2019 Trucksales Best Commercial Van

The humble delivery van is an essential part of the economy. Hauling packages and parcels, spare parts and food supplies, and servicing the trade sector tirelessly, the 'white box on wheels' is a workhorse vital to our modern way of life.

Once, Australia rode on the sheep's back. Now we rely on the mid-sized van.

It's why manufacturers of models like the six gathered here spend so much on research and development. These are vehicles designed to perform day in, day out, often with little mechanical sympathy. Mid-size vans a tool of trade, and little more.

Related reading:
2019 Toyota HiAce: Review
Ford Transit Custom v Renault Trafic: Comparison
2019 Renault Trafic Trader LIFE: Review
2019 Peugeot Expert: Review
2018 Hyundai iLoad: Review
2018 Volkswagen Transporter: Review

And while new-model progress is glacial when viewed against passenger cars (vans typically have a 10-year model cycle, if not longer), the delivery van is nonetheless a considered purchase decision – especially when you can claim a $30,000 instant asset write-off from the tax man.

Commercial enterprises and owner-operators assess every square inch of their potential purchase. They make sure it's not only fit for the job at hand right now, but that it won't leave them short in the years of service that lie ahead. In this comparison, we'll do the same.

Here we'll test the six top-selling models of the mid-size delivery van sector, including the stalwart Ford Transit Custom, recently updated Hyundai iLoad, all-new Peugeot Expert, long-serving Renault Trafic, fresh-off-the-boat Toyota HiAce and long-standing commercial contender, the Volkswagen Transporter.

Locally, It's medium-sized vans that dominate the wider van segment.

Falling in the 2500-3500kg GVM (Gross Vehicle Mass) range, the vans gathered here sell in far greater numbers than their smaller (under 2500kg GVM) and larger (3501 to 8000kg GVM) siblings. VFACTS shows 20,215 medium vans were sold in Australia in 2018, around 25 per cent more than when we last conducted this comparison five years ago. That compares to 3129 compact LCVs and 8794 large vans.

In all, there are 10 competitors in the class Down Under – we've assembled five of the stronger sellers for comparison here, as well as the all-new Peugeot Expert that we expect will achieve solid sales numbers by this time next year.

In alphabetical order, and with their 2018 sales tally in brackets, our contenders are the Ford Transit Custom (1880), Hyundai iLoad (4362), Peugeot Expert (new to market), Renault Trafic (1922), Toyota HiAce (6852) and Volkswagen Transporter (2095).

We've tried to ensure these vehicles are as evenly matched as possible. But with manufacturers offering varying specifications, sizing, engine and trim grades the task is harder than it seems. To that end, we've stuck as closely as possible to a $40,000 retail price; and to a grade representative of the majority of users.

With and without a 650kg payload on board we'll drive the half-dozen one-tonne vans through a road loop comprising everything a prospective buyer could expect to encounter. We'll also assess running costs and serviceability, resale value and safety – and let's not forget ergonomics, comfort and connectivity.

Vans are made to move things from one place to another. It's a pretty simple formula, really. But to be considered a truly proper fit for the man or woman at the wheel, the modern delivery van must also offer confident road manners, assertive performance and outstanding fuel economy.

With those thoughts in mind, our judges set to testing the engine, transmission, braking and dynamic abilities of the six vans on test. Each was driven repeatedly through the same demanding test loop with 650kg in the back, and again with an empty deck.

We also considered ride comfort, noise, vibration and harshness levels, and the functionality of electronic driver aids in our overall score.

Despite having the lowest power output on test at 96kW, the Ford Transit Custom felt easily the most responsive of all the vans tested. Its engine feels bright and energetic whether laden or unladen, but its sharp throttle response can result in a bit of low-speed driveline shunt if you're not careful with your right foot.

Its leather-trimmed steering wheel has a satisfying thickness and is both pleasingly direct and the best weighted of this group.

The six-speed automatic transmission mates nicely to the 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel engine and is impressively smooth and responsive in its shifts, whether up or down the ratios.

A toggle button on the driver's side of the transmission lever allows the driver to change gears manually, and when the transmission lever is pulled back to its manual mode the gearbox will hold the selected gear without upshifting.

