Mazda BT-50 vs Mercedes-Benz X-Class

What's the difference?

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 X was an opportunistic shot at a market segment new to Benz. With even apprentices able to afford to buy a well-specced Hilux, it's become harder to separate the foreman from the kids. I, like Mercedes, thought this would be the boss's car. Mercedes saw the gap and went for it, thinking it could grab sales from top end utes from VW, Toyota and Ford, while maybe saving a few folks from buying a RAM or an F150.

The problem is, the target market knows its utes. And in a rough-and-tumble workplace, the perception is that if you've spent up big on this Merc, you've actually just paid too much for a Nissan Navara. Still, like those flawed movies I enjoy, the X-Class is a fine thing - and I don't blame Mercedes for trying. It just costs too much, and yet isn't Mercedes enough to justify that price.

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.

Despite being a Japanese ute in drag, the X-Class isn't immediately rumbled as resembling a Nissan, which certainly should count in its favour. Everyone who asked about it had little idea it wasn't a Daimler from the ground up, until you pointed out various details. Up here in the higher reaches, it's a really quality-looking thing, with beautiful paint and enough differentiation to make it look like a Merc. The headlights do seem a tad small next to the rest of the Mercedes range, but the whopping great three-pointed star in the grille leaves no one in doubt. 

It's fairly tasteful in silver, too, and with a few carefully chosen options it looks pretty tough.

Once you're inside you see where it starts to get confused about itself. The hard, scratchy plastic dash pokes out from behind a huge slab of metallic trim. The centre console is clearly a brother from another mother, as is the overall dash layout. The cabin lacks the thoughtfulness and quality of a Mercedes design - you can't just slap on those signature air vents and expect to get away with it. Every piece that comes from Mercedes appears glued on, and it's jarring. 

This might have been less of an issue if the car was significantly cheaper and not likely to be purchased by people who are familiar with the brand.

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.

I really can't imagine how anyone signed off on the most annoying features of the X. Front-seat passengers get a solitary, shallow cupholder (the second one is unusable), and big door bins that could hold a bottle if you didn't mind it getting smashed from sliding around (they're unlined), and nowhere to put your phone. Like, nowhere, except maybe the glove box. Even the centre console bin is shallow and not much good for anything, apart from as an armrest.

The front seats are reasonably comfortable but the rears are way too high (in the name of a better view) and rammed hard against the rear bulkhead. The rear doors are also pretty narrow, so entry and egress can be a bit of a challenge if you're large or toddler small. Once you're in the seats, legroom is limited and headroom marginal. At least you get air-conditioning vents, but you don't get an armrest in the rear. On a nearly $80,000 ute. Even the dark-ages Colorado has one of those.

Anyway, that's enough said about the interior flaws.

The tray is a big boy, but it's worth knowing that the roller cover does rob a bit of space, as it does on any ute. The optional tray liner looks good and with Mercedes-Benz stamped in it, reminds you again what you've got. All told, it's 1581mm long, 1560mm wide (1215mm between the wheelarches) and you can load up nearly a tonne of people and things into the X350. You can also tow a massive 3500kg braked and still be able to carry a payload of 490kg. Gross vehicle mass is 3250kg (tare is 2190kg).

The X-Class range starts at the $45,450 X220D manual dual-cab and reaches all the way to the $87,500 X350d Edition 1. One step back from that is the $79,415 X350d Power dual-cab with all-wheel drive. That nets you 19-inch alloy wheels, an eight-speaker stereo, climate control, around view camera, reversing camera, keyless entry and start, front and rear parking sensors, electric front seats, sat nav, auto LED headlights, fake-leather interior, heated and folding rear vision mirrors, power windows and a full-size alloy spare.

An 8.0-inch screen hosts Mercedes COMAND system, complete with rotary dial and the weird scratchpad. COMAND is not as good as its German rivals and for some reason doesn't have Apple CarPlay and/or Android Auto, which is a mammoth oversight for a car of this type and cost.

Our car also had the lockable roll cover for $3295, the $1551 styling bar, a tow bar ($836) and, presumably, tow-bar wiring ($462).

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 X350d has something very Mercedes about it - the engine and transmission package. With 3.5-litres of turbo-diesel V6, you get 190kW at 3400rpm and a thumping 550Nm between 1400 and 3200rpm. These kind of figures at least put it up there with the brawnier VW Amarok.

Feeding the power to all four wheels is Mercedes' own seven-speed automatic. A centre diff apportions power front to rear and you have a choice of three modes - automatic, high range and low-range.

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 X350d did pretty well in the week I had it - the official figure of 8.8L/100km was never going to happen but with a long motorway run to the Blue Mountains and the rest bashing about town, the 10.5L/100km I did achieve without trying was not bad at all. The 80-litre tank should give you a decent range of 750km, or thereabouts.

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.

One of the weirder things to make it into the X-Class is the world's second most irritating column stalk, which is asked to pack in indicators, headlights and wipers. Thankfully, the world's most irritating column stalk, the Mercedes automatic shifter, wasn't inflicted on the X-Class. But the obvious problem is the key, which clearly isn't a Mercedes unit - even the star is ill-fitting and will probably fall off after a while. This is not a premium experience.

Thankfully, the big turbo-diesel wipes away a lot of the complaints about this car not being Mercedes enough. Brawny and super quiet (twin balance shafts will do that), the X is a very easy car to live with. While not especially lively, it's easygoing in the city and very refined.

On the open road it cruises almost silently and the ride is way above what you might expect from an unloaded tradie-mobile. It doesn't feel as high as some utes, which makes it feel a bit more car-like, and will no doubt appeal to some who might have to swap in and out of a traditional SUV and into the X, for whatever reason.

It is by far the most civilised ute I've ever driven and was worlds away from the Colorado I drove last week, to the point where I could almost - almost - see a justification for the unbelievably hefty price tag.

Credit for the refined ride and handling goes to the coil-spring rear end, much maligned in some quarters. While that style of suspension is not the ultimate in load-lugging, it's way more comfortable for passengers and, given the likely buyer profile, probably more agreeable than a cart-sprung rear-end.

I would cheerfully drive long distances in the X and it feels like it could go anywhere.

The Mercedes-Benz finally starts to puts its nose ahead of its competitors on the safety front.

The X350d has seven airbags, ABS, stability and traction controls, forward collision warning, low speed forward AEB, pedestrian detection, lane-keep assist and around-view cameras, trailer-sway control and hill-descent control.

It also has three top-tether and two ISOFIX points.

Its five-star ANCAP safety rating was awarded in 2017.

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.

Mercedes offers a three year/200,000km warranty for the X, which isn't too bad. It also throws in roadside assist for the duration. Also worthy are the 12 month/20,000km service intervals. 

A basic capped-price service scheme will hit you for $1950 (pre-paid) or $2,555 if you pay when you front up for each of the three services covered. The servicing isn't super-cheap, as you can see, but at least you know what you're up for.