Mazda BT-50 vs Nissan Navara

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.

While it won’t appeal on the value front as much as its Mitsubishi Triton engineering twin, the Navara’s tweaks from Premcar make it a more comfortable and livable thing. 

The extra cost is worth it for how much better it is on the road, plus you get more features, regardless.

Whether the changes to the Navara are sexy enough to get people in the dealership door is another question, but anyone who takes this over a Triton won’t be disappointed.

If it's for work, the SL or ST will do. If it's doubling as a family car, the Pro-4X is worth the outlay.

Note: CarsGuide attended this event as a guest of the manufacturer, with travel, accommodation and meals provided.

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.

Nissan has done well to inject its own design flavour into the ute, because even though there’s inevitable similarity in the silhouette, it doesn’t just look like a Triton.

Impressive given a lot of the car is the same, and Nissan couldn’t change any of the hard points the Triton comes with. In fact, the Navara’s dimensions are largely the same as the Triton, coming in at 5320mm long, 1930mm wide and 1815mm tall.

The biggest Nissan-specific design element is a nod to the Navara’s heritage, the three little vent lines above the grille hark back to the original D21 generation ute which had these holes in the bonnet.

It’s subjective to some extent, but I reckon the Navara has the Triton beat on the design front.

Depending on the variant, you get some other indicators that this is no Triton, including a sports bar on the rear of the cabin with ‘Navara’ cut into it, or Pro-4X decals if that’s the variant you go for.

Given the lifestyle and off-road focus of the Pro-4X, it also has a bit more trim inside and out to feel more rugged and premium.

The Navara’s new interior is a big step up over the previous generation, even if it is genuinely all-Triton in there. The biggest change is the Nissan badge on the steering wheel.

It’s a ute, so there’s still a lot of plastic, cheap materials and even the nicer looking surfaces are in a few spots made of gloss black plastic (sometimes called piano black) which gets smudged easily and after a short while.

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.

It’s a bit of a shame the Navara doesn’t benefit from the changes Nissan has been making to its interior design and layout recently, because it leaves older Nissans in the dust, in terms of design and ergonomics.

But, the Mitsubishi Triton’s interior isn’t a bad one for the Navara to have inherited, because it just works. It’s uncomplicated and sensible, if a little boring.

There are physical buttons for shortcuts, and the tech is relatively straightforward, even if it does also carry the downside of Android Auto being wired-only. It adds to the somewhat dated feeling the Navara’s interior carries, but the physical space itself is rather sensible.

The Navara’s seats are comfortable, and as the driver it’s easy to find your own preferred position, with the electric adjustment in higher variants being an extra help there.

The driving ergonomics and visibility are also good, which lines up well with the Navara’s driving dynamics and makes it feel less like you’re pedalling a big dual-cab around.

Behind the driver, there’s not heaps in the way of amenity, but the addition of USB ports once you’re past the base SL is welcome for second-row passengers, and the space isn’t cramped by any means.

The Navara has a tub capable of easily fitting a Euro pallet, according to Nissan’s specs, but with its distance of 1135mm between wheel arches, it won’t fit an Aussie pallet. The tub is almost square, at 1555mm long and 1545mm wide, and 525mm tall. 

Plus there’s the 3500kg towing capacity and its payload ranging between 964kg for the Pro-4X or up to 1064kg in the base SL.

The new D27 generation Navara starts from $53,348, before on-road costs, so it’s already more expensive than the Triton it’s based on, but we’ll get into the main, somewhat oily reasons for that in a bit. 

The Navara’s available in four variants at launch, SL, ST, ST-X and Pro-4X. They’re all 4X4 dual-cabs, so it’s mainly the features for each trim level that make the difference when it comes to pricing.

The SL starts off with a lot of the basics covered. There are LED headlights and tail-lights, climate control, the same 8.0-inch multimedia touchscreen as the rest of the range and digital radio as well as Android Auto and Apple CarPlay.

Its aforementioned touchscreen is also a little larger than the one in the Triton it’s based on. Then there’s the 7.0-inch driver display screen which lives between the two physical dials.

At this point in the range the steering wheel is polyurethane and the floors aren’t carpeted, just covered with vinyl. It’s a work ute and it feels like one.

Things pick up slightly with the ST, which starts from $56,765, and gains alloy wheels, auto-folding mirrors, a leather-accented steering wheel and floor carpet, plus now side-steps and a sports bar. It also adds USB ports in the second row for charging, so it’s probably the minimum grade you’d want if you’re ever going to have kids in the back. Essentially, it gains a few things that make it feel a little more livable without getting too fancy.

The ST-X is a fair step up in price, it’s $63,177, but gets better suspension, 18-inch alloys, leather-accented and heated front seats and a power adjustable driver's seat, dual-zone climate and a wireless phone charger.

It also gains a centre limited-slip differential, drive modes more compatible with off-roading, different styling elements and push-button start, so you don’t need to use the physical key.