Suspension errs on the firmer side and, while not 'crashy' or overly brittle, it's noticeably firmer than the comparatively plush-riding Peugeot and picks up more low speed surface irregularities. On the positive side, this does result in more disciplined cornering and less front-end bounce than on its French rival.

The Hyundai iLoad’s 2.5-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel is the second-largest-capacity engine on test after the HiAce and, not surprisingly, is shaded only by the Toyota in terms of peak outputs.

However, at 2042kg the iLoad is also the second heaviest van on test after the Toyota, packing an extra 200-odd kilos over the Renault, Peugeot and Ford. It's also the second thirstiest, consuming a claimed 7.6L/100km.

The weight doesn't appear to dull the performance of its grunty turbo-diesel, which feels slightly old-school in terms of refinement and throttle response, but still offers plenty of useful mid-range torque.

The engine feels a little soft in terms of low-end throttle response but surges strongly through a fairly narrow mid-range to offer plenty of easily accessible performance.

The five-speed automatic transmission shifts smoothly and features a tiptronic-style gate to allow pseudo-manual shifting. However, given the engine's workmanlike performance we're unsure of when or why you'd need to use this feature.

Noise levels inside the cabin are higher than some rivals but the Hyundai featured a cargo barrier where some of its rivals have a bulkhead, and this always allows more resonance to permeate the cab.

Like the Toyota, the iLoad is a rear-wheel-drive van and this has a subtle influence on its handling characteristics, making it less inclined to push its nose wide when cornering but also more likely to bring its tail around. We never experienced this despite wet and slippery test conditions.

The iLoad has a good turning circle and strong brakes but its steering errs on the light side and there's not much at all in the way of steering feel, but it does at least go faithfully where it's pointed.

The Peugeot Expert immediately stands out in this pack for the softness of its front suspension. While some drivers might find this endearing, others may find the pitch and bounce generated over humps and bumps to be disconcerting.

This aside, the Expert's ride quality is better than most if not all of its rivals, and its suppleness doesn't appear to impact adversely on its load-carrying ability – it handled our test load easily and without any suspension bottoming.

The French van generated more tyre rumble and road noise in the cabin than its rivals, somewhat surprising as the test car was equipped with a bulkhead, suggesting most of the noise comes up into the cab from the front-end.

The steering is very light when compared with the meaty heft of the Renault or Ford but it's direct enough.

Its quirky rotary gear selector is a point of difference but the benefits over a conventional lever are questionable, as the design really hasn't freed up any space and not everyone will appreciate the ergonomics of the dial when shifting quickly from D to R or vice versa.

The six-speed auto shifts fluently enough but the engine can get a bit coarse if pushed beyond 3500rpm. The auto shift dial also offers a manual mode and there are sports-car-like shift paddles nestled behind the steering wheel. However, given the fact the manual mode doesn't appear to hold a gear, instead automatically upshifting at redline, it begs the question as to the real benefit of this feature.

Outputs from the 2.0-litre engine are competitive in the class, as is kerb weight and performance when laden or unladen. Overall performance is likewise class competitive, although fuel consumption at 6.2L/100km is equal best in class with the Renault Trafic.

The Renault Trafic stands out in this company as the only van with a manual transmission, and while that may be seen as a negative in some quarters – particularly since Renault doesn't even offer an automatic option – it is at least an excellent six-speed manual. Renault has announced, however, that an auto Trafic is coming as part of a facelift that should reach Australia by the end of this year.

The relationship between clutch and gearbox is nicely weighted, ensuring the Trafic is pleasantly easy to drive in all conditions, while the six-speed 'box snicks through a slick set of ratios without any disagreeable notchiness or driveline judder.

Quite how the operator might feel about this after 8-10 hours at the wheel is another matter, but suffice to say that, if you're going to have a manual van, this is about as good as it gets.

The Renault also packs the smallest capacity engine on test at 1.6 litres, but its performance is boosted by not one but two turbochargers. Together the blowers manage to produce enough boost to place the smaller Renault engine’s output on a par with that of the 2.0-litre Volkswagen Transporter engine.

It's certainly not as toey as the Ford Transit and the fact it's a manual tends to highlight a slight softness in power delivery off the bottom end, but the drivetrain is impressively smooth and the engine quite smooth, with the overall impact that the Renault feels the most refined of all the vans tested in terms of NVH.

