Isuzu MU-X vs Mazda BT-50

What's the difference?

Isuzu’s 3.0-litre MU-X has attracted plenty of fans over the years – and for good reason: it’s a seven-seat 4WD wagon packed with features, driver-assist tech and it has a decent 4WD set-up including a recalibrated rough terrain mode.

But the Japanese brand's 1.9-litre experiment has now officially ended – it’s a Gary-goner. So, for this test I’m driving its replacement: the 2.2L MU-X. This 4WD wagon has a, you guessed it, 2.2-litre engine – offering better claimed fuel consumption than the 3.0L, as well as an eight-speed automatic transmission and idle stop-start technology. And this MU-X has the same 3.5 tonne towing capacity as the 3.0-litre version, that’s 500kg more than the outgoing 1.9L MU-X.

So, how does this new 2.2L MU-X perform off-road? And does it make more sense as an adventure wagon than its 3.0L stablemate?

Read on.

Traditionally, offering a smaller engine in a particular make or model has been a manufacturer’s way of stripping a few dollars out of the price-tag. In the case of the ute market, that’s more often than not an attempt to rope price-sensitive fleet customers into the family. Not to mention responding to the cut-throat pricing of some of the Chinese newcomers.

A handful of years ago, we saw Mazda do just that with a 1.9-litre turbo-diesel variant for its BT-50 range to give us the XS, entry-level trim specification. But it seems Mazda has had a bit of a rethink about that strategy (in line with Isuzu’s plans, given the BT-50 and D-Max share their major structures and drivelines) and has now upgraded the small-engine variant of the BT-50 with a new engine and the return of the 4X4 option (which was dropped after about 12 months in the previous XS model due to lack of demand).

But perhaps most importantly, the engine in this base-spec BT-50 has now grown from the original 1.9 litres to 2.2 litres. As a result, there’s more torque, more power and an extra couple of gears in the transmission. And with the option of four-wheel drive again, the new XS BT-50 might just get a look in where the previous XS didn’t.

In the end, of course, the XS closes the gap to the other BT-50s in the line-up, perhaps muddying further the question of whether you need to stump up for the full 3.0 litres in the other BT-50s, or take an enough-is-enough stance and save some coin.