Gac Aion Ut vs Mazda BT-50

What's the difference?

The Aion UT is a cleverly-specified little hatchback and a great entry-point into electric motoring. The software needs a bit of work from a usability perspective, plus the spongy ride and cutesy styling might not be for everyone. 

However, with strong points including driving range, cabin space and value, there’s even a pitch for it in some cases to be an only car compared to most of its price rivals, which are more likely to be thought of as a second car runabout in a two-car garage.

The pick of the range is definitely the entry-level Premium. It comes in at a headline-grabbing price with specs to blow rivals out of the water, while only missing out on a few luxuries.

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

GAC tells us the UT hatch was designed in Milan, Italy, but it also isn’t ashamed of the Chinese influence on its overall appearance, like the ultra-short bonnet and Chinese city-car style face.

Along the side it has a modern, aerodynamic profile, and the ultra-short overhangs and long wheelbase maximise the amount of room for batteries under the floor and interior space.

The rear feels a lot like a modern Mini, with its bulbous tailgate and protruding light clusters, spiced up with a sporty spoiler piece jutting out.

It’s not a bad looking thing and it’s available in an array of fun colours.

On the inside it seems to follow the established rule-book of Chinese automakers, with plush trims, big screens with minimal physical buttons as well as a contemporary two-spoke steering wheel.

There’s a trendy floating console which hosts the cupholders and wireless charger on the Luxury grade, and an array of interesting patterns and textures through the doors and dash which you wouldn’t have once seen on a car at this price-point.

However, it is worth noting that while the seats are quite nice, and the steering wheel is a stand-out touchpoint, the trims on the doors and across the dash-top are hard plastics, more so than some of this car’s rivals.

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.

In terms of interior space, the Aion UT stands out with its spacious cabin. At 182cm tall, I am easily able to find a comfortable seating position, and visibility out the front sides and rear, while not as good as some small SUVs, isn’t bad.

There’s lots of headroom, and while I mentioned the hard plastic door cards before, there’s enough padding everywhere your elbows are going to touch to make it feel a bit nicer than perhaps it is.

The main drawback of this car for me is the lack of tactile buttons and the frustrating software.

The main screen isn’t particularly well utilised, being taken up by either a background or the navigation map, with an array of typically small shortcuts across the bottom for important features like the climate control or settings menus.

You can pre-set a few information panels which sit above the shortcut bar as in many rival cars and there’s also a shortcut tray which can be hosted on the driver’s side and configured with a variety of shortcuts and settings.

It’s just a bit clumsy to use, and the array of poorly-labelled settings menus for things like active safety equipment feel needlessly complicated.

I’d love to see this car with physical controls for climate and multimedia to make it easier to live with.

Up front the storage is decent. There are big pockets in the doors and a large storage tray between the driver and front passenger thanks to a flat floor. There’s also a slightly weird storage box under the touchscreen which has a net inside, good for more delicate objects you don’t want flying around the cabin.

On the floating console there are two cupholders which are a bit too shallow for my liking, and the wireless charger feels almost pointless because its made of a hard plastic, so your phone just slides right off in the corners. The cabled outlets are hidden beneath which allows for tidy cable management and the centre armrest console box is a healthy size.

The rear seat is comparatively basic, although touches on the key points. Its main advantage is how generous the space is. My frame was able to fit behind my own driving position with heaps of room for my knees, and just enough room for my head despite the dip in the roof for the sunroof shade in the Luxury-grade car we tested. There may be even more headroom in the base car.

The flat floor makes the space useful even for three across in a pinch and there’s a drop-down armrest with (again, shallow) cupholders. There are pockets on the back of both front seats and smallish pockets in each door. The array of soft trims continues, too, and the back of the centre console features a partially adjustable air vent. Luxury spec cars get a single USB rear power outlet.

As with many Chinese cars in this segment, the generous rear seat space comes at a cost to the boot. It measures just 321 litres, which is slightly smaller than its main opponents in this category, although larger than some hatchbacks like the Toyota Corolla, for example.

It has its advantages, though. The floor is two-tiered, and can offer a flat load area with the rear seats folded down, or a deeper boot in its lower position. Underneath there’s a cutaway good for charging equipment and the tyre repair kit (sorry, no spare wheel in here).