Even when laden with 650kg on board the Trafic could be slowed to 1250rpm in the taller gears and could gather its skirts again without a downshift. It also cruised fairly effortlessly through our winding, laden hill-climb section in third gear, without needing a lower cog.

At 1809kg the Trafic is the lightest van on test by a modest margin but this plus its smaller engine and manual transmission do show through in an impressive 6.2L/100km fuel consumption figure, equal best with the thrifty Peugeot Expert.

The Renault's suspension tune also hits the sweet spot between the softness of the Peugeot and the almost sporty firmness of the Ford Transit, treading a sensible and comfortable middle ground in terms of ride comfort and handling.

Despite boasting a healthy 300cc (0.3-litre) advantage over its next nearest rival, the 2.5-litre Hyundai iLoad, the Toyota HiAce's engine delivers only a whisker more power and torque than the iLoad, likely suggesting it's a fairly unstressed unit in this application.

That's certainly how it feels out on the road where it goes about its business with an easy efficiency, whether laden or unladen. The engine is mated to a nicely responsive six-speed automatic that shifts smoothly up or down the ratios and generally gets its job done without fuss or fanfare.

A glance at the scales reveals a clue to Toyota's powertrain choice, as the Japanese van tips the scales at a sumo-like 2288kg, some 479kg heavier than the svelte Renault Trafic, and 246kg heavier than the next most portly, the Hyundai iLoad.

That said, the Toyota doesn't feel over-burdened and the engine and gearbox do a solid job of masking its extra kilos. On the road the HiAce feels to have plenty of power in reserve and hauled itself up through the steeper parts of our short hill climb without raising a sweat.

The combination of a large capacity engine and high kerb weight do, however, have an adverse impact on fuel consumption. The Toyota drank its way through a worst-on-test 8.2L/100km, some 2.0L/100km more than the thriftiest vans tested.

Like the iLoad, the Toyota is rear wheel drive and that brings with it subtle differences to its handling over its predominantly front-drive rivals.

Toyota has equipped its new model with a suite of electronic drive aids (which no doubt accounts for some of the weight gain), and the intervention of such features as electronic stability control and traction control is more evident in the HiAce than in other vans. That's not a bad thing, just further proof that Toyota tunes such systems quite conservatively.

The steering's a bit on the lighter side but not excessively so and it's probably going to suit more drivers than not.

NVH in the cabin is well subdued, although without a bulkhead we're not really comparing apples with apples. What noise there is in the cabin isn't uncouth or unrefined.

The driving position feels to be set a bit further back from the screen than some of its rivals, but it's a comfy setup with good seats and a typically sensible Toyota approach to dash layout and design, with everything logically laid out and falling readily to hand.

Like the Hyundai, the Volkswagen Transporter is competitive in all key areas against its rivals but is beginning to show its age.

The only van here fitted with a dual-clutch transmission, and the only seven-speed on test, the transmission sets the tone for the drive experience as it proved overly fussy, shifting up and down the ratios far more regularly and noticeably than the torque-converter autos.

The VW's 2.0-litre turbo-diesel is decently responsive and the transmission features a sports mode which sharpens throttle response and shift speed for when you want to hustle a bit harder to that next job.

The engine offers competitive power and torque outputs but fuel consumption at 7.7L/100km is second highest on test, after the relatively thirsty Toyota.

The driving position isn't as comfortable as the Renault and Ford, however, with the driver sitting in more of an up-and-over stance at the wheel. A high-set brake pedal may also lead to some leg and foot fatigue, particularly for left-foot brakers.

The VW was one of the vans on test that didn't feature a bulkhead and this in turn meant it was one of the noisier, in terms of road rumble and general NVH. However, it was still a touch quieter than the Peugeot, which did have a bulkhead, so go figure.

It’s no secret that delivery van drivers spend more hours at the wheel than just about any other road user (well, except long-distance truckies). It stands to reason, then, that the cabin must be comfortable, ergonomically sound, well connected and safe – while also doubling as an on-road office. Storage, security and user-friendliness are also prime considerations here.

