citroen says this screen is primarily to reduce air-conditioning requirements, which in turn reduces the A/C load on the engine to optimise performance and fuel economy. 

It’s also claimed to (slightly) reduce noise intrusion from the cargo bay, which is mostly caused by tyre roar through the rear wheel arches. However, Citroen has taken a commendable step in trying to muffle these noise paths by surrounding each wheel arch with large plastic mouldings which are claimed to contain sound-absorbing material.

Glazed rear barn doors with wiper/washer and 180-degree opening, plus solid sliding side doors, are standard issue. The barn doors also feature an asymmetrical design (one wide, one narrow) to off-set the centre pillars and reduce the large blind spot they create in the rear-view mirror. 

The cabin layout is simple and functional with decent-sized door mirrors, although the kerb side would benefit from a wide-angle lens due to a big blind spot for the driver created by the solid side door. The fold-down inboard arm-rest is a nice touch and the cabin is quite spacious, although tall drivers will find the left footrest too high for a comfortable leg position.

Nissan has done well to inject its own design flavour into the ute, because even though there’s inevitable similarity in the silhouette, it doesn’t just look like a Triton.

Impressive given a lot of the car is the same, and Nissan couldn’t change any of the hard points the Triton comes with. In fact, the Navara’s dimensions are largely the same as the Triton, coming in at 5320mm long, 1930mm wide and 1815mm tall.

The biggest Nissan-specific design element is a nod to the Navara’s heritage, the three little vent lines above the grille hark back to the original D21 generation ute which had these holes in the bonnet.

It’s subjective to some extent, but I reckon the Navara has the Triton beat on the design front.

Depending on the variant, you get some other indicators that this is no Triton, including a sports bar on the rear of the cabin with ‘Navara’ cut into it, or Pro-4X decals if that’s the variant you go for.

Given the lifestyle and off-road focus of the Pro-4X, it also has a bit more trim inside and out to feel more rugged and premium.

The Navara’s new interior is a big step up over the previous generation, even if it is genuinely all-Triton in there. The biggest change is the Nissan badge on the steering wheel.

It’s a ute, so there’s still a lot of plastic, cheap materials and even the nicer looking surfaces are in a few spots made of gloss black plastic (sometimes called piano black) which gets smudged easily and after a short while.

The Berlingo’s 1433kg kerb weight and 2150kg GVM would normally result in a 717kg payload. However, Citroen’s official payload figure is 133kg higher, at a class-leading 850kg, because PSA calculates kerb weights differently to the norm (typically French). So, 75kg of that can be carried on the roof when shared across three racks with the mounting points provided.

Its robust 3250kg GCM allows up to 1100kg of braked trailer to be towed without any reduction in payload. Citroen states that this GCM applies up to a maximum altitude of 1000 metres above sea level, with a 10 per cent reduction for each additional 1000 metres. So keep those stats in mind if you’re heading for Mount Kosciuszko.

The cargo bay, which offers 3.3 cubic metres of load volume (or 3.7 with passenger sear folded), has a floor length of 1800mm and a roomy 1229mm between the wheel arches. This means it can carry one 1160mm-square standard Aussie pallet, easily loaded with a forklift through the rear barn doors and held in place by six tie-down points. There’s also internal lighting, a 12-volt outlet and sturdy ladder-frame cargo barrier behind the driver. Nothing for the passenger, though.

Cabin storage options include two pockets and a combined cup/bottle holder in each door. There’s also a large lidded compartment and two open bins set into the dash-top, two circular storage slots in the centre display plus two smaller pockets below and beside the gearstick; the latter a slim-line 'holster' complete with USB port.

The single glovebox has two-tier storage, and there’s a full-width cabin shelf overhead. The centre console, which is a module that can be unlocked and removed if you want floor space between the seats, has a cup holder at the front, a big internal storage area with sliding lid in the centre and two cup/small bottle holders at the rear. There’s also lots of vacant space for additional storage under both seats.

It’s a bit of a shame the Navara doesn’t benefit from the changes Nissan has been making to its interior design and layout recently, because it leaves older Nissans in the dust, in terms of design and ergonomics.

But, the Mitsubishi Triton’s interior isn’t a bad one for the Navara to have inherited, because it just works. It’s uncomplicated and sensible, if a little boring.

There are physical buttons for shortcuts, and the tech is relatively straightforward, even if it does also carry the downside of Android Auto being wired-only. It adds to the somewhat dated feeling the Navara’s interior carries, but the physical space itself is rather sensible.

The Navara’s seats are comfortable, and as the driver it’s easy to find your own preferred position, with the electric adjustment in higher variants being an extra help there.

The driving ergonomics and visibility are also good, which lines up well with the Navara’s driving dynamics and makes it feel less like you’re pedalling a big dual-cab around.

