2021 Ford Ranger v GWM Ute: Comparison Review

Once it became apparent the all-new 2021 GWM Ute was the best dual-cab to ever emerge from China, lining it up against the Ford Ranger was a no-brainer.

We have a huge amount of respect for the Aussie-developed Ranger at carsales – and so do hundreds of thousands of buyers. Even with a new generation just over the horizon, the 2021 Ford Ranger remains the standard by which all other dual-cabs have been judged… and fallen short.

But the GWM Ute is a very different proposition to the likes of the Toyota HiLux and Isuzu D-MAX. It’s so gobsmackingly cheap and well equipped, so obviously not an inferior product, that it instantly reshapes our understanding of what a good-value dual-cab actually is.

Can the Ranger resist this all-out assault? To find out we drove these two in the city, in the ’burbs and in the country. We drove them on bitumen and gravel. We engaged low-range for some proper off-road work and even secured 650kg in their tubs to establish how much that impacted.

It was a fascinating process that ended… well, you’ll just have to read on to find out.

Dual-cab utes are relatively simple things. Take a ladder frame, bolt a five-seat/four-door body on top, sandwich a turbo-diesel engine and 4x4 system in between and away you go – as long as you remember the steering, suspension, brakes, wheels and tyres, etc.

Mostly imported tariff-free from Thailand, they have been a bulwark of profitability for the auto companies that sell them in significant numbers here. At the top end, where demand seems insatiable, paying more than $70,000 on the road for a dressed-up Ford Ranger or Toyota HiLux is not uncommon.

So cop this, the mid-spec 2021 GWM Ute Cannon-L – (yes, we know, it’s a weird name and we explained it here) – is priced at $37,990 drive-away. And it comes with lots of good gear.

The 2021 Ford Ranger XLS is three from the top of the line-up and is priced at $52,490 plus on-road costs. Comparatively speaking, it does not come with a lot of good gear.

First, a step back to ensure we are comparing apples with apples.

The Ranger uses the familiar 147kW/470Nm 3.2-litre five-cylinder turbo-diesel, optional ($2200) six-speed auto and simple part-time 4x4 system with dual-range transfer case and locking rear diff.

The GWM Ute relies on an evolved version of the 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel from its predecessor, the Great Wall Steed. It now makes 120kW and 400Nm. An eight-speed ZF auto is standard, as is a pretty sophisticated Borg-Warner 4x4 system topped off by dual-range and rear locker.

The pricing disparity is not reflected in the look of these two vehicles. The GWM Ute Cannon-L is all chrome and bling complete with tough truck grille and implied machismo. By contrast, the Ford Ranger XLS is understated with hardly a shiny bit to be seen outside or in.

Both vehicles get alloy wheels (18s for the GWM and 16s for the Ford), single-zone air-conditioning, two USB plug-in points, Apple and Android smartphone connection (as well as Bluetooth), and in-dash touch-screens.

Both have only rake adjust for their steering column and neither comes fitted standard with embedded satellite-navigation.

From there, the GWM really takes over. It gets artificial leather seat trim (versus cloth), a powered driver’s seat, heated front seats, keyless entry and push-button start, an electric park brake, adjustable rear air-con vents, side steps, a sports bar, a cute pop-out step to access the tub and a standard spay-in liner. The latter was an $800 option for our test Ranger XLS.

The Ranger has a cool party trick in its new embedded FordPass modem, which allows such things as remote start and location finding via an app on your smartphone.

The Ranger is protected by a five-year/unlimited-kilometre warranty and roadside assistance is offered by Ford until it is seven years old. Service intervals are every 15,000km or 12 months and the price is capped at $1591 for five years.

The GWM Ute ups the warranty to seven years/unlimited kilometres combined with five years/100,000km of roadside assistance. Service intervals are a shorter 10,000km/12 months and the capped-price servicing for the first five years comes out at $1700.

Related reading:
2021 Ford Ranger: Review
2020 Isuzu D-MAX v Mazda BT-50: Comparison Review
2020 Isuzu D-MAX v Toyota HiLux v Ford Ranger: Comparison Review

The equipment advantage of the 2021 GWM Ute Cannon-L over the Ford Ranger XLS extends to standard safety as well. It has enough driver assist systems (DAS) to boast semi-autonomous capability.

Those systems include autonomous emergency braking (AEB) with pedestrian and cyclist detection, adaptive cruise control, lane keep assist (LKA), lane departure warning (LDW) and lane change assist. There are also surround, reverse and kerb cameras.

The 2021 Ford Ranger XLS also has AEB with pedestrian detection, LKA and LDW, but that’s about it when it comes to DAS. Its cruise control system is not active. Both utes get front and rear parking sensors, traffic sign recognition and tyre pressure monitoring.

Both also get front, front-side and curtain airbags, but the GWM adds a centre airbag in between the two front occupants. That aids its eligibility for a potential five-star ANCAP rating. The Ranger gets five stars, but from way back in 2015.

As already mentioned, dual-cab utes aren’t the most complex of devices. But that doesn’t mean what they have to do is simple.

The breadth of buyer expectations is huge. These things can be family commuters, business haulers, towing vehicles and off-roaders all in the same day. All at the same time even!

We touched on the technical stuff at the top, but to flesh that out a little more, both engines are single variable-geometry turbo and double overhead cam. The Ford Ranger XLS makes peak power at 3000rpm (v 3600rpm), while the GWM Ute Cannon-L has a slightly wider torque spread at 1500-2600rpm (v 1750-2500rpm).

Claimed fuel consumption is 8.9L/100km for the Ranger and 9.4L/100km for the GWM Ute. Our results came in at 12.5L/100km for the Ford and 13.4L/100km for the GWM.