Most of the cabins provide comparable comfort levels. Our judges ranked the Trafic, Transit Custom and iLoad at the top of the list here, noting all except the iLoad, Transporter and HiAce offer lumbar support, while the Trafic, Transit Custom and Expert include a dedicated driver's armrest.

Ease of entry saw the HiAce and iLoad draw favour for their A-pillar grab handles, though the Hyundai's lack of a three-point seatbelt and head-restraint in the centre seating position is far from ideal. There was little to separate the driver's door aperture, though step-to-seat height did vary with the Toyota HiAce and Hyundai iLoad ranking as the best on this front.

Our drivers found the Renault Trafic's outward visibility, reversing camera and spot mirrors helpful in close-confines manoeuvring, the Toyota HiAce’s larger mirrors and standard reversing camera likewise handy. The Ford Transit Custom was hard to see out of, but had a great reversing camera with zoom functionality. The Peugeot Expert was noted as tricky to see out of while the Volkswagen Transporter on test did not have a reversing camera.

Middle seat functionality favoured the Renault and its removable clipboard and cup-holder arrangement. The Trafic rated as one of the better 'mobile offices' here, closely tailed by the Ford Transit Custom and Hyundai iLoad. As tested, all vans excluding the Hyundai iLoad and Toyota HiAce were fitted with three seats.

Where airbag coverage is concerned, only the five-star ANCAP (2019) rated Toyota HiAce offers seven airbags in its cabin. The Ford Transit Custom received its five-star ANCAP rating back in 2012 [find out why the date-stamping of ANCAP tests is important here] where the Hyundai iLoad managed four stars back in 2011. At the time of writing this comparison, the remainder of the field is unrated by ANCAP.

Testing the infotainment, connectivity and in-cabin technology of our half-dozen vans, the judges determined there was a lot to like. Depending on where you look there are vans focussed heavily on entertainment, while others prioritise safety and/or navigation, or even comfort and amenity.

The Ford Transit Custom is a well-packaged van with considered functionality and some of the best connectivity options of the cohort. Infotainment, courtesy of Ford’s SYNC system, saw Apple CarPlay and Android Auto included as standard, alongside two USB and two 12-volt outlets in reach of the driver.

The Transit Custom was the only van on test with standard heated (outboard) seats and offered effective cabin heating that was quick to warm up. Navigation is equipped in this instance, but is a $600 option.

The Ford also offered a comprehensive suite of driver assistance features. Although optional at $1600, the comprehensive suite of technologies includes forward collision warning/autonomous emergency braking, rear cross-traffic alert, lane departure warning, blind spot monitoring, adaptive cruise control, auto high-beam, rain-sensing wipers and tyre pressure monitoring.

The Toyota and the Peugeot also package numerous advanced safety systems, including autonomous emergency braking, but as standard fitment.

Our judges said the Transit Custom was one of the best vans here for cabin oddment storage and 'mobile office' provisions with large door pockets, and a huge area on the dash for paperwork, folders, laptops and the like.

When it came to the Hyundai iLoad there was a feeling that age was working against it. Our judges felt that the iLoad was a bit more utilitarian than some of the others on test, but praised the standard inclusion of Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.

The Hyundai iLoad doesn't have native navigation, however, and though the Bluetooth pairing process was very quick, the van features only one poorly positioned USB outlet.

Good but not great storage and pull-out-style cupholders ranked the iLoad below many others on test, as did its slow-acting HVAC system and near non-existent driver assistance technologies.

The Peugeot Expert also took a while to heat the cabin, but was otherwise well equipped. Our judges felt the Expert's interior was cleverly thought out with thorough interior storage options and a decent amount of tech as standard.

Phone storage sat close by the Expert's USB outlet and linked smoothly to the standard-issue Apple CarPlay and Android Auto infotainment array. Stereo microphones for the Bluetooth system made for crystal clear phone calls, while forward collision warning, blind-spot monitoring and dual parking cameras made the Expert a safer option than many on this test.

Storage and amenity was another strong point in the Peugeot Expert. It offered both under-seat storage and tablet storage in the armrest, large door bins and a very deep pocket on the dashboard for folders and paperwork – great for couriers or tradies.

The Renault Trafic showed a mix of technology and amenity representative of its age. Our judges felt the French-built van offered good storage and strong HVAC performance, and said features such as the heated driver's seat and native navigation were a welcomed inclusion for the price.