Behind the driver, there’s not heaps in the way of amenity, but the addition of USB ports once you’re past the base SL is welcome for second-row passengers, and the space isn’t cramped by any means.

The Navara has a tub capable of easily fitting a Euro pallet, according to Nissan’s specs, but with its distance of 1135mm between wheel arches, it won’t fit an Aussie pallet. The tub is almost square, at 1555mm long and 1545mm wide, and 525mm tall. 

Plus there’s the 3500kg towing capacity and its payload ranging between 964kg for the Pro-4X or up to 1064kg in the base SL.

The new D27 generation Navara starts from $53,348, before on-road costs, so it’s already more expensive than the Triton it’s based on, but we’ll get into the main, somewhat oily reasons for that in a bit. 

The Navara’s available in four variants at launch, SL, ST, ST-X and Pro-4X. They’re all 4X4 dual-cabs, so it’s mainly the features for each trim level that make the difference when it comes to pricing.

The SL starts off with a lot of the basics covered. There are LED headlights and tail-lights, climate control, the same 8.0-inch multimedia touchscreen as the rest of the range and digital radio as well as Android Auto and Apple CarPlay.

Its aforementioned touchscreen is also a little larger than the one in the Triton it’s based on. Then there’s the 7.0-inch driver display screen which lives between the two physical dials.

At this point in the range the steering wheel is polyurethane and the floors aren’t carpeted, just covered with vinyl. It’s a work ute and it feels like one.

Things pick up slightly with the ST, which starts from $56,765, and gains alloy wheels, auto-folding mirrors, a leather-accented steering wheel and floor carpet, plus now side-steps and a sports bar. It also adds USB ports in the second row for charging, so it’s probably the minimum grade you’d want if you’re ever going to have kids in the back. Essentially, it gains a few things that make it feel a little more livable without getting too fancy.

The ST-X is a fair step up in price, it’s $63,177, but gets better suspension, 18-inch alloys, leather-accented and heated front seats and a power adjustable driver's seat, dual-zone climate and a wireless phone charger.

It also gains a centre limited-slip differential, drive modes more compatible with off-roading, different styling elements and push-button start, so you don’t need to use the physical key.

The top-of-the-range (until the Warrior arrives) is the $68,418 Pro-4X with more design changes, all-terrain tyres, a black sports bar and roof rails, contrast stitching and specific seats with Pro-4X styling. It’s the variant Nissan Australia expects to be the most popular, too. It also has the same diff and better suspension the ST-X gains.

The Euro 6-compliant 1.6-litre multi-point fuel-injected four-cylinder petrol engine is conspicuously rev-happy for a commercial vehicle, as evidenced by its tachometer which displays rpm increments all the way up to 7000rpm - with no redline.

The needle has to reach 6000rpm to access the engine’s relatively modest maximum power of 72kW (less than Kangoo/Caddy, which are both turbos), with peak torque of 152Nm (also less) at a relatively high 3500rpm. It also requires 95-octane fuel.

The five-speed manual gearbox has useful spread of ratios for both city/suburban delivery work and load hauling on the highway.

A 150kW/470Nm four-cylinder turbo-diesel engine lies under the bonnet, which falls a little short of some rivals, but isn’t glaringly weak.

Its power lines up with, for example, the Toyota HiLux, but torque falls short of its rival’s 500Nm. It’s the same story for the Ranger, though that ute slips a nose ahead with 4.0kW more than HiLux and Navara in its four-cylinder guise.

The Navara’s six-speed automatic transmission also sends that power and torque to all four wheels, though how exactly it gets there depends on the spec and whether you have a centre differential or not.

Our Berlingo achieved a combined figure of 7.2L/100km over a distance of 422km on a variety of roads and with different loads, including near-maximum GVM. Impressively, that was line-ball with the official combined figure of 7.1. With its 60-litre tank, you could expect a realistic driving range of 580-600km.

From the Navara’s 75L tank, a claimed 7.7L/100km is used on the combined (urban/extra-urban) cycle, though on the launch drive we saw the trip computer hovering around 9.0L/100km.

With a few hundred kilos in the tray, that jumped up to the low 11s.

Hypothetically, if you manage to get close to Nissan’s claimed consumption, you should be able to get more than 900km out of a single tank of diesel. Nissan’s claim isn’t too outrageous, either, considering the type of driving a car launch generally consists of isn’t normally conducive to favourable fuel consumption figures.

The first thing we noticed was the relatively low cargo-bay noise, combined with low wind and engine noise. The ride quality was firm but acceptable without a load, and the steering responsive and linear in weight, with a strong self-centering effect ensuring good directional stability. 

The slick-shifting manual gearshift was nice to use, with well-defined gates and a light clutch action. Braking response was strong, but four discs designed to cope with a 3250kg GCM could bite hard if you pressed too firmly without a load.

