Ford Ranger vs Mazda BT-50

What's the difference?

I can definitely see the pitch for the Ranger Super Duty. For fleets, having a vehicle with more modern safety, comfort, and thoughtful technologies is compelling when the alternative is an old Toyota 70 Series or a hardly-suitable-for-Aussie-roads full-size American pick-up.

It is beefed up for whatever the trails can throw at it, and more than work-ready without the need for months of conversion work, but for private buyers, do you really need this? For some niche towing and off-road applications it’s an unbeatable factory offering, but I’d argue it’s expensive overkill for most.

Still, Ford’s customer-centric approach is commendable. It will be interesting to see if it can simply create a 4.5T GVM sub-segment for the dual-cab market in the same way Raptor did for performance variants.

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

Key to the success of the BT-50 XS will be acceptance by fleet buyers. The vehicle, however, seems to be pretty well considered as far as that goes, although as with any stripped-down model, there are features that will be missed. Things like the manual air-conditioning probably won’t make much difference, but the lack of a tyre pressure monitoring system is a bigger issue for a working vehicle. Performance from the smaller engine is still well within acceptable parameters, but we reckon any buyer considering using much of the 3500kg touring capacity would be better off with the 3.0-litre engine offered in the rest of the BT-50 range.

The Mazda is not the best riding of its ilk, and there are competitors with bigger cabins, although, notably, at this point on the pricing ladder, these are often from China rather than Thailand where the Mazda is built. Ultimately it will come down to whether the smaller engine and reduced performance is an issue and also whether the money saved over the bigger-engined BT-50 is enough to justify that and the loss of some creature comforts. But since fleet managers are notoriously hard-nosed about this stuff, there’s a good chance to BT-50 XS will find a market.

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

The Super Duty dwarfs a standard Ranger on the road. The track is as wide as a Raptor, while the height has increased significantly. It looks almost as though someone dropped a Ranger in Photoshop and told it to increase everything by 15 per cent.

The chunky grille, re-designed blocky fenders to accommodate the extra width, intentionally squared-off wheel arches, and beefed-up ride height with correspondingly larger wheels make the Super Duty imposing on the road.

Like its relatives overseas, the Super Duty logo is three-dimensionally imprinted on the bonnet, and the factory tray being available in a range of finishes (steel, matt black, or colour matching) either adds to the ruggedness or street appeal depending on what the buyer is after.

All of this is not just to make the car look tough, but also to accommodate the depth of changes underneath, because the Super Duty is so fundamentally different from a standard Ranger it’s almost an entirely new vehicle.

Even things as core as the chassis rails have been up-gauged significantly to handle this car’s additional capabilities. Ford has even delved into its Detroit parts catalogue to upgrade almost everything else underneath. It features a front differential from the Bronco Raptor, eight-stud wheel hubs from the F-250, and an upgraded version of the rear axle assembly from a Transit van, although with a unique and up-sized rear differential.

There is also a new transfer case, 130-litre fuel tank, and steel underbody protection which can pivot the entire weight of the vehicle.

Inside looks and feels like a regular Ranger. As mentioned, it comes with all the multimedia amenities and some of the luxuries like soft-touch finishes for anywhere your elbows are going to rest, although the abundance of hard plastics are notable.

Targeting tradies and fleet customers has meant Mazda has embraced the concept of factory accessories. Right now, there are options for tougher front bumpers, bull-bars, snorkels, drop-side trays, an awning, wheel-arch flares (for bigger, aftermarket wheel and tyre packages) driving lights, roof racks, canopies, tub-drawer systems and even a dual battery set-up. All these factory options carry the full Mazda warranty.

But Mazda has gone even further with accessory packs aimed directly at different fleet markets. For instance, there’s the Mine-Spec Pack which incorporates a park-brake alarm, high-mounted brake lights, a reversing buzzer, work-lights, LED rear lighting and pre-wired switches for auxiliary and beacon lighting.

Externally, Mazda's design brief for the BT-50 has clearly been to not frighten the horses. But it's better than that, because it has actually emerged as one of the better looking utes out there. In XS trim, even the steel wheels add a no-nonsense flavour to the overall effect. And where some of the competition appear to be trying very hard to ape the full-sized US-made pick-ups, the Mazda is its own thing.