But the Trafic's user-friendliness was a little difficult, and many of its tech features were part of a $2600 Business Pack. The aforementioned heated seat, keyless entry system and climate control are optional on the Trafic, but join standard navigation and Bluetooth connectivity.

We found the telephony system tricky to interact with in the Trafic, and without Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, the Trafic's connectivity array is somewhat restrictive. A couple of the judges also noted the lack of overhead storage and vanity mirrors as a negative, adding that the Renault's door bins were hard to access when the doors are closed.

By way of contrast the newly introduced Toyota HiAce showed a great level of technology included as standard – such as the innovative Toyota AppLink function – and the best levels of driver assistance on test.

Apple Carplay and Android Auto is not available on the HiAce yet, but will be retrofitted from the end of the year. The Hiace includes a reversing camera while AppLink offers a fuel finder, BOM weather integration, travel times with navigation and traffic assistance, and voice-to-text functionality.

Safety inclusions added high-beam assist, road sign assist, rear cross-traffic alert, and lane departure and keeping assist.

However, the HiAce was compromised by sub-par cabin storage and difficult-to-use Bluetooth connectivity. Headlight performance was notably poor in wet weather and the heating was good, without being fantastic. Our judges felt the HiAce's oddment storage lacked innovation, boasting few of the cubbies and storage bins of its rivals. The omission of a phone holder was likewise disappointing.

If the HiAce's storage options were disappointing, then the Volkswagen Transporter's were a delight. Our judges praised the Vee-Dub's storage cubbies, pockets and boxes, the overhead shelf and cavernous door bins perfect for a life on the road. The HVAC worked well and the general ease of use in the cabin was well thought out, but unfortunately that's where the praise comes to an end.

Our assessment crew felt the Volkswagen Transporter was uncomfortably expensive when compared with the rest of this set. Optional gadgets and gizmos put it on a par with the Transit Custom or the Toyota HiAce, but these added thousands of dollars to the purchase price.

The Transporter's infotainment screen is tiny when viewed against the rivals here, and featured Bluetooth telephony and audio streaming, but no proprietary navigation, no Apple CarPlay and no Android Auto. There's also no standard reversing camera at this price point.

The Volkswagen is, however, available with some of these features as an option. A larger infotainment screen is available for $2520 (which includes a CD player), voice control is $410, and a reversing camera will set you back $700.

Driver assistance technologies are likewise available optionally, but these do not include adaptive cruise control.

When it comes to commercial vehicles, running costs and aftersales support factors are as important as the initial purchase price and fuel consumption figures (see specifications table below). Whether you're buying one or 100 medium vans, the hip-pocket considerations are the same. No van should cost more than it needs to.

Ford offers a five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty with up to seven years of included roadside service on Transit Custom models. Standard service pricing is capped for the lifetime of the vehicle. For the duration of the warranty period servicing amounts to a total of $2515. Service intervals are set at 12 months or 30,000km (whichever comes first).

A five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty also applies to the Hyundai iLoad, as does included roadside assistance and a capped-price servicing scheme. Service intervals are shorter than the Ford at 12 months/15,000km with the cost over five years tallying $1958.

Peugeot offers five years of roadside assistance and a five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty as well. Service intervals for the Expert are set at 12 months/20,000km with capped-price servicing amounting to $2868.47 (115hp models) or $2982.46 (150 and 180hp models) over the first five years of ownership. Peugeot offers a 10 per cent discount if owners purchase the Service Plan upfront.

The second French van on test, the Renault Trafic, offers only a three-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty. Roadside assistance is included for up to four years and service intervals are set at a Transit-rivalling 12 months/30,000km. Renault offers capped-price servicing for the duration of the warranty period at a total price of $1797.

HiAce has a good name when it comes to reliability, and Toyota now backs its entire range with a five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty. However, for vehicles used for commercial applications, like the HiAce invariably will, the terms shift to five years/160,000km. Service intervals are set at six months/10,000km with capped-price servicing totalling $1080 (petrol) or $1440 (diesel) over the first three years or 60,000km. Roadside assistance is a cost option.