The top-of-the-range (until the Warrior arrives) is the $68,418 Pro-4X with more design changes, all-terrain tyres, a black sports bar and roof rails, contrast stitching and specific seats with Pro-4X styling. It’s the variant Nissan Australia expects to be the most popular, too. It also has the same diff and better suspension the ST-X gains.

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.

A 150kW/470Nm four-cylinder turbo-diesel engine lies under the bonnet, which falls a little short of some rivals, but isn’t glaringly weak.

Its power lines up with, for example, the Toyota HiLux, but torque falls short of its rival’s 500Nm. It’s the same story for the Ranger, though that ute slips a nose ahead with 4.0kW more than HiLux and Navara in its four-cylinder guise.

The Navara’s six-speed automatic transmission also sends that power and torque to all four wheels, though how exactly it gets there depends on the spec and whether you have a centre differential or not.

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.

From the Navara’s 75L tank, a claimed 7.7L/100km is used on the combined (urban/extra-urban) cycle, though on the launch drive we saw the trip computer hovering around 9.0L/100km.

With a few hundred kilos in the tray, that jumped up to the low 11s.

Hypothetically, if you manage to get close to Nissan’s claimed consumption, you should be able to get more than 900km out of a single tank of diesel. Nissan’s claim isn’t too outrageous, either, considering the type of driving a car launch generally consists of isn’t normally conducive to favourable fuel consumption figures.

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.

Now we get to the biggest reason you’d consider a Navara over the Triton it’s based on.

While the Navara benefits from having a relatively new platform underneath it - thanks Mitsubishi - it’s still a ladder-frame dual-cab ute so expectations weren’t exactly on the floor, but they also weren’t sky-high.

And sure, a lot of the details about the new Navara aren’t groundbreaking, nor is much of the way it drives - but the changes Premcar has made to the suspension in this ute are well worth the extra outlay.

What Premcar has done with the Navara, on what we would guess is a relatively constrained budget, is find the most cost-effective way to make the ute better to drive.

They went with upgraded dampers which have been tuned to balance control and comfort with the ute’s off-road ability.

The result? A very controlled front-end, more communicative steering and confidence on the road to drive over even rough surfaces without fear of being flung off the road. Ladder-frame utes don't normally feel so controlled over rough surfaces at high speeds.

It’s worth noting that while the SL and ST still benefit from the suspension upgrades, the ST-X and Pro-4X in particular are much better to drive than you’d expect from a dual-cab ute.

Some of the roads around Canberra are particularly rough, even close to town where the speeds are lower, but the Navara handled myriad surfaces and conditions on- and off-road, in the soaking wet and when it was bone-dry.

Aside from one particular section of the launch that may have just been a little unkind to the ‘stiffer’ sidewalls on the ST-X compared to the Pro-4X, the Navara’s behaviour was not only confidence-building, but allowed for a degree of fun not normally present in the class.

The steering feel left no guesswork necessary, and there’s not a huge on-centre dead-spot as is often the case in a dual-cab. Nice and direct without being too heavy.

The Navara’s weak point, which still gets a pass mark, is probably that its drivetrain now feels older than the ute in which it lives. The outputs are passable, and the transmission finds the correct place well enough, but in a world of 10-speed autos in Rangers or petrol plug-in hybrids, a bog-standard turbo-diesel with six gears has to be bang-on perfect to keep up. 

The Navara’s is adequate, but once you’re used to it, the drive experience is a step above most in the ute segment in terms of control, something that’s hard to come by in this segment.

It translates well to off-roading, where the ute’s front-end settles very quickly over ridges and undulating surfaces without the harshness of a too-stiff set of dampers.

Unsealed roads feel easily dispatched even at relatively high speeds, and with the right tyres (a la Pro-4X) the Navara is a seriously capable thing.

If you find yourself the owner of a D27 Navara and never leave the bitumen, you’re missing out.

The new Navara inherits the Triton’s maximum five-star ANCAP rating from testing in 2024. It scored notably well in Child Occupant protection, though its score for Safety Assist isn’t as high as some rivals.

Eight airbags mean the Navara’s got occupants cushioned in case of the worst, while the whole range has the same suite of safety tech, including a surround-view camera, forward collision warning and AEB, front- and rear-cross traffic alert, driver monitoring and traffic sign recognition, front and rear parking sensors and trailer sway control.

The Navara’s driver monitoring, however, suffers the same overzealousness as the Triton. Nissan didn’t reprogram any of the ADAS systems which means the car will regularly accuse you of being distracted if you’re not looking directly at the road ahead. Checking mirrors or a map in the centre screen will trigger this.

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.

Nissan’s 10-year/300,000km warranty is fantastic but applies only if you service with Nissan. It’s five years with no kilometre limit otherwise. 

There’s five years' of flat-price servicing at $499 per visit, every 12-months or 15,000km, whichever comes first.

Roadside assist is also free for a decade if you service with Nissan, or a year otherwise.

Given there are around 180 Nissan dealers nationwide, finding one shouldn’t be a challenge.