The new Mazda BT50 freestyle cab

[saintphil]

Just had a look today in Petchabun , at the new Mazda BT50 Freestyle cab. Only been out a month. Has anyone got one to give a reveiw , had a look at a lot of others

ie Toyota VIGO , Ford RANGER, but the Mazda does seem the best value , . Any help

[Robert24]

not sure about Mazda's plan but looks like they are working on developing their next generation pick up. (similar to what Toyota had done with Revo or Ford Ranger or Nissan)

[saintphil]

not sure about Mazda's plan but looks like they are working on developing their next generation pick up. (similar to what Toyota had done with Revo or Ford Ranger or Nissan)

Thanks for the reply, I know salesmen are the same the world over , and tell you what you want to here , but they was not expecting another update for a few

years.

[MadMac]

The "new" BT50 is a facelift after 2 years. This is already the new model (under the hood identical with Ranger, also had a facelift). Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi are followers with their new models. Isuzu/Chevrolet were the first. This generation of pickups will last for the next 8...10 years.

Edited September 25, 2015 by MadMac

[IMHO]

The "new" BT50 is a facelift after 2 years. This is already the new model (under the hood identical with Ranger, also had a facelift). Toyota, Nissan and Mitsubishi are followers with their new models. Isuzu/Chevrolet were the first. This generation of pickups will last for the next 8...10 years.

The BT-50 minor change shares mechanicals with the 2011 Ford Ranger, yes. However, the 2015 Ranger minor change has improvements to the engines that have not been passed over to Mazda.

[MadMac]

The "freestyle" BT50 is the current model with some more plastic minus the fake lights in the back, thus identical with the 2013 Ranger. The 2015 facelifted BT50 is not officially out yet, but seen one on the road. This again will be the same as the Ranger. Still both facelifted 2013 models. When you look at the parts of the Mazda, these are all labeled FoMoCo. Making the Mazda actually a Ford. Now it's up to taste, if one is willing to spend almost 100k more for a "Ford" badge and cosmetic differences.

[IMHO]

The "freestyle" BT50 is the current model with some more plastic minus the fake lights in the back, thus identical with the 2013 Ranger. The 2015 facelifted BT50 is not officially out yet, but seen one on the road. This again will be the same as the Ranger. Still both facelifted 2013 models. When you look at the parts of the Mazda, these are all labeled FoMoCo. Making the Mazda actually a Ford. Now it's up to taste, if one is willing to spend almost 100k more for a "Ford" badge and cosmetic differences.

The 2015 Ranger 2.2L has 10HP and 10Nm more than the 2.2L BT-50, plus it has better FE and less turbo lag.

The 3.2L in both keep the same outputs, but the Ranger version has a new turbo that generates more torque at lower RPM's, and gains ~16% (claimed) FE.

The Ranger was launched in 2011, not 2013 BTW - but some buyers probably waited that long to get one

Edited September 26, 2015 by IMHO

[MadMac]

I say it's Ford marketing bubbles . They are screwed together on the same band. The 10HP/torque difference as well as the "turbo lag" are software settings in the ECU. So no real difference, but may be they use another SW load in the Ford than in the Mazda. Anything else would be far too costly to implement in production. It's the same car with some customizations for each model.

Not sure what the correct yearly numbering is, also marketing bubbles. The "new" one is called 2016.

[IMHO]

I say it's Ford marketing bubbles . They are screwed together on the same band. The 10HP/torque difference as well as the "turbo lag" are software settings in the ECU. So no real difference, but may be they use another SW load in the Ford than in the Mazda. Anything else would be far too costly to implement in production. It's the same car with some customizations for each model.

Not sure what the correct yearly numbering is, also marketing bubbles. The "new" one is called 2016.

Not just software - the 2015 versions of the 2.2L and 3.2L used in Ford models have different turbos (with smaller impellers), new injectors, higher commonrail pressures, and revised EGR systems.

The changes are enough that 3.2L export models to AU have to be de-tuned a little to pass Aussie emissions.

Edited September 26, 2015 by IMHO

[Don Mega]

I say it's Ford marketing bubbles . They are screwed together on the same band. The 10HP/torque difference as well as the "turbo lag" are software settings in the ECU. So no real difference, but may be they use another SW load in the Ford than in the Mazda. Anything else would be far too costly to implement in production. It's the same car with some customizations for each model.

Not sure what the correct yearly numbering is, also marketing bubbles. The "new" one is called 2016.

Why would it be too costly to implement in production ?.

To my knowledge (am happy to be proven wrong) but the Ranger and BT-50 are no longer built on the same production line at AAT with the Ranger (2016 model) having moved to the Ford Tasith Pluakdaeng facility in Rayong to be built alongside of the Everest.