Volkswagen offers a five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty on its Transporter range. Roadside assistance is included for the first 12 months, while service intervals are set at 12 months/15,000km – the same as Hyundai's iLoad. Volkswagen's capped-service pricing program totals $3433 over the duration of the warranty period.

Resale values are tricky in the commercial van world. Condition and mileage play a huge part in a vehicle's overall value. For this comparison we'll consider the trade-in value of a comparable five-year-old model with 180,000km on the odometer.

According to redbook.com.au and based on the parameters above, the resale value of the six vehicles on test is as follows: Ford Transit Custom – 44.5 per cent; Hyundai iLoad – 36.8 per cent; Peugeot Expert – 29.2 per cent; Renault Trafic – 29.8 per cent; Toyota HiAce – 46.2 per cent; Volkswagen Transporter – 34.1 per cent.

The load bay testing process began with weighing each vehicle, fully fuelled, on electronic scales. Kerbside weight criteria can vary from manufacturer to manufacturer, so this provided a solid foundation for comparison. It also accounts for those vehicles fitted with accessories such as nudge and tow bars.

Then we got to work with our tape measure, measuring front and side apertures; load floor length, width and height; floor to ceiling height; and the width between each van's rear wheel arches, all while noting any other features – fittings like 12-volt sockets, bulkhead load-through flaps, internal lights and load-bay grab handles, for example.

Each van was then loaded with 650kg – representing somewhere between 50 and 60 per cent of the stated maximum payload limit – before we tackled a varied road loop encompassing busy industrial estate, motorway, and winding and undulating roads on Melbourne's metro fringe.

Of course, some features will suit some drivers and applications better than others. Bulkheads give protection from flying cargo during an accident or hard braking while reducing ambient noise and improving the efficiency of cabin heating or cooling, but they eliminate walk-through access to the load bay.

Top-hinge tailgates provide shelter in bad weather and offer superior rear vision but usually eliminate rear forklift access, while barn doors simplify forklift loading and require less effort to open and close, but partially obscure rear vision and are prone to being caught by gusts of wind, potentially leading to dents and damage.

On the road it was the Ford, Toyota and Renault that impressed the most in terms of dynamics when loaded, with the remainder just a little more prone to body roll through the bends, and not quite matching the leading trio for general composure.

As for ease of loading, each vehicle on test has enough room between its rear wheel arches to accommodate a standard Australian pallet (1165mm x 1165mm), but all bar the Peugeot has a top-hinge tailgate. This meant that while the Peugeot could be loaded via forklift at the rear, the remainder had to be loaded through the side sliding door.

Here the Ford offers the largest aperture, while the Hyundai suffered – not only because side access was restricted by its accessory cargo barrier, but also because its side door, when fully open, sits well forward of the aft edge of the aperture.

That meant we couldn't quite squeeze a second 325kg weight into the Hyundai with our forklist, so we made up the shortfall with filled water bottles – all the other vehicles could be loaded with two 325kg weights (via forklift) with relative ease.

The Toyota has the largest rear aperture but the Ford isn't far behind, while the Hyundai and Peugeot had the smaller apertures of the bunch, both side and rear. The Toyota also leads the pack for outright floor space, the new format now appreciably wider than its predecessor, but it also had the lowest load floor to ceiling measurement – an aspect where the VW and Ford shone.

The Peugeot, Toyota and Hyundai come standard with twin sliding side doors while our Ford was fitted with an optional offside door – the remainder just get the one nearside door.

Our Ford test vehicle's side doors both feature optional glazing, which helps rear three-quarter vision through the bulkhead window but does little to prevent prying eyes from examining the load bay's contents. Our Ford test vehicle also came fitted with an optional tailgate instead of its standard barn doors.

The Toyota has the highest (unladen) load floor height, at 620mm, while the Ford has the lowest, at 505mm.

For payload limits the Toyota is at the back of this pack while the Peugeot is out in front, the claimed figures spanning 1075kg to 1300kg. Weighing the vehicles revealed the Toyota as the heaviest, at 2288kg, which is appreciably heavier than the lightest – the Renault – at 1809kg. Bear in mind that the Toyota and Hyundai came to us fitted with tow kits, adding extra weight.

