Yes, Mazda still makes bakkies
AND THEY’RE GOOD ONES: JUST RIGHT IF YOU DON’T WANT TO BE A RANGER OKE
Brendan Seery
When it comes to things automotive, Mazda has always been like the kid at school who has stayed in the background: not a flashy superstar or sports jock, but not the class fool, either. Just anonymous. Then, suddenly, around Matric time, he walks away with four or five As ... and provincial colours for cross-country running.
In the car market, Mazda’s products (other than the MX-5 sports car) have tended to be overshadowed in the sexiness stakes by competitors from the likes of VW, Ford and Renault. And, in the reliability world, Mazdas have never been spoken of with quite the awe of Toyota. All of that is unfortunate, because Mazdas, although they might not be showy, are good cars when it comes to dynamics. And when it comes to quality and reliability, they can go toe-to-toe and even best Toyota.
Probably the most ignored Mazda is the one which competes in the ultra-competitive bakkie market. A Mazda bakkie? That’s often the first thing someone says – normally followed by “do they still make bakkies?”
There are plenty of old battered Mazda bakkies – some dating back to the ’80s – still trundling along our roads, often the transport for the lone guy trying to make his small business succeed.
But, when it comes to new bakkies – and especially the “lifestyle' types of double cabs – Mazda’s BT-50 seldom gets a look in.
When the Manne talk bakkies (and it is a man's world, this one, girls...) they debate the Toyota Hilux, the Ford Ranger, the Isuzu KB and even the comparative newcomer, the VW Amarok.
Which is a pity because the BT50 is, in effect, a Ford Ranger in a different suit. And the Ranger is frequently SA’s best-selling vehicle of any type, according to official monthly figures, doing battle with the Hilux.
The BT-50 has slightly more rounded design and fluid looks, thanks to what Mazda calls its Kodo design philosophy (no I don’t know what it means but presumably, it conjures up echoes of placid Koi ponds, graceful geishas – and steel Samurai swords ... who know what goes on in the minds of marketers?).
It is handsome, rather than startling looking and not quite as overtly butch as the Ford Ranger (and one wonders how much of that is compensation for its owner's lack of whatever...). Under the skin, it has the same chassis and engines (a four-cylinder 2.2 litre turbodiesel and a five-cylinder, 3.2 litre turbodiesel) as the Ranger. Which means they're gutsy, if not particularly economical when you use the grunt.
Inside, the BT-50 is slightly more elegant than its Ford cousin, although the bits from the Ford parts bin (the two companies only split their alliance fairly recently) – like the entertainment screen – are reminiscent of ’80s calculator watches to my mind.
Ford’s newest Rangers have much more sophisticated systems, but this has not carried across to the BT-50.
So, the question has to be: why would you buy a BT-50 instead of a Ford Ranger? Not for any technical reason because they’re virtually identical.
Perhaps there’ll be less of a queue for service at the (fewer) Mazda dealers. Perhaps you don’t want to be just another Ranger oke ...
Whatever your motivation, I suggest that, if you’re in the market for a bakkie, don’t ignore the BT-50 just because it doesn’t stand out.
Mind you, the real question you need to ask is: do you really need a bakkie in the first place?