Inside, the smaller info screens and simple layout in basic black tell the budget story. At the same time, there's a lot to like in terms of the clear, simple analogue gauges and the no-fuss controls including the conventional T-bar, park-brake and ignition key. There's a look and feel that also suggests this is a ute that should be able to take a few knocks in the course of earning a living.

Practicality is what the Super Duty is all about, and it starts with the capacities. As already mentioned, this means a 4500kg GVM, which allows a payload of up to 1982kg (for the lightest single-cab variant), and up to 4500kg of towing capacity, and a total GCM of up to 8000kg.

The factory Cab Chassis tray was also part of the design from the beginning, and has dimensions to make the most of the footprint, measuring in at 2580mm x 1950mm for the Single Cab, 2130mm x 1950mm for the Super Cab, and 1830mm x 1950mm for the double cab.

The off-road dimensions are also strong, with an approach angle of 36.3 degrees, a departure angle of 29.3 degrees, and a breakover angle of 26.9 degrees (for the most capable Single Cab variant). Even the ground clearance is increased to between 295 and 299mm - larger in every direction over the standard model.

Wading depth is 850mm and a fully sealed Safari Snorkel comes standard on every body style. Plus, there are heavy-duty recovery hooks wherever you need them if you do end up getting stuck. The stock tyre is an all-terrain General Grabber, so most buyers won’t have to drive straight to a tyre shop either.

The choice of three body styles is excellent from the factory. One suited to every niche, while there are other commendable additions like the pre-drilled hard points in the dash for the fitment of equipment with a factory finish, as well as modern amenities like a full-size power outlet on the back of the centre console in every body style.

Plus, Ford has already reached out to the aftermarket so a range of accessories for both recreational buyers and its target fleet audience are already catered for at launch.

Perhaps the only detractor from what is otherwise a car that seems to cater to every need is the lack of a de-specified interior. With such tough intentions, I can see scenarios where the 12-inch touchscreen could be a liability, and cloth seats could easily get destroyed where a hard wearing vinyl trim isn’t an option.

With a choice of cab-chassis of pick-up tub, not to mention the option of a single or dual-cab body in cab-chassis form, the XS allows for a fair bit of creativity in how it’s configured. The cab-chassis, for instance, will accept a conventional drop-side alloy tray or any number of service body configurations right up to camper bodies.

The stock tub on the pick-up version gets a drop-in liner but there’s no power outlet or light that some of the competition offer. The tie-down points are also a bit disappointing with two lower points in the rear of the tub and a pair of higher points in the front. Experience tells us that high-mounted tie-down points are vastly less practical than anchor points mounted close to the cargo floor.

The move to the larger engine has, however, increased the Mazda’s towing ability. From the previous version’s 3000kg towing limit, the new 2.2 can now legally tow 3500kg (with a braked trailer and approved tow-hitch). Payloads vary according to specification, but range from about 1000kg right up to 1379kg for the XS singe-cab-chassis.

The factory-option drop-side tray carries it’s load up high, but offers a flat floor with no wheel-arch intrusions. The standard tub is not as large in any direction, but does have a damped tailgate for safety (you can’t drop it) and convenience (the gas struts help raise it).

In the cabin, you get USB charging ports (two in the front, one in the rear seat) and there are central air-vents for the rear seat of dual-cab models. The dual-cab also has an under-seat storage area, two gloveboxes and a 60/40 split fold rear bench. The doors feature bottle holders and there’s a flip-down glasses compartment in the roof lining.

While the front seats are comfy enough for bigger drivers, the rear seat also goes against dual-cab tradition a little by having plenty of room in every direction, as well as a rational seat-back angle.

While the XS remains the entry-level BT-50 variant, you once again have the choice of two or four-wheel drive, with price-tags to match. So, starting at the start, the 4x2 XS single-cab cab-chassis now kicks off at $37,900 before on-road costs with the dual-cab pick-up (styleside) 4x2 variant at $46,710.