Both vehicles have double wishbone front suspension, leaf spring rear-ends and electric-assist rack and pinion steering. But the GWM has disc brakes all-round while the Ranger has rear drums.

The Ranger has a simple two-diff 4x4 system that essentially requires rear-wheel drive on bitumen. The GWM Ute’s more sophisticated set-up allows 4x4 on-road up to 100km/h before automatically reverting to rear-wheel drive.

The GWM is slightly longer, wider and taller while wheelbases are almost exactly the same at just over 3200mm. Unladen ground clearance is identical at 232mm. The Ranger has an 800mm wading depth, while the GWM offers 500mm. Approach and departure angles are similar but the Ranger has a 24-degree breakover versus 21.1 for the GWM. The turning circle of the Ranger is also tighter at 12.7m versus 13.1m.

The Ranger XLS claimed kerb weight is heavier at 2209kg versus 2175kg for the Cannon-L. The GWM has a 1050kg payload, the Ford 991kg. GVM (gross vehicle mass) for the Ranger is 3200kg and GCM (gross combination mass) 6000kg. The Ute equivalents are 3130kg and 5555kg.

Importantly, the Ford has the better braked towing capacity at 3500kg, while the GWM manages a still-decent 3000kg.

The tubs are similarly sized, although neither is capable of fitting a 1165x1165mm Aussie pallet between the wheel-arches.

If there was an area where we expected the 2021 Ford Ranger XLS to dominate the GWM Ute Cannon-L it was in the drive experience. A decade of comparison testing experience simply can’t be ignored.

Well, the Ford Ranger is the better drive, but it’s not night and day. It’s more cohesive, more comfortable and more refined for sure, but the GWM Ute is let down by details and a lack of finishing rather than total engineering ineptitude.

We’ve touched on these issues before. Throttle delay and lag inhibit the engine’s acceleration; a lack of grade stabilisation means the auto hunts excessively on climbs; the steering weight gets progressively weighty as speeds rise.

The GWM Ute’s sluggishness is exacerbated by lane keep assist, which can be reduced but not switched off. Traction and stability control are coarsely tuned, reacting too soon in rough corners where wheels momentarily lose contact with the surface.

The small and underpowered – by comparison with rivals – engine is less of an issue than expected once up and rolling. The auto, when not trying to choose a gear on hills, works hard and smoothly to maximise forward momentum.

While the suspension is firm, a little jittery at low speed and sometimes harsh impacting a sharp edge, the fundamental damping is well judged, the handling is confident on highway-oriented Cooper tyres and the cabin remains quiet even when the engine is revved hard – something that happens often.

No doubt, the Ranger has the livelier and more frugal engine, has the edge in ride comfort, handling, steering weight and directness (unfettered by lane keeping that rarely seems to want to work).

It retains that edge in cohesion whether unladen or carrying 650kg in the tub. Both vehicles had acceleration curbed, but the GWM also developed a drivetrain vibration launching with the load onboard.

Engage 4x4 and head off-road and both vehicles are capable of overcoming sensible challenges. They have reasonable articulation and clearance, although the side steps on the GWM did ground at one point. The GWM Ute’s rear axle also made an unpleasant metallic clunk in low-range when turning with the diff lock engaged.

The weirdness here is the control dial for the GWM’s 4x4 system, which is marked 4L (low-range, of course – that’s fine), Eco, Normal and Sport. Eco is actually rear-wheel drive high-range, Normal is 4x4 high-range and Sport is 4x4 high-range with more aggressive auto shift patterns. Nowhere is the dial marked 2Hi or 4Hi.

This is one of a number of examples of weird little things that constantly remind us the GWM isn’t from around these parts. Chinese writing on the reversing camera is another. The tendency for the Apple integration to work intermittently is disturbing. So is the occasional habit of the radio to turn on and only turn off by switching off the vehicle.

The instrument panel and touch-screen in both are relatively straight-forward, just the Ranger is that bit better integrated and easier to manage.

Both vehicles have good space in the cabin for four adults and plenty of storage options. The front seats are comfy, while the rear seat bases in both fold up to reveal hidden cargo space. The backrests also fold down.

There are two child seat anchors and ISOFIX mounts in each ute. Only the Ranger gets a fold-down armrest.

This decision here is quite easy if based on price and equipment. The 2021 GWM Ute Cannon-L is simply the rational choice.

A $20,000 price advantage is impossible to ignore. That it also drives pretty well on- and off-road, with and without a load, helps a lot.

But there’s a bunch of unknowns to counter that: reliability, servicing support and, down the road, resale value. These are significant considerations.

By contrast, the 2021 Ford Ranger XLS is a very well-known commodity which has spent a decade impressing us. It doesn’t match the GWM Ute on price, but it has a reputation that’s inestimable in its value.

It boils down to this. The Ford Ranger is the risk-averse choice you’ll pay a premium for. The GWM Ute Cannon-L is far better than we expected and is worth a try if you’re willing to take a punt.

If this valid new competitor prompts some price-cutting from the likes of Ford and Toyota, then all the better.

Price: $52,490 (plus on-road costs)
Available: Now
Engine: 3.2-litre five-cylinder turbo-diesel
Output: 147W/470Nm
Transmission: Six-speed automatic
Fuel: 8.9L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 218g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety rating: Five-star (ANCAP 2015)

Price: $37,990 (drive-away)
Available: Now
Engine: 2.0-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel
Output: 120kW/400Nm
Transmission: Eight-speed automatic
Fuel: 9.4L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 246g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety rating: Not tested