Mazda Bt -50 Thoughts

Hi Peter,

Thank you for your reply and good feedback. I am led to believe that the Ford Ranger is similar to the BT50. Good to know that it has the grunt.

Ian

Hi,

I plan on looking at a Trakmaster 'Nullarbor' around 18'. Tandem axle. I do believe the Mazda should handle ok. Any thoughts or experience with the van?

Thanks,

Ian

I just had a look at the specifications of the Nullarbor and the BT 50. Unfortunately I could not find any weights for the van on the manufacturer's web site but a review on another site said it is 2343 kg. The Mazda site lists 2112 kg for the heaviest BT50 in the entire range.

I would be looking for a heavier car. The ideal tow car should be at least as heavy as the van and have a long wheel base with the shortest possible distance between the tow ball and the rear axle. All of the utes in the BT 50 class don't shape up all that well against those dimensions and as a result they don't have a good safety record when towing big vans. There is a discussion currently in progress on one of the major caravan sites as a result of this recent crashhttp://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/grandmother-escapes-windblown-caravan/xsaesqu?cpkey=2aa6c7fd-754a-44f1-bfa2-43d122a27419%257c%257c%257c%257c There are countless others on the net.

The van in that accident is most likely within the car's towing capacity but it is physically too big for the car to handle it.

Imagine two BT 50s driving along a highway at around 90 kph. One is towing a 3500 kg van and the other has a 3500 kg four wheel trailer full of bags of cement. Both are hit by a strong cross wind. One will hardly notice it while the other would stand a good chance of making the 6 o'clock news that night. Both cars are within their maximum towing capacity but one is running on a knife edge whenever it encounters a bit of speed combined with wind or anything that causes a sudden change in direction of the car. You can't go solely on the towing capacity of the car when choosing a van.

A BT 50 will certainly tow that van but a much heavier car with a tow ball a lot closer to the axle than the 1.2 metres that most of those utes have would do it with a far higher degree of safety, particularly on the highways.

There is another issue with all utes of this size and that is chassis bending. High tow ball loads combined with too much weight in the back result in huge forces bouncing up and down behind the rear axle. The result is the chassis tries to pivot on the axle and lift the front with disastrous results. This problem is much more likely to occur if the back of the chassis is sitting on after market air bags. Look up bent chassis, particularly on dual cabs, on the net and you wll be amazed at what you see.

I would suggest you read these two articles on car and van dynamics before making any decisions. They would be the best articles of their type that I have found on the net so far.

http://www.caravanandmotorhomebooks.com/pdf/vehicle_dynamics_complete.pdf

http://rvsupertramp.com.au/Articles/CaravanDynamics.aspx

HI,

I have been advised by a number of people to wait, as the BT has only been out for 18 months or so. Any updated version would be slightly better than the previous models.

Good advise I think.

Any reason for the auto over the manual?

Thanks, Ian

Ian,
I drove the manual Ranger at work. It has the same clutch and gearbox as the BT 50.

I found the clutch to be either in or out and while I found the box ok to swap gears others have found them a hand full in traffic.


As said the auto is great off road allowing for great control in all conditions.

The auto is a very good box and runs through all it's gears effortlessly.
It is a very good box for towing. The auto will also greatly reduce strain when taking off or manoeuvring a van or camper.

Hi Ross,

I will visit site you have suggested. I guess the more information one has, the better the decision. I agree that all brands have their unique problems and faults. The more time taken a more informed decision can be made.

Regards,

Ian

HI,

My thoughts exactly, they are a big spacious unit. A bit like me, at 6'2" I need room. The Mazda does seem to have that, also can't beat a bigger cubed engine for that extra work that may be required of the motor. Van size is about what I will be looking at.

Thanks for the info.

Ian

Hi Geoff,

Thank you for the info, the information that you have provided is useful. One thing that you need to count on when travelling particularly with a new vehicle is responsible support from dealers.

I will take this into account, did you get rid of your earlier Mazda? If so, what unit do you purchase to replace it?

Thanks, Ian

Hi Ian,

I looked at several different options for a heavy duty utility, there really is only three (Landcruiser, Defender, Patrol) and settled on the Landcruiser 79 series. In my circumstance I am carrying a tray-top camper (approx 400kg plus load) so I wanted something with a decent chassis and proven record after the bad experience with the BT50.
Only had the 'cruiser for 8 months but several 4WD trips already and it's been great. It is quite different to the BT50 - not as good driving around town but hughly better in the bush (clearance, gearing, torque).

Like everything in life a vehicle choice is a compromise. Good luck with your decision.

Cheers, Geoff

Hi Ian, Like Geoff, we had an 07 BT50, ours was a manual twin cab for towing an 18 foot Jayco Pop top. It did have clutch issues, three clutches in about 65000 Ks. In all other respects we loved the vehicle, an if I needed such a vehicle again I would have no hesitation in buying the new one with an auto box.

As to Mazda service, we could not fault it here in Newcastle. Cheers

Hi,

Thank you for the information, I do believe that the auto seems to be the choice amongst a lot of travellers.
The 470 NM is certainly a good point and from all reports the economy is good even when towing.

Thank you for your reply. Ian