Mitsubishi Triton VS Holden Colorado
Mitsubishi Triton
Likes
Dislikes
Holden Colorado
Likes
- Very torquey engine
- Nice ride and handling
- Reasonable off-road capability
Dislikes
- Basic cabin
- Noisy engine
- Roll-away tonneau cover is fiddly
Summary
Mitsubishi Triton
So, you’re looking for a dual-cab ute. You want something that can do it all. Tough, family friendly, and right in the sweet spot when it comes to price.
You’re also looking for something a little different to Australia’s two favourites, the Ford Ranger and Toyota HiLux. Maybe you find them too expensive, maybe you find them too popular, or maybe you find the HiLux too old and the Ranger too digital.
For this test, we’ve grabbed the next two down in terms of popularity. Both are built by Japanese automakers in Thailand, and both have a reputation for being as tough as they come.
Read more about
- Beefed-up ute approved for Australia: Isuzu D-Max Blade gets Walkinshaw treatment to take on the Toyota HiLux GR Sport, Nissan Navara Warrior and maybe even Ford Ranger Raptor
- Iconic badges to return? Mitsubishi Lancer and Montero nameplates trademarked in the US suggest Nissan Patrol twinned Pajero and Nissan Leaf relation are coming
- Will the new 2025 Kia Tasman ute be a hit? We examine whether newcomers such as the BYD Shark plug-in hybrid ute can match the might of the Ford Ranger and Toyota HiLux | Analysis
On the one hand, we’ve got the new-generation Mitsubishi Triton in GLS form, and on the other, we’ve got the facelifted Isuzu D-Max in LS-U+ form. Both are well-equipped dual-cabs in 4x4 form which sit second from the top of their respective ranges.
Will we be able to crown one a winner for work, play, and family duties? Read on to find out.
Safety rating | |
---|---|
Engine Type | 3.0L turbo |
Fuel Type | Diesel |
Fuel Efficiency | 8L/100km |
Seating | 5 seats |
Holden Colorado
The Holden Colorado is a quiet achiever in the ute market: it has a solid rep as a work-and-play vehicle, generally records positive results in objective editorial reviews and comparisons, and it sells well.
But how does a Z71 do as a tow vehicle? Read on.
Safety rating | |
---|---|
Engine Type | 2.8L turbo |
Fuel Type | Diesel |
Fuel Efficiency | 8.7L/100km |
Seating | 5 seats |
Verdict
Mitsubishi Triton/10
It’s a tough test for two tough utes, which are more evenly matched than we first expected. It’s clear both also make great alternatives to the HiLux or Ranger.
The Triton’s asking price is more affordable. It has solid ownership terms as well as a sleek, modern, and spacious cabin. It also has a higher payload and a handful of additional safety kit. On value (and our scoring system) alone, it’s hard not to award it the win.
However, this doesn’t make the D-Max a loser by any stretch. It impressed in areas I didn’t expect. Its cabin is more comfortable even though it doesn’t feel as big. It boasts a better ride quality and faster, smoother power delivery when compared to the Triton. After our rigorous testing, it was the ute I subjectively preferred driving home in at the end of the day.
 | Triton GLS 4x4 | D-Max LS-U+ 4x4 |
Price and specs | 8 | 7 |
Practicality | 8 | 7 |
Design | 8 | 7 |
Engine and transmission | 7 | 8 |
Fuel consumption | 7 | 7 |
Driving | 7 | 8 |
Safety | 9 | 8 |
Ownership | 9 | 8 |
Final score | 7.9 | 7.5 |
Holden Colorado7.2/10
The Holden Colorado Z71Â is a pretty decent towing machine, handling all aspects of general load-lugging duties with a quiet reliable efficiency. In simple terms, it kept the whole ute-and-van combination trucking along nicely.
The Z71 is a solid Colorado package all-round with some welcome flashiness to its functionality.
Design
Mitsubishi Triton
Both versions of these utes arrived this year, one a new-generation, the other a facelift.
We’re straying into subjective territory as always with design, but to me the Triton gets an advantage. Clearly its latest generation has been cause for a blank canvas redesign, and the result is a much more contemporary looking vehicle from the outside.
Its light profile, imposing width and wheel stance, as well as its tidy body panels make it stand out from the crowd, particularly at its price point. Sure, it doesn’t have the brash American appeal of the Ranger, but it looks more modern than the facelifted D-Max on this test at any rate.