Move up to all-wheel drive and there’s no single-cab option. Instead, things start with the dual-cab cab-chassis 4x4 at $53,120 and the dual-cab pick-up at $54,720.

Aside from the bigger engine and stronger performance, you now get an eight-speed transmission and there’s fuel-saving stop-start tech that was once only available on higher-spec BT-50s.

Other additions for the XS include LED headlights, adaptive cruise control, wireless connectivity for both Apple Car Play and Android Auto, a reversing camera and an 8.0-inch touchscreen. There’s also digital radio and hill-descent control.

But the XS’ place at the bottom of the BT-50 ladder is confirmed with the cloth-trimmed interior, vinyl flooring and plain steel wheels for all but the dual-cab pick-up 4X4 variant which gets alloy wheels.

Which is all fine and gives the Mazda something of a pointy stick with which to poke at the incoming competitors (mainly) from China, but where does that place the XS relative to the 3.0-litre BT-50? Well, if you take the XT variant with the 3.0L engine and the same body and driveline layout, the XS comes in at just $2500 less. That’s not a huge saving either as an outright number or in terms of the monthly lease repayments.

Part of that is because Mazda has also hiked prices across the BT-50 range in tandem with announcing the new XS. Which means that spec-for-spec 1.9 versus 2.2-litre XS is now $1500 more than it was. But even if Mazda had held prices on the XS variants, would $4000 be enough of a difference? For reference, the original XS sliced $3000 off the 3.0L price when it was launched back in late 2021.

There are areas where you can see where Mazda has pulled a few dollars out of the vehicle, starting inside with the small centre touchscreen, the truly tiny central dash-cluster screen, and the cloth trim. There’s also a bit of hard plastic in evidence and the air-conditioning lacks the set-and-forget function of climate control systems. The keyless entry and start has gone and the XS is started with an old fashioned ignition key. The XS specification also loses the front and rear parking sensors and the tyre-pressure monitoring system.

You might also imagine the drum rear brakes are another giveaway but, in fact, they’re standard across the whole BT-50 line-up.

Again, things don’t look too different from a regular Ranger under the bonnet, with the Super Duty maintaining the same 3.0-litre V6 turbo-diesel engine and 10-speed automatic transmission, but with some tweaks.

It has less power, producing 154kW (30kW less than the standard V6 Ranger), but maintaining the same 600Nm of torque, and it also has upgraded cooling to support load-lugging, with the front fan upgraded from 800W to 1000W.

The inverter is also 400W to support additional electrics, and mechanically there is a new transfer case, new front and rear differentials, upgraded CV shafts and main drive shaft, as well as an 18-inch brake package.

For emissions compliance, the Super Duty is equipped with both a DPF (diesel particulate filter) and AdBlue. But being conscious of the needs of many heavy-duty users, the brand has added a manual override for the DPF cycle so it doesn’t slow the vehicle down when full power is needed.

The same 4x4 auto system is employed, allowing automatic all-wheel drive to be applied in the standard driving mode. The differentials can be independently locked via the off-road menu in the touchscreen.

The tuning of this engine does make a tangible difference to the drive experience on the road, and while four cylinders are more prolific in the dual-cab space, the 3.0-litre V6 does what it can to bridge the gap between the more standard crop of turbo diesels and bigger V8s in American full-sizers.

The new engine capacity of 2.2 litres is up from the 1.9 of the previous XS version but still well short of the 3.0 litres of the more expensive BT-50 versions. And the specifications are pretty much exactly what you’d expect with the new 2.2 just about splitting the difference between the old 1.9 and the 3.0.

In this case, that equates to 120kW of power and 400Nm of torque, while the 1.9 was good for 110kW and 350Nm, and the 3.0 sports 140kW and 450Nm. So, yep, somewhere right about the middle. And that makes sense given the new 2.2 uses the basic mechanical architecture of the 1.9.

But the switch up to the new engine brings one very important change and that’s the adoption of an eight-speed automatic to replace the six-speed unit fitted to the previous XS and the other BT-50s. That has an obvious potential benefit for drivability, but also for fuel economy.