Unlike some EVs, the Aion UT doesn’t get a frunk (front boot) for additional storage.

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.

The Aion UT has a front-mounted electric motor producing 150kW/210Nm. That’s plenty punchy for any hatchback at this price, and I like the way the brand hasn’t messed around with a sub-100kW motor in the base variant to push prospects towards the top-spec car.

It’s more powerful than all of its closest rivals and at the time of writing you’ll have to spend four to six thousand dollars more to get into something equivalent from BYD, Chery, Jaecoo, Leapmotor or MG.

It even has a claimed 0-100km/h sprint time as low as 7.3 seconds.

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.

The Aion UT has a 60kWh lithium-iron phosphate (LFP) battery pack, which grants it a WLTP-certified 430km of driving range.

That’s more than its closest rivals, like the entry-level Ora Standard Range (310km), BYD Dolphin Essential (410km) or BYD Atto 2 (345km).

Claimed efficiency is 16.4kWh/100km and the car I tested returned a consumption of 14.0kWh/100km over a 130km route of mixed conditions, which isn’t bad at all.

Charging speeds are less impressive, but realistically appropriate for the relatively small battery. The peak DC charging capacity of 87kW means a charge time which the brand quotes at 24 minutes, but this is from 30-80 per cent. Expect closer to 40 minutes for a 10-80 per cent charge.

AC charging is decent, at 11kW. This should have you charging from 10-80 per cent between four and five hours.

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.

The drive experience can be where a lot of Chinese cars fall down but I walked away less frustrated by the Aion UT.

That’s not to say it will behave as you might expect a low-slung hatchback to. The suspension, for example, is extremely soft as it maintains its original Chinese-market state-of-tune.

This makes the car waft over imperfections on city roads. And in that sense it offers supreme ride comfort in the scenarios it was designed for. However, at the extremes, like some speed bumps, or particularly deep pot holes there can be a surprisingly violent re-bound sending a thud through the cabin.

The other trade-off for soft suspension is less body control. I was surprised to find that the Aion UT holds it together mostly well on a flat country B-road, but when undulations and big dips introduce themselves, the soft suspension can be too slow to react, making the car lose confidence in higher-speed open road scenarios we’re more used to in Australia.

The steering, like many electric cars in this category, is relatively heavily electrically assisted. This makes it light and easy to adjust at low speeds for easy park and maneuverability in the confines of a city. It loses a little bit of road-feel at higher speeds but the Aion UT’s steering is far from the least connected I’ve experienced recently.

One thing it can’t be criticised for is a lack of power. With 150kW instantaneously available the Aion UT has some serious poke and while the ChaoYang tyre package is tuned more for efficiency than grip, it’s again not one of the worst I’ve driven with.

One thing which helps the whole experience along is this car’s hatchback layout. With the weight of the battery low and squat and the wheels all the way out to the edges of the frame, the Aion UT inherently handles decently compared to an electric crossover or small SUV.

Like all Chinese cars, the UT has a host of occasionally frustrating driver aids, which you can read about in the Safety section below. While I was inclined to turn some of the features off after testing them, the alerts are relatively quiet and non-invasive.

Is the UT any good to drive? It’s not bad for the segment, I was largely pleased with how it handled and the power on offer, and while it still has its annoyances, they’re not big deal-breakers. 

The MG4 rear-drive is a better allrounder, while the GWM Ora isn’t as good. I’d say it’s on par with the BYD Dolphin, but they excel in different areas. The Dolphin's a bit sharper in terms of handling but the Aion UT is more comfortable.

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.

GAC covers this electric hatch with an eight-year and unlimited kilometre warranty, while the brand’s “magazine battery 2.0” is covered by a separate eight-year and 200,000km warranty. Five years of roadside assistance is included.

The Aion UT needs to be serviced once a year or 15,000km. The service price schedule extends all the way out to 240,000km with yearly visits costing between $199 and $640 but for the life of the warranty the average yearly cost comes in at $352.

There are currently 19 GAC dealers in Australia, confined mainly to Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with a single store in Perth and an outlier in Cairns. No representation yet in Tassie, Canberra, the Northern Territory or SA.

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.