Mazda 3 vs Mazda BT-50

What's the difference?

Given how effortlessly it traverses the mainstream and premium small car classes, the Mazda 3 might be the best value small car on the planet.

With racy styling, sports car handling, classy interior presentation and impressive, intelligent efficiency, there’s plenty to sink your teeth into here.

Poor rear vision, a dark back-seat area and smallish boot aside, it doesn’t have any glaring faults.

In a world overrun with SUVs, props to Mazda for evolving the small car so brilliantly to mask a half-decade of existence. Continuous improvements have made the 2024 G25 Evolve SP Vision an essential small car shortlist proposition, regardless of price.

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.

How is it that the current Mazda 3 is already five years old? This hatchback is still stunning, the sort of car you look back at when walking away.

The shape is sleek and almost coupe-like, with a shark-like nose, cab-backward-style long bonnet, upswept shoulder line and a fastback silhouette.

More importantly, it’s the way the light dances across the sculptured sides that draw the eyes in. Bereft of clutter, it makes you wish all mainstream manufacturers had the courage to be so daring.

We’ve said it before – the 'BP'-generation Mazda 3 (Axela in Japan) is the brand’s boldest C-segment hatch since the 1993 'BA' 323 (Astina/Lantis/323F).

But there’s a price to pay for such timeless beauty…

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.

There is a price to pay for all this quasi-coupe styling flair, and that’s a comparatively snug-feeling interior, though you’d never call it cramped.

Actually, the Mazda 3 is no less spacious than most of its competition in all but one area, with enough room even for 200cm drivers, along with sufficient shoulder width and ceiling height to match.

If you’re really tall, maybe that missing sunroof isn’t such a bad thing, after all.

Sat so low-down on cushy, enveloping front seats that offer plenty of comfort and support, this is the anti-SUV. Maybe Mazda should have called this the MX-3.

Sporty and spot-on, the driving position is a laid-back affair, with an emphasis on better ergonomics, as emphasised by the thoughtful placement of switchgear that’s all within easy reach, ahead of a beautifully flowing and layered dash. Proudly Japanese in flavour, it brings to mind functional minimalism.

Drilling into some of the 3’s finer interior details, the analogue-look digital instrumentation is super-legible, ultra-classy and gorgeously lit at night. As previously mentioned, the dials and surrounding air vents are reminiscent of the later Porsche 944 and 968.

It’s not just all for the sake of aesthetics, either.

Yes, it’s lovely, but the thinned-rim three-spoke steering wheel feels great to grip, with nifty little paddle shifters that are a delight to prod.

Same goes for the physical volume knob and climate-control buttons, sidestepping the need to get distracted and frustrated by virtual sub-menus.

And having a conventional gear lever with old-school Tiptronic-style shifts suits the 3’s athletic vibe.

Plus, forward vision is A-OK, ventilation is faultless, storage is better than you might expect, and the fit and finish is as good if not better than any of this 3’s German premium opponents.

Out back, the split-fold rear backrest is set at a comfortable angle, the cushion is well padded, and you’re provided with USB ports, air vents, and an armrest with two cupholders. More thoughtfulness.

But while knee room is fair, rear headroom isn’t great if you’re tall or wear a beehive, as the falling ceiling line reveals.

Vision out is limited by that rising window line and fat pillars. Getting in and out of the back requires some contortionist moves. And the small windows mean it can be gloomier in the back than a Smiths album.

Finally, at just 295 litres, the 3’s cargo capacity is disappointing. Sure, it eclipses the Corolla hatch’s 217L cubby, but other rivals are far larger back there.

At least the floor is wide and flat and there are 60/40-split backrests for cabin access for longer items.

Note that a space-saver spare wheel lurks underneath. Mazda argues there’s always the closely-related CX-30 if you need (slightly) more space (317L).

Meanwhile, at the other end of the 3…

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.

When you think about it, shoehorning a big torquey engine in a light and agile small car is a recipe for fun. Ford did just that with the Escort RS2000 in the 1970s… and Mazda’s now an expert at it, too.