Mazda has also added stop-start tech to the XS in the name of efficiency. But, as we’ve found many times before, the fuel economy benefits seem restricted to the official test results rather than the real world where this technology serves to annoy many drivers more than anything else.

If you opt or the four-wheel-drive variants, you’ll get a rear diff lock but you miss out on an on-road 4x4 setting. Considering the 2.2-litre’s newfound towing capacity (the full 3500kg of the competition), that lack of a 4x4 Auto setting is a shame, but not an unexpected one at this price-point.

As a vehicle that slips into the category above the standard crop of dual-cabs, the Super Duty doesn’t wear an official fuel consumption number.

The story won’t be great. Anecdotally, as we were hopping in and out of several vehicles on this launch test, the computers were all showing over 12L/100km.

To be fair, we spent hours off-roading, towing, and driving in mixed countryside conditions, so hardly merciful, but we were also mostly unladen for the majority of the driving.

With a 130L fuel tank though, the Super Duty should still have plenty of driving range.

While one of the expected benefits of the 2.2-litre engine compared with the three-litre unit is a reduction in fuel consumption, the new 2.2 engine goes one big step further by actually being more frugal than the 1.9-litre engine it replaces. Well, in terms of the official government test, anyway.

The single cab-chassis model in new 2.2-litre, two-wheel-drive form posted a combined (urban-highway) fuel number of a creditable 6.9 litres per 100km. Compared with the mechanically similar 1.9 single cab-chassis, that’s a saving of 0.1 litres per kilometre, and a corresponding drop in tailpipe carbon emissions of 1 gram per kilometre.

To be honest, this small improvement is probably largely due to the stop-start system now fitted, which many drivers will turn off at the first opportunity. Even so, the new eight-speed transmission must also be playing a part, so let’s call the old and new engines line-ball in the real world.

The rest of the XS line-up scored official figures of 6.3 litres per 100km for the double-cab pick-up 4x2, 7.1 litres for the double cab-chassis 4x4 and 6.6 litres per 100km for the dual-cab pick-up 4x4.

With the BT-50’s standard 76-litre fuel tank, the theoretical range is more than 1000km. In reality, that’s going to be closer to 800km.

The BT-50 engines do not require AdBlue additive to reduce exhaust emissions.

A lot of the experience of driving the Super Duty is familiar to the rest of the Ranger line-up. It feels comfortable and refined from behind the wheel, but certainly a size-up from its siblings.

For those who have driven any recent Ranger, this will be very good news. There’s not much about this vehicle that feels properly clattery like some light truck alternatives, and if you’ve driven a Raptor before, the pumped-up width and height will be familiar.

The brand has even managed to maintain an excellent steering tune which balances weight and feel, despite the differences to the hardware underneath. Even the ride quality, something Ranger is so well known for, has carried across to this model, despite significantly beefed-up components.

There is a degree of ladder-chassis jiggle to it, and if you throw some really rough terrain at it, the Super Duty will have the odd harsh moment, but on the whole it’s impressive what Ford has managed to do with such a significantly altered ute.

Over a long day of driving in harsh conditions, the seat quality proved to be comfortable, while ergonomics in the cabin are fairly robust, with a good driving position, physical dials for the climate unit, and easy manual adjustability.

The tweaked V6 engine is an interesting story. Unladen, off-the-road, and at commuter speeds it feels similar to the standard version, but things change when you throw different stress factors at it.

Stomping on the accelerator, for example, elicits a dulled response compared to the relatively athletic performance of the standard engine, with the 0-100km/h sprint (for all the good that will do the commercial audience) significantly impacted. We recorded a (not very scientific) 14.1 seconds.

When a lot is asked of it, either for overtaking scenarios or when laden, the engine creates a fair bit of noise and doesn’t seem to be in much of a hurry to go anywhere (even chugging up a hill at 60km/h with six tonnes combined across tray and trailer). But it’s the consistency and the throughput of the torque that's been focused on for this re-tune, which Ford says should keep the engine capable of doing these sorts of tasks all day.

The transmission isn't too busy or annoying, smoothly shifting through gears.