Towing didn't feature in this comparison, but for manufacturer-quoted braked limits it's the VW clearly out in front at 2500kg. That's a tonne more than the figure quoted by Hyundai and Peugeot, with the Toyota, Ford and Renault falling mid-pack.

The Ford, Renault and Peugeot come standard with a steel bulkhead with window, while the Hyundai has an accessory cargo barrier. The Toyota has walk-through access between its pedestal seating while the VW has no bulkhead but no walk-through access either thanks to its (optional) twin passenger seat unit.

The Renault's wide bulkhead window provides excellent vision through and beyond the load area; while the Ford and Peugeot's equivalents have reduced vision but mesh grilles for extra protection.

All three vans with bulkheads also feature lower load-through flaps – small hatches that allow longer items to be loaded through to under the front passenger seat (Ford) or right through to the passenger footwell (Renault and Peugeot). This adds an extra 550mm (Ford), 1110mm (Peugeot) and 1230mm (Renault) in potential load length, for long but narrow items.

As far as general load bay appointments go, the Ford is a clear winner. It comes standard with a sturdy plastic floor liner, full-height plywood inner wall protection, a side aperture grab rail (the only one on test) and eight large, sturdy and well-placed tie-down anchor points.

The Renault has smaller load anchor points but 16 of them – not just at floor height but also at mid height and up high – giving added practicality when securing a load. The Peugeot and the Hyundai have eight, the rest making do with six.

The Ford is the only van here with full-height internal protection, the remainder having mid-height protection – plastic for most and wood composite for the Toyota. The Ford, Renault, and Peugeot came with 12-volt sockets in their load bays while all but the Hyundai had two load bay lights, the iLoad only having one.

Weighing up these payload strengths and weaknesses isn't easy, and what's best for one business or application won't be the same for another. However, after taking all our judging criteria into account, in this comparison it's the Ford that emerges at the head of the pack, representing the best all-round mix of practicality, flexibility, features and sheer ability.

As you've no-doubt gathered, this comparison saw our six medium commercial vans assessed against five broad criteria we felt were most important to owner-driver and/or owner-operators. For clarification, they are: Cabin Ergonomics and Safety; Pricing and Running Costs; Cabin Technology and Connectivity; Payload and Towing Provisions; and On-Road and Driveline Performance.

The weighted scoring applied 20 points to each category for a possible total of 100 points.

For Cabin Ergonomics and Safety the win went to the Toyota HiAce on 16.5 points. It was followed closely by the Renault Trafic (16.0) and Ford Transit Custom (15.0), with the Peugeot Expert and Volkswagen Transporter tied in fourth place with 13.5 points. The Hyundai iLoad received the wooden spoon in this field with just 12.5 points.

Staying up the front, but looking at Cabin Technology and Connectivity, and it was the Ford Transit Custom that topped the ladder with 16.5 points. The Transit Custom asserted a clear lead on the connectivity front, beating its nearest rival by two points. In order, the remainder of the field was the Peugeot Expert (14.5), Hyundai iLoad and Toyota HiAce (13.5), Renault Trafic (12.0) and Volkswagen Transporter (10.0).

Ford's Transit Custom also topped the Payload and Towing Provisions section of the test earning a score of 19.0 from a possible 20 points. French vans Peugeot Expert and Renault Trafic tied in second place with 16.0 points ahead of the Toyota HiAce on 15.0 points. At the back of the pack the Volkswagen Transporter (14.0) held off the Hyundai iLoad (10.0) for last place.

Running costs are an obvious concern for any commercial vehicle operator. Beyond the initial purchase price and weekly fuel bill, it's on-going servicing costs and resale that plays a major part of the new van decision. In order our rivals scored as follows: Ford Transit Custom (16.0), Peugeot Expert (15.0), Renault Trafic (14.0), Hyundai iLoad (13.5), Toyota HiAce (13.0) and Volkswagen Transporter (11.5).

Finally, we looked at the all-important On-Road and Driveline Performance of our six vans to see which is the safest and best to operate. Surprisingly, an in spite of currently being offered only with a manual transmission, the Renault Trafic won the category with 17.0 points. It was followed by the Ford Transit Custom (16.5), Toyota HiAce (15.5), Peugeot Expert and Volkswagen Transporter (13.5) and Hyundai iLoad (13.0).

