Triton, Colorado or BT50???

[Waipuna]

I get a vehicle supplied as part of my employment package but I am limited to picking from 3 manufacturers. They are Mitsubishi, Holden, or Mazda.

I have told my employer that I would like a Turbo Diesel Dual Cab Ute and so I must choose between a Triton, Colorado or a BT50.

At this stage I am leaning toward the Triton mostly because of the better ground clearance which will come in handy on the tracks on my farm. I love the engine in the BT50 but not much else impresses me.

Anyway I am open to hearing arguments from anyone as to why one choice might be better than another as I don't feel any emotional attachment to any brand.

The vehicle will be used for a combination of regional city miles and high speed rural highway driving throughout regional Qld. On weekends it will be loaded up and driven on low speed steep 4wd tracks on my farm and the occasional beach camping trip.

Fire away fellas!!!!

Brett

[Scantek]

I have a Colorado in my work package and I find it great. I was leaning toward the Navara D40 but pricing was outside my allowance. I looked at the Triton and B50/Ranger but they just didn't do it for me. We run a fleet of Rodeo's & Colorado's and some of them get the living hell thrashed out of them but they just keep on going.

Power and performance of the Colorado seemed better to me than the B50 and Triton.

if you get a Colorado be carefull of the back end when reversing. The distances are decieving.. The speedo reads 118km/hr and the GPS says your doing 110km/hr so if you stick to the speedo reading you'll never get caught for speeding..

Russ

[grimbo]

if you can put an aftermarket set of springs then go the Triton, also make sure you get the rear diff lock as well.

The BT50 is really nice to drive, great engine and gearbox. The rear seats aren't as roomy as the triton but more tray space.

After giving both of them a thorough working out on a drive from Adelaide to Alice a couple of years ago I'd be happy with either one, but haven't driven the Colorado so can't comment on that

[Waipuna]

Thanks Guys.

A couple of things I have learnt about the Triton with optional rear diff lock, more rear passenger legroom, and coil front suspension are all features that would suit my needs so I think the decision has been made in favour of the Triton.

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Brett

[grimbo]

don't get the crappy hard tonneau cover. It lets in so much dust it's not funny. Also forget the stupid "roll bar" as it takes up a lot of space. Try and get a canopy if you can though.

[Waipuna]

[quote="grimbo"]don't get the crappy hard tonneau cover. It lets in so much dust it's not funny. Also forget the stupid "roll bar" as it takes up a lot of space. Try and get a canopy if you can though.[/quote]

Thanks Grimbo.

Actually I think I might keep it simple this time round and go for a trayback with no canopy. For me it is all about minimising the scratches in the bush and I have noticed the traybacks on my farm get through the deep gullies without even coming close to bottoming out with the rear overhang. The styleside versions all struggle getting through without panel damage.

Another reason for no canopy is to carry motorbikes in the back. I must agree with your comments re: the crappy hard tonneau cover though. Serve a purpose for secure city based use but completely useless in practice if you actually want to load up your ute properly for the bush.

Brett