[Pomthai]

I say it's Ford marketing bubbles . They are screwed together on the same band. The 10HP/torque difference as well as the "turbo lag" are software settings in the ECU. So no real difference, but may be they use another SW load in the Ford than in the Mazda. Anything else would be far too costly to implement in production. It's the same car with some customizations for each model.

Not sure what the correct yearly numbering is, also marketing bubbles. The "new" one is called 2016.

Not just software - the 2015 versions of the 2.2L and 3.2L used in Ford models have different turbos (with smaller impellers), new injectors, higher commonrail pressures, and revised EGR systems.

The changes are enough that 3.2L export models to AU have to be de-tuned a little to pass Aussie emissions.

I hope revised doesn't mean even harder the blank off.

And de-tuned? lol, I expect there will be some free software updates for quite a few in the motoring world over the coming months. Not just VW.

[MadMac]

Why would it be too costly to implement in production ?.

To my knowledge (am happy to be proven wrong) but the Ranger and BT-50 are no longer built on the same production line at AAT with the Ranger (2016 model) having moved to the Ford Tasith Pluakdaeng facility in Rayong to be built alongside of the Everest.

I know that the 2013 or 2011 or whatsoever BT-50 has almost all parts labeled FoMoCo (Ford Motor Company). So these are with certainty identical to the same parts in the Ranger. From a production cost and efficiency point of view it would not make sense, to produce the same engine in a slightly different mechanical version to achieve a differentiation, when the exact same can be done by loading a different software version.

Given that there may be some improvements to the engine compared to the pre-facelift model, I would think the new Mazda would get the same changes in due time, as the engine itself is developed by Mazda and not Ford. We can only speculate here.

Interesting with the move of production though. This should increase output and lead to better availability locally as they mostly produce for the Aussie market. Remember the long lead times not so long ago...

Edited September 26, 2015 by MadMac

[saintphil]

Thanks for all the input from everyone, so basically the new Mazda BT50 has all the same running gear as the old one, but it

had a new nose, and rear end .Has anyone got any reviews of the old one, as from what I have found out it is the same.as a

few pieces of trim wont make any difference to performance

[IMHO]

I would think the new Mazda would get the same changes in due time, as the engine itself is developed by Mazda and not Ford. We can only speculate here.

Nar, these 2.2L and 3.2L engines are Ford designs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Duratorq_engine#2.2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Duratorq_engine#3.2

The previous generation Ranger/BT-50/B2200 (-2010) were indeed all-Mazda designs though.

Mazda will not be getting the 2015 engine updates. That deal is done. They're now solidly focussed on the next gen, which will be using their own Skyactiv tech.

Edited September 26, 2015 by IMHO

[Don Mega]

Why would it be too costly to implement in production ?.

To my knowledge (am happy to be proven wrong) but the Ranger and BT-50 are no longer built on the same production line at AAT with the Ranger (2016 model) having moved to the Ford Tasith Pluakdaeng facility in Rayong to be built alongside of the Everest.

I know that the 2013 or 2011 or whatsoever BT-50 has almost all parts labeled FoMoCo (Ford Motor Company). So these are with certainty identical to the same parts in the Ranger. From a production cost and efficiency point of view it would not make sense, to produce the same engine in a slightly different mechanical version to achieve a differentiation, when the exact same can be done by loading a different software version.

Given that there may be some improvements to the engine compared to the pre-facelift model, I would think the new Mazda would get the same changes in due time, as the engine itself is developed by Mazda and not Ford. We can only speculate here.

Interesting with the move of production though. This should increase output and lead to better availability locally as they mostly produce for the Aussie market. Remember the long lead times not so long ago...

2011+ Ranger and BT-50 share the T6 platform. it was designed in Australia by Ford (Hence a lot of "fomoco" parts in the BT-50).

The engines are built by Ford (at their Dagenham facility), not Mazda. Seems you are confused with the J97 platform that had the 2.5 and 3.0 engines, they were Mazda designed engines.

The Ranger facelift vehicle (2016)differs a fair bit mechanically (and electronically) from the BT-50 now as it shares drive line and electronic components with the New Everest.... the BT-50 does not, unless Mazda decide to develop their own.

Edited September 26, 2015 by Don Mega

[MadMac]

Ok, that's good info. Thanks!

[Don Mega]

I expect the BT-50 will go through one more face lift before a new model is released, most likely Hilux based.

[IMHO]

I expect the BT-50 will go through one more face lift before a new model is released, most likely Hilux based.

