LDV G10 vs Mazda BT-50

What's the difference?

The LDV G10 is a solid option for those buyers who just want a van that gets the job done. It was decent with weight on board, but is probably better suited to parcel carriers rather than pallet shifters.

Safety levels are the biggest concern, as it is falling behind in the class when it comes to active safety tech, and its weak crash test score could be enough to rule it out for some customers. 

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 more you see LDV G10 vans, the more regular they look. Familiarity breeds ignorance, I guess, but I still think the G10 looks smart. 

It isn’t quite as boxy as some, with its sleeker front-end styling and almost sedan-like tail-lights helping it stand out from the ‘box-on-wheels’ stigma. It gets 16-inch alloy wheels as standard, and has halogen headlights and misses out on daytime running lights.

But it still is a box on wheels, measuring 5168mm long (on a 3198mm wheelbase), 1980mm wide and 1928mm tall. That makes it a darn sight smaller than the new HiAce, which stepped up significantly in size, and about on par with a Renault Trafic SWB or Ford Transit Custom 300S SWB. 

The perceived build quality is mostly okay, though our test car had a few loose plastics on the outside and a seemingly mis-fit windshield rubber.

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.

Those dimensions translate to a cargo space of 5.2 cubic metres, with a load space spanning 2500mm long, 1590mm wide (1270mm between the arches) and 1270mm tall. That mightn’t be big enough for you, and that’s too bad - there is no high roof version, nor a long-wheelbase model; but you could get an LDV V80 if you really need to step up in size… but we wouldn’t suggest you do that.

The payload for this model is 1010kg, which is decent but not benchmark-setting. It has a gross vehicle mass of 3000kg, meaning a kerb weight of 1990kg. The gross combination mass depends on the model: the GCM for diesel models is 5000kg for a braked trailer, while petrol models have a GCM of 4750kg for a braked trailer (auto) and 4500kg (manual). All models have a GCM of 3750kg for unbraked trailers.

The petrol versions have 1093kg of payload, if you prefer that fuel type. Interestingly, the manual versions have leaf spring rear suspension, while the auto models have coil springs as part of a five-link suspension architecture.

The load area has a six floor-mounted and four wall-mounted tie-down hooks, and the floor is lined with a vinyl covering while up to half-height the inner walls are lined, too. There are four lights mounted on the walls, which is handy for after-hours work.

And every LDV G10 comes with dual sliding side doors (some brands charge thousands more for this convenience), while the back door is a tailgate as standard, with the option of barn doors for diesel models.

For those who need to fork loads in, the barn doors are a no brainer, because the side door apertures (at 820mm wide) aren’t broad enough to load in using a lift. The tailgate also makes it very difficult to load weight in, as we found on test, as our mates at Crown Lifts had to use long tines to fork in our 750kg ballast.

When it comes to creature comforts up front, there is a pair of low-mounted pop-out cupholders, and an open storage area between the seats. There isn’t much covered storage, so if you often carry valuables, you may need to keep that in mind. 

The seats are comfortable and offer good adjustment, and they’ve been changed since the diesel auto model launched. They’re no longer a cheap-feeling fabric, but rather a faux-leather accented, mesh-lined set of seats, and both have armrests. Nice.

The presentation is okay, but the ergonomics could be better. The touchscreen is mounted down lower than most, and means you may need to take your eyes away from the road because the controls are down even lower. And the USB? Near the floor.

That screen is still a 7.0-inch display, but now has the same software system as the newer models in the LDV range. That means a nice crisp colourful display with the added advantage of Apple CarPlay… if you can get it to work. We had a few issues when reconnecting a phone without re-starting the car. 

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.

Under the bonnet of the diesel G10 is a 1.9-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel with 106kW of power and 350Nm of torque. There’s the choice of a six-speed manual or six-speed automatic, and the G10 is rear-wheel drive. It has a diesel particulate filter, but not stop-start or AdBlue.

Prefer petrol? There’s a 2.4-litre five-speed manual model (105kW/200Nm) or a 2.0-litre turbocharged six-speed auto (165kW/330Nm). Those models are cheaper - $25,990 for the manual for ABN holders, while the turbo-petrol auto is $30,990 d/a. 

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 combined cycle fuel use claim for the LDV G10 diesel auto is 8.6 litres per 100 kilometres. The manual version uses 8.3L/100km according to the brand.

On test we saw a fuel use return of 9.7L/100km at the pump, across a mix of urban, highway and freeway driving, with and without a load. 

Petrol models use a claimed 11.5L (manual) and 11.7L (auto) per hundred.

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.

You probably wouldn’t choose an LDV G10 as a daily driver if you didn’t intend to use the cargo zone at least 80 per cent of the time.

But if - for whatever reason - you really want to use a van like this on a day-to-day basis, you won’t hate it. 

The G10 drives pretty nicely for this type of vehicle. It isn’t as bouncy when unladen as some of the other vans out there, with the suspension proving very quick to settle and mostly very compliant across mixed surfaces. 

The steering wheel can jostle a bit over sharp edges, but it steers well, with decent (not too heavy) weighting and predictable response at all speeds. 

Without weight on board the engine feels reasonably urgent in its response, which is a bit of a surprise because it’s not a powerhouse based on its outputs. It revs smoothly and pulls with good strength, with little turbo lag to contend with. While it is a bit of a grumbly engine at times, the response is better than adequate.

Plus the transmission is well sorted, with smooth shifts that are predictable.

The braking response is definitely better without weight on board, with a decent progression to the pedal and decent bite when you press hard on the anchors.

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.

LDV isn’t close to the leaders in the segment for ownership, with a behind-the-times three-year/100,000km warranty (admittedly with the same cover for roadside assist), and no capped price servicing plan. 

Service intervals are every 12 months/10,000km, which is short, and you need to get an initial service done at 5000km, too. 

If you’re worried about long-term longevity, you can check out our LDV G10 problems page.

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.