If you’re quick with the calculator you'll see it's the Hyundai iLoad and Volkswagen Transporter that tied for fifth place on this comparison test on 62.5 points. Both vehicles' aging design played a part in their lower score here, and though each is a competent commercial vehicle in its own right, our judges felt they simply didn't match the offerings at the pointier end of the test.

In fourth place with an impressive 10 point lead over the Hyundai and Volkswagen was newcomer, the Peugeot Expert. The Expert's strong after-sales provisions and comfortable, connected cabin saw it amass 72.5 points on this test, just behind the other new van in this space, the Toyota HiAce on 73.5 points.

In spite of its age, but because of its well thought-out design and confident on-road feel, was the Renault Trafic. Offering very good value for money and with most of the technology requirements covered, the Trafic scored 75.0 points from a total of 100 to take home second place on this test.

That means the Ford Transit Custom is Carsales Best Commercial Van of 2019.

Scoring 83 points from a possible 100, the Transit Custom impressed our judges not only with its safety, connectivity, on-road ability and payload capacity, but in its consideration of the driver in every aspect of its design.

Providing a safe and well-connected work place, the Ford Transit Custom meshed confident payload-hauling ability and undisputed after-sales value with a 'mobile office' feel hard-working drivers deserve. SUV-like creature comforts and a quieter, well-rounded ride saw the Transit Custom take a strong and deserved lead over the remainder of the field.

Simply, the Ford Transit Custom is the best van in its class.

How much does the 2019 Ford Transit Custom cost?
Priced from: $40,990 – $45,790 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel
Output: 96kW/385Nm
Transmission: Six-speed manual; six-speed automatic
Driven wheels: Front
Fuel: 6.5L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 169g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: Five-star ANCAP (2012)
Payload: 1006kg
Country of Origin: Turkey

How much does the 2019 Hyundai iLoad cost?
Priced from: $38,790 – $43,790 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 2.5-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel
Output: 100kW/343Nm
Transmission: Six-speed manual; five-speed automatic
Driven wheels: Rear
Fuel: 7.6L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 199g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: Four-star ANCAP (2011)
Payload: 1113kg
Country of Origin: South Korea

How much does the 2019 Peugeot Expert cost?
Priced from: $36,490 – $45,890 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 1.6-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel; 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel
Output: 85kW/300Nm; 110kW/370Nm; 130kW/400Nm
Transmission: Six-speed manual; six-speed automatic
Driven wheels: Front
Fuel: 5.2L/100km; 6.2L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 137g/km; 163L/100km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: N/A
Payload: 1000kg; 1300kg
Country of Origin: France

How much does the 2019 Renault Trafic cost?
Priced from: $32,990 – $47,280 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 1.6-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel; 1.6-litre four-cylinder twin-turbo-diesel
Output: 66kW/260Nm; 103kW/340Nm
Transmission: Six-speed manual
Driven wheels: Front
Fuel: 6.2L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 164g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: N/A
Payload: 1235kg; 1274kg
Country of Origin: France

How much does the 2019 Toyota HiAce cost?
Priced from: $38,640 – $70,140 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 3.5-litre six-cylinder petrol; 2.8-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel
Output: 130kW/450Nm (turbo-diesel auto), 207kW/351Nm (V6)
Transmission: Six-speed automatic
Driven wheels: Rear
Fuel: 12.0L/100km; 12.4L/100km; 7.5L/100km; 8.4L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 275g/km; 283g/km; 219g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: Five-star ANCAP (2019)
Payload: 885kg; 1075kg; 1080kg; 1295kg
Country of Origin: Japan

How much does the 2019 Volkswagen Transporter cost?
Priced from: $37,490 – $60,190 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel; 2.0-litre four-cylinder twin-turbo-diesel
Output: 75kW/250Nm; 103kW/340Nm; 132kW/400Nm; 150kW/450Nm
Transmission: Five-speed manual; six-speed manual; seven-speed dual-clutch
Driven wheels: Front; all
Fuel: 7.0L/100km; 7.2L/100km; 7.6L/100km; 6.8L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: N/A
Safety Rating: N/A
Payload: 1266kg; 1256kg; 1197kg; 964kg
Country of Origin: Germany