The engine in question is the G25, a 2.5-litre four-cylinder naturally aspirated twin-cam petrol engine, delivering 139kW of power at 6000rpm and 252Nm of torque at 4000rpm.

As this Evolve SP Vision hatch tips the scales at 1415kg, it makes for a healthy, and consequently very lively, power-to-weight ratio of over 98kW/tonne.

That’s if you decide to use all the available revs, which the six-speed torque-converter auto makes great use of.

Driving the front wheels, it offers a 'Sport' mode to extend the revs even more, which is keeping in line with this Mazda’s sporty character.

Less so is the company’s decision to ditch the old multi-link independent rear suspension system a few years back for a more prosaic torsion beam arrangement. We’ll get to how that affects ride and handling in a moment.

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.

Mazda claims the G25 averages 6.6L/100km on the combined cycle… for a carbon-dioxide emissions rating of 154g/km. On a 51L tank, that gives a potential distance of over 940km!

Driven good and hard in our hands, we managed 7.5L/100km, which isn’t bad given the speed and conditions it was subjected to.

Plus, the Mazda’s happy on 91 RON 'standard' unleaded petrol.

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.

Ask yourself. What do you want from a new small car?

Since the first Familia of the early 1960s, Mazda’s been at it constantly, through the 1300 and 323 eras and into the modern age of the 3.

The Hiroshima brand knows its stuff. Space, practicality, comfort, ease, reliability and affordability. But a small car has to offer more, specifically in the way it makes the owner feel.

That’s why, while the Focuses, Lancers, Astras and Pulsars are gone, the 3’s still here. And it isn’t just the lush visuals inside and out that are, well, sensory-rich.

As older Alfa Romeo owners know, there’s something special about an engine that sounds alive, and the moment you push the 3’s starter, it purrs into life. That’s the first clue.

Slot the refreshingly old-school lever into Drive, and the G25 leaps into action, and, if you need it to, will keep pulling forward strongly, engine buzzing, like it’s on a mission.

That describes the torquey urge of this big 2.5L four, paired perfectly with the sensibly-geared auto.

We miss Mazda’s magnificent manual immensely, but the 3’s instant response reflects its favourable circa-100kW/tonne power-to-weight ratio.

And, as we’ve harped on in the past, the twin-cam unit’s extra oomph beyond 4000rpm delivers muscular high-speed responses akin to a good turbo – or a great old-school Alfa. You can keep your laggy dual-clutch transmissions, Europe.

Now, sweet, smooth and speedy performance is one thing, but having the chassis tuned with precise and fluid steering for tactile handling, and confident roadholding, backed by nuanced driver-assist and traction controls, are another.

There is a consistent and unifying control to the 3’s linear and forgiving dynamics, reminiscent of past masters like the Focus (and today’s brilliant Peugeot 308) that makes it a joy to drive enthusiastically through fast corners, with the knowledge that it won’t suddenly snap-oversteer and bite an unalert driver back.

For a Mazda, the ride is quiet enough, but there is still some droning transmitted through the cabin, via the Bridgestone Turanza (215/45) tyres, on coarse-chip bitumen surfaces.

And while suspension comfort is pretty impressive for the most part, larger bumps reveal the torsion beam’s limitations, as the car can occasionally thud over them in a way that we remember the multi-link rear end wouldn’t.

Anyway, what we’re saying is that, overall, the 3 Evolve SP Vision is an immersive and interactive driving experience that is right up there with the best of them.

Brawny performance, exquisite agility and a refinement that, collectively, have eluded every small Mazda in living memory until this generation’s 2019 debut. This 3’s right on the money. Still.

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.

Mazda offers a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty, with five-years roadside assistance… and that’s nothing special nowadays.

Service intervals are at 12 months or every 15,000km.

A fixed-price service scheme is available, averaging out to $434 annually over the first five years. Mazda shows pricing right up to 16 years and 240,000km on its website.

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.