With maximum torque at 3500rpm and peak power at 6000rpm, the 1.6-litre non-turbo engine responded best around town when kept revving freely between those two numbers. Although torque started to fall away sharply below 1800rpm, a useful amount remained between 1800-3500rpm, as evidenced by 2750rpm at 100km/h and 3000rpm at 110km/h in top gear on the highway.

With 600kg in the cargo bay plus a 100kg driver, our 700kg payload was 150kg below GVM. Handling and ride quality with this load was excellent, particularly over large bumps and on heavily patched bitumen roads. Braking was also reassuringly strong and it continued to track straight in cross-winds at highway speeds.

The engine’s rev-happy nature was noticeable on our 2.0km, 13 per cent gradient set climb with this load, finding its sweet spot in second gear at 3750rpm - which it happily pulled all the way to the top. Engine braking on the way down was non-existent, but the powerful brakes easily covered this shortfall.

Now we get to the biggest reason you’d consider a Navara over the Triton it’s based on.

While the Navara benefits from having a relatively new platform underneath it - thanks Mitsubishi - it’s still a ladder-frame dual-cab ute so expectations weren’t exactly on the floor, but they also weren’t sky-high.

And sure, a lot of the details about the new Navara aren’t groundbreaking, nor is much of the way it drives - but the changes Premcar has made to the suspension in this ute are well worth the extra outlay.

What Premcar has done with the Navara, on what we would guess is a relatively constrained budget, is find the most cost-effective way to make the ute better to drive.

They went with upgraded dampers which have been tuned to balance control and comfort with the ute’s off-road ability.

The result? A very controlled front-end, more communicative steering and confidence on the road to drive over even rough surfaces without fear of being flung off the road. Ladder-frame utes don't normally feel so controlled over rough surfaces at high speeds.

It’s worth noting that while the SL and ST still benefit from the suspension upgrades, the ST-X and Pro-4X in particular are much better to drive than you’d expect from a dual-cab ute.

Some of the roads around Canberra are particularly rough, even close to town where the speeds are lower, but the Navara handled myriad surfaces and conditions on- and off-road, in the soaking wet and when it was bone-dry.

Aside from one particular section of the launch that may have just been a little unkind to the ‘stiffer’ sidewalls on the ST-X compared to the Pro-4X, the Navara’s behaviour was not only confidence-building, but allowed for a degree of fun not normally present in the class.

The steering feel left no guesswork necessary, and there’s not a huge on-centre dead-spot as is often the case in a dual-cab. Nice and direct without being too heavy.

The Navara’s weak point, which still gets a pass mark, is probably that its drivetrain now feels older than the ute in which it lives. The outputs are passable, and the transmission finds the correct place well enough, but in a world of 10-speed autos in Rangers or petrol plug-in hybrids, a bog-standard turbo-diesel with six gears has to be bang-on perfect to keep up. 

The Navara’s is adequate, but once you’re used to it, the drive experience is a step above most in the ute segment in terms of control, something that’s hard to come by in this segment.

It translates well to off-roading, where the ute’s front-end settles very quickly over ridges and undulating surfaces without the harshness of a too-stiff set of dampers.

Unsealed roads feel easily dispatched even at relatively high speeds, and with the right tyres (a la Pro-4X) the Navara is a seriously capable thing.

If you find yourself the owner of a D27 Navara and never leave the bitumen, you’re missing out.

The new Navara inherits the Triton’s maximum five-star ANCAP rating from testing in 2024. It scored notably well in Child Occupant protection, though its score for Safety Assist isn’t as high as some rivals.

Eight airbags mean the Navara’s got occupants cushioned in case of the worst, while the whole range has the same suite of safety tech, including a surround-view camera, forward collision warning and AEB, front- and rear-cross traffic alert, driver monitoring and traffic sign recognition, front and rear parking sensors and trailer sway control.

The Navara’s driver monitoring, however, suffers the same overzealousness as the Triton. Nissan didn’t reprogram any of the ADAS systems which means the car will regularly accuse you of being distracted if you’re not looking directly at the road ahead. Checking mirrors or a map in the centre screen will trigger this.

A three-year/100,000km warranty includes roadside assistance, plus there’s a five-year anti-corrosion warranty. Scheduled servicing is 12 months/20,000km, whichever occurs first. There is also fixed pricing for the first three scheduled services of $416 (12 months/20,000km), $777 (24 months/40,000km) and $416 (36 months/60,000km).

Nissan’s 10-year/300,000km warranty is fantastic but applies only if you service with Nissan. It’s five years with no kilometre limit otherwise. 

There’s five years' of flat-price servicing at $499 per visit, every 12-months or 15,000km, whichever comes first.

Roadside assist is also free for a decade if you service with Nissan, or a year otherwise.

Given there are around 180 Nissan dealers nationwide, finding one shouldn’t be a challenge.