Don't believe that Hilux platform rumor - that one is so far fetched you can't even call it speculation

I think that particular journo was just short on stories that day

Maybe he should write F1 stories - he's got the right creds

Edited September 26, 2015 by IMHO

[Don Mega]

I did not hear it from a journo but until it is confirmed by Mazda(or denied/ignored) it is just pure speculation.... would be a good few years before that happens though.

Edited September 26, 2015 by Don Mega

[IMHO]

The engines are built by Ford (at their Dagenham facility), not Mazda.

Indeed they are.. but the ones used in Thai production come from SA: https://corporate.ford.com/company/plant-detail-pages/struandale-engine-plant.html

[Don Mega]

The engines are built by Ford (at their Dagenham facility), not Mazda.

Indeed they are.. but the ones used in Thai production come from SA: https://corporate.ford.com/company/plant-detail-pages/struandale-engine-plant.html

same same but different !!

[IMHO]

I did not hear it from a journo but until it is confirmed by Mazda(or denied/ignored) it is just pure speculation.... would be a good few years before that happens though.

This is where it began: http://www.caradvice.com.au/383921/next-mazda-bt-50-might-be-hilux-based/

As the journo himself notes though, Mazda haven't even discussed the topic with Toyota.

Puff.

[JaseTheBass]

I watched a review last night and the consensus was that Mazda have missed the mark. People expecting it to be up with the class leading Ranger will be disappointed.

[IMHO]

I watched a review last night and the consensus was that Mazda have missed the mark. People expecting it to be up with the class leading Ranger will be disappointed.

Depends on what "the mark" is... for years now, Mazda's strategy has been simple: be a price leader. I think they've still hit that mark.

[JaseTheBass]

I watched a review last night and the consensus was that Mazda have missed the mark. People expecting it to be up with the class leading Ranger will be disappointed.

Depends on what "the mark" is... for years now, Mazda's strategy has been simple: be a price leader. I think they've still hit that mark.

Get what you pay for.

I'd rather pay a bit more and get the best than pay less and get something other than the Ranger.

[MadMac]

Nothing wrong to consider the best value you get for your money. I obviously have a BT-50 , getting 2 years old now. That time the only new models were the Isuzu/Chevy and the Mazda/Ranger, limiting choice significantly. This has changed now.

I would have taken the Ranger as it just looks cooler, if not Fort would have lied to me straight in the face (won a security price in SG, Mazda is the old model, other BS) at two dealers. Seems that was their script. In addition the long waiting time and nothing for free. Mazda throw in 10 partly insignificant freebies, but included was also a 1 year first class insurance worth 20k. That and the 90k lower price of the Mazda were good enough to chose the smiling face, not to think about after sales support from Ford if they even lie to you before you make a testdrive.

So yes, I'm happy with my BT-50, suspension could be a bit better but it's an ute, not a cruiser. Amazing what that beast transported so far and it can still kill almost every other at a traffic light. Would buy the Mazda again anytime.

[saintphil]

Thanks again for the input from all members , but has anyone owned one to give a personal view of the day to day running, of

one , and wether they had wished they had gone for a better model ie the Ford or Toyota

[saintphil]

Nothing wrong to consider the best value you get for your money. I obviously have a BT-50 , getting 2 years old now. That time the only new models were the Isuzu/Chevy and the Mazda/Ranger, limiting choice significantly. This has changed now.

I would have taken the Ranger as it just looks cooler, if not Fort would have lied to me straight in the face (won a security price in SG, Mazda is the old model, other BS) at two dealers. Seems that was their script. In addition the long waiting time and nothing for free. Mazda throw in 10 partly insignificant freebies, but included was also a 1 year first class insurance worth 20k. That and the 90k lower price of the Mazda were good enough to chose the smiling face, not to think about after sales support from Ford if they even lie to you before you make a testdrive.

So yes, I'm happy with my BT-50, suspension could be a bit better but it's an ute, not a cruiser. Amazing what that beast transported so far and it can still kill almost every other at a traffic light. Would buy the Mazda again anytime.

[stevenl]

Thanks again for the input from all members , but has anyone owned one to give a personal view of the day to day running, of

one , and wether they had wished they had gone for a better model ie the Ford or Toyota

I'm very happy with mine and would not consider the 2 brands you mention better, certainly not when I bought it

[MadMac]

Just did . No regrets, great car. Suspension is a bit hard on the rear if unloaded, that could be better. Low fuel consumption, you get around 8...9l/100km in real, mostly city. Mazda service here in CNX is good, many new built centers, they also have a lot more locations than Ford, so don't need to drive through the whole city.

I would buy it again.

P.S. got also free leather seats (well, that fake leather) because madame wanted it, would not take this again in TH, you burn your ass. Alternatively wear long trousers...but who wants this

Edited September 26, 2015 by MadMac