The Super Duty made light work of the off-road component of our test drive, making the real-world conditions feel easy, and the way it handled the more theoretically challenging staged tests was impressive, too. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen such articulation ability from a leaf-sprung rear suspension set-up, while the clearance angles also remained impressive.

Levels of grip on offer are also impressive from the stock tyre, which importantly also offers a hefty amount of sidewall for the more hairy stuff, and the traction systems doesn't seem to miss a beat.

Safety systems are tame on the country roads we took it on, barely skipping a beat, and are thankfully not at all annoying.

It is big though, so I can imagine parking in a city might not be easy (it’s already hard enough in a Raptor), so again, it’s worth asking if you need this kind of capability before you pull the trigger as a private buyer.

Striking the right balance between ride comfort and load-lugging capacity has always been the big trick with utes in general. The fact is, there’s probably no ideal setting, especially considering the range of payloads a ute can be expected to carry on any particular day. In the BT-50’s case, Mazda has opted to go for a stiffer suspension tune. That means it can technically tow and haul with the best of them, but it also dictates that ride quality is far from what you’d call plush, even in this market segment.

The ute handles bumps best when the undulations don’t come too hot and fast. But strike a patch of high-frequency lumps and bumps and the suspension, particularly at the rear, starts to pogo about with a corresponding decline in ride control. The steering, too, seems to lack a little feel and is relatively slow-geared (although that has its benefits off-road).

The engine certainly does the job in isolation, but it’s likely to struggle a little with the full three-and-a-half tonnes on the hitch. It’s pretty noisy, too, and definitely sounds like a diesel, unlike some modern diesel designs that are more refined. There’s also a sense that Mazda has ditched some of the sound deadening of other BT-50 models, as the engine is certainly heard and felt. The optional snorkel moves the induction noise right into the driver’s window when it’s open, too.

But the new eight-speed automatic transmission is a beauty. Upshifts are crisp and smooth and even the downshifts as you approach a full stop are measured and calibrated to never intrude. And it’s nice to see a conventional T-bar shifter with no separate park button or non-intuitive movements required.

We didn’t get a chance to try the BT-50’s off-road chops, but past experience tells us that the Mazda will be pretty good. As with many four-wheel-drive utes, the limiting factor will be the standard tyres fitted at the factory.

While alloy wheels and carpets on the floor might be negotiable on a vehicle like this, a basic level of safety gear is not. So, the XS gets front, knee and side-curtain airbags, as well as givens such as anti-lock brakes and stability control.

But it doesn’t stop there with the BT-50 XS also fitted with the bulk of the current driver aids. Those include blind-spot monitoring, lane keeping assistance, lane-departure warning, rear cross-traffic alert and the reverse camera system. There’s also autonomous emergency braking which can also identify pedestrians and cyclists.

You also get Mazda’s own take on the controversial driver-attention monitor which many ute makers simply haven’t managed to get right in terms of the system’s calibration and how aggressively it acts. The BT-50’s is one of the less intrusive ones.

What’s missing? On a vehicle designed to tow big loads, a tyre pressure monitoring system is a great addition, but not one you’ll get on a BT-50 at this price. We’d also like to see an on-road 4WD setting which would allow the use of all-wheel drive when, say, towing on a bitumen road. More expensive competitors have this, but the Mazda is hardly alone in not offering this tech at this entry-level price.

The XS variant picks up the five-star ANCAP safety rating already awarded to the rest of the BT-50 line-up.

Ford offers the same five-year and unlimited kilometre warranty as the rest of its range, and servicing, which is required once every 12 months or 15,000km, is capped price.

It costs $469 per visit for the first five years, which is more expensive than the standard Ranger ($379 per visit for four years, then $430 for the fifth), but it’s still not outrageously expensive (and not priced much differently from a HiLux when you consider that model's six-monthly service visits).

Mazda’s standard five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty applies to the BT-50 range, and includes the first five years of roadside assistance, too.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever comes first. Capped-price servicing is available with the first five years of servicing costing $2188 on 4x2 versions and $2302 for 4x4 variants.

It’s worth mentioning that the BT-50’s new engine is Euro 5 compliant but doesn’t require AdBlue, reducing running costs.