The Verdict – 2014 4WD dual-cab ute comparison

The top three vehicles in this category were so closely matched that only four points separated them. In the case of the second and third place getters, this difference was in fact one solitary point.

So why the nightmare? Surely it’s a clear decision. He who scores the most points wins, right?

Well yes, and no... But first, let’s break apart our test criteria to put you in the picture.

Execution of Intended Purpose
In this perhaps most relevant of sections, our judges considered the many uses dual-cab utes could possibly face, and scored them accordingly. Interestingly, the BT-50 pipped the Ranger to take first place, scoring an additional point for carrying capacity.

In third place came the Amarok which lost one point for cargo area flexibility, while D-MAX followed in fourth ahead of Colorado, HiLux and Triton respectively.

Fit, Finish and Finesse
Regular readers will not be surprised to learn that Volkswagen usually takes the cake in this part of our comparisons. The build and materials quality of their vehicles is pretty hard to top, and in this test the Amarok was no exception.

Tying for second place were the BT-50 and Ranger twins, which eased ahead of a three-way third-place tie between the Colorado, HiLux and Triton. The D-MAX came in fourth.

On the Road (and off it!)
This is where our nightmares begin. On-road, the Amarok proved impressively capable, falling behind the Ranger only where power delivery was concerned. It did, however, mass a higher aggregate score, as did the Ranger over its BT-50 cousin.

In fourth place was the Colorado, by just a single point, trailed again by just one point by the Toyota HiLux. Only a few points behind that came the D-MAX and in last place the aged Triton.

Suitable Integration of Technology
Typically, our judging criteria separates technology and safety components when testing passenger vehicles. However, when testing light commercial vehicles, safety is integrated into the score because these vehicles are not [yet] compelled to undergo ANCAP testing.

As the vehicles on this comparison are used for both purposes, our judges split the decision, allowing the ANCAP score as the over-ruling decider, albeit with some important caveats.

Safety aside, the Amarok won the technology category convincingly over the Colorado (in second-place) and BT-50 and Ranger which tied for third. Fourth place went to the Triton while the D-MAX took fifth ahead of last-place HiLux.

So, where’s the contention? Well, to make this as brief as possible, it’s in the fact that the Amarok doesn’t have curtain airbags. Despite being a five-star ANCAP vehicle, we felt buyers looking to purchase an Amarok for family use should be made aware of this important shortcoming.

For reference, the Colorado, Ranger, BT-50, HiLux and Triton all have curtain airbags as standard across both the front and second row.

Value for Money
If you’ve studied this category throughout our comparison, you’ll note some rather large gaps between not only the list price of these vehicles, but also in the warranty and after-sales support, and accessory and option pricing... Not to mention resale values.

Factoring all of this into account, our judges decided it was the Amarok which represented the best value for money, narrowly ahead of the Triton (which is very competitively priced right now). Third place was awarded to the BT-50 ahead of the more expensive and arguably less well-kitted Ranger, followed by a tie between Colorado and D-MAX in fifth. The wooden spoon goes to HiLux.

That said, the Amarok did score highly against all judging criteria on this test and was clearly the most refined vehicle to drive, had the best on-road dynamics and ride quality and was the best built. In spite of its lack of low-range (on automatic models) and compromised ground clearance and wading depth in this company, it managed an impressive 78 points out of 100.

In second place it’s the Australian developed and no-nonsense workhorse, Ford’s Ranger. Amassing 74 points from 100 the Ranger felt both comfortable and capable across every situation it was driven. It’s a little more expensive than its BT-50 cousin, though we feel it is a better drive on road, on dirt and in the wet.

This, not surprisingly, brings us to the BT-50. Mazda’s trade-tough ute lost to the Ranger by just one point (73/100), and in all categories was quite evenly matched. As noted, however, the BT-50’s firmer ride and tendency to ‘skate’ on wet and dirt roads saw our judges favour the Ranger by the slimmest of margins.

Fourth place (with a score of 68/100) was awarded to Holden’s mighty capable Colorado. Although build and material quality could have been better, the Colorado’s ability on and off-road was nothing short of impressive. It’s a torquey work vehicle with towing and carrying capacity to rival the best on test, but when viewed as a passenger vehicle has some obvious shortfalls.

A surprise tie in fifth saw the D-MAX and HiLux share an identical score of 64/100, although each arrived at its total differently. The D-MAX scored better in the Value for Money, Execution of Intended Purpose and Suitable Integration of Technology parts of our test – not surprising given its newer design age. That said, the HiLux still managed to beat the D-MAX in our On the Road and Fit, Finish and Finesse categories.

This brings us to the final chapter, and last place. Falling only one point behind D-MAX and HiLux, with a total of 63/100, is the Mitsubishi Triton. The vehicle’s design age showed both on and off-road, while cabin quality and amenity, and lower technology levels – and four-star ANCAP safety rating – also played their part. These issues aside, the Triton still has a lot to offer and is in most aspects a very capable workhorse, especially considering its price in relation to most on test.

trucksales.com.au's 2014 4WD dual-cab ute comparison

>> Ford Ranger

>> Holden Colorado

>> Isuzu D-MAX

>> Mazda BT-50

>> Mitsubishi Triton

>> Toyota HiLux

>> Volkswagen Amarok