Mercedes-Benz Sprinter vs Mazda BT-50

What's the difference?

The Mercedes-Benz Sprinter has long been a formidable competitor in the Light Duty (3501-8000kg GVM) division of Australia’s highly competitive Heavy Commercial vehicle market.

The popular range offers a choice of panel van, cab-chassis and minibus body styles, four turbo-diesel engine variants (plus an all-electric drivetrain), three wheelbase lengths and for panel vans plus the choice of two roof heights.

An extensive overhaul of the Sprinter range in 2024 brought extra safety technologies, new comfort and convenience features and other benefits, which Mercedes-Benz claims can help drivers work more efficiently. We recently put one of the latest models to the test.

Traditionally, offering a smaller engine in a particular make or model has been a manufacturer’s way of stripping a few dollars out of the price-tag. In the case of the ute market, that’s more often than not an attempt to rope price-sensitive fleet customers into the family. Not to mention responding to the cut-throat pricing of some of the Chinese newcomers.

A handful of years ago, we saw Mazda do just that with a 1.9-litre turbo-diesel variant for its BT-50 range to give us the XS, entry-level trim specification. But it seems Mazda has had a bit of a rethink about that strategy (in line with Isuzu’s plans, given the BT-50 and D-Max share their major structures and drivelines) and has now upgraded the small-engine variant of the BT-50 with a new engine and the return of the 4X4 option (which was dropped after about 12 months in the previous XS model due to lack of demand).

But perhaps most importantly, the engine in this base-spec BT-50 has now grown from the original 1.9 litres to 2.2 litres. As a result, there’s more torque, more power and an extra couple of gears in the transmission. And with the option of four-wheel drive again, the new XS BT-50 might just get a look in where the previous XS didn’t.

In the end, of course, the XS closes the gap to the other BT-50s in the line-up, perhaps muddying further the question of whether you need to stump up for the full 3.0 litres in the other BT-50s, or take an enough-is-enough stance and save some coin.