What's the difference?
Kia expects its all-new Tasman to be a key player in Australia’s highly competitive ute segment. And to its credit, the Korean manufacturer has created its contender from scratch, rather than taking the easier platform-sharing route favoured by some rivals.
However, judging by feedback from numerous locals during our test, the jury is out on whether Aussies will warm 'en masse' to its bold styling and confronting appearance, which tends to distract from the capable vehicle beneath.
So, given our tradie focus, we recently spent a week in the lowest-priced entry point for Tasman dual-cab ute ownership, to see how it measures up as a tool-of-trade for tradies, farmers or fleets wanting a back-to-basics workhorse.
Once regarded as rather an agricultural ute offering, Isuzu’s D-Max has become a well-established, long-time favourite of families, weekend warriors and off-road tourers.
The 3.0-litre D-Max has gained a strong following through the years but versions with the newer 2.2-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel engine are marketed as better on fuel. However there’s a substantial trade-off in terms of power and torque against the 3.0-litre (120kW and 400Nm versus 140kW and 450Nm).
The X-Rider, a mid-spec variant, is available with either engine, so how does the 2.2-litre-equipped D-Max perform as a daily driver and, more importantly, off-roader?
Read on.
Ute buyers prepared to look beyond the Tasman’s polarising appearance will discover a competent all-rounder. It has its faults like any ute but boasts high standards of engineering, build quality, interior design and performance that make it a worthy new competitor in this space.
The D-Max X-Rider has adequate appeal as a daily driver – it’s functional and comfortable – and it’s also working off a proven 4WD platform.
This mid-spec ute lacks the polish of higher-grade D-Max grades, but it may still entice those ute fans who want a workhorse with a tractable engine and don’t care at all about frippery.
Does that 2.2-litre engine add anything substantial to the package? No, and the potential fuel savings it represents don’t seem so likely as the 3.0-litre doesn’t use a lot more fuel than the 2.2-litre D-Max anyway – and the 3.0-litre version only costs another $2000 or so to buy.
The 3.0-litre D-Max remains the better option because while the 2.2L is effective off-road, it’s only reasonable in general day-to-day driving, as it lacks grunt and has to work that much harder and is that much noisier under load than the 3.0-litre in most driving scenarios, including 4WDing.