On the inside it continues its modern look and feel, and also features plenty of clever little design touches to push Mitsubishi’s diamond theme. This is reflected in surprising places, like the knurling on the volume dial or reflected in the headrests of the seats. The cabin feels spacious and wide, and is brightened up a bit with a tasteful smatter of silver in the cool bar-style vents. It also features bright and sharp screens with decent if uninspired software.
Meanwhile the D-Max stays the course for this update with a slightly more aggressive treatment in its grille and rear light clusters. Its overall visage is one of a conservative ute which plays it quite safe in terms of design queues. It does keep with the tough reputation of the D-Max badge, but in my opinion runs the risk of feeling a little dated with so many newer-looking options on the market, ranging from its Triton rival here to the Ranger and VW Amarok.
This tough but rugged theme continues on the inside, with a few redeeming features that may surprise you. On the whole it’s a bit of a greyscale space with plenty of hard plastics, but there are soft-touch surfaces in all the right places which offer a bit more sponge than those in the Triton. It also manages to maintain Isuzu’s current hexagonal design motif, which is reflected in the wheel, buttons, dash cluster and even the seats.Â
For this update the D-Max also has an improved software suite, although it’s still a bit clumsy in terms of its layout compared to the simple menus in the Triton.
Which seats are better for spending time in? Despite its more rugged appeal, I was surprised to find the D-Max had the better of the two seats simply because you sink into them more. Even the leather trim on its steering wheel is softer and nicer to hold.
Do we have a winner? Despite the D-Max proving to be quite comfortable, in terms of aesthetics and providing a modern, spacious cabin, it’s the Triton.
Holden Colorado
The Colorado is a good-looking unit, so it follows that the Z71, the Colorado line-up's top dog, should be the best-looking vehicle in the entire range. And it is. Look at the photos yourself and make up your own mind.
The Z71's black highlights everywhere, the roof rails, side steps and fold-away tonneau cover add functionality to the flashiness.
Under its slick exterior, the Z71 sits on a steel ladder-frame chassis.
There may be no mechanical differences between the Z71 and other similarly-powered Colorado utes, but this is not merely a sticker-pack special – this is something more substantial than that. Don't believe me? Keep reading.
Practicality
Mitsubishi Triton
Dimensionally, the Triton is longer and taller but slightly narrower than the D-Max (although, it does not feel it), while the D-Max actually gets a longer but much narrower tray. See the full dimensions in our table below.
In terms of storage and adjustability in the cab these two are quite evenly matched. Both offer eight-way power adjust seats in the spec tested, and both offer telescopic adjust for the steering column. Both get large bottle holders in the doors and in the centre console, although without adjustable ridges, neither are perfect when it comes to holding different sized bottles.
Only the Triton scores a wireless charging bay below its climate controls, while it also offers a larger centre console box.
Both have easily adjustable screens with the new-generation Triton committing nicely to dials for tuning and volume, and the D-Max notably re-introducing them for this update. Again, the Triton’s software is more simply laid out, and its screens are brighter and sharper than the units in the D-Max.
Both cars score an array of easy-access toggles on a dedicated climate panel, saving you the need to negotiate with touchscreen menus, so they’re evenly matched on that front.
The rear seat is differentiated mainly by the additional width seemingly on offer in the Triton, which feels as though it could seat an adult in the middle position in relative comfort. It scores bottle holders in the doors and drop-down armrest, as well as two USB-A ports on the back of the centre console and adjustable air vents in the roof. Additionally, the Triton gets a clever set of pockets on the back of the passenger seat suited to various device sizes. I fit quite comfortably behind my own 182cm tall driving position in the Triton, although I did feel as though I was seated very far off the ground.
Meanwhile the D-Max’s rear seat offers the same spongy seat trim as in the front seats, although overall it feels narrower than the Triton. It, too, scores bottle holders in the doors and two additional small ones in the drop-down armrest, although it only offers a single USB-C outlet on the back of the centre console. There are also two adjustable air vents down there. And an odd little storage tray. Unlike the Triton, the D-Max comes with a bonus coat hook on the back of the front seat. It feels as though I have slightly less room in the D-Max, but it is still sufficient and just as comfortable.
The Triton has a noticeably larger tray than the D-Max. See the full figures in the table below, but the core part of the story is the Triton’s tray is much wider and offers more useful space between the arches, while the D-Max’ tray turns out to be slightly longer. Both come from the factory in this spec fitted with a plastic tub-liner, but neither come with a roller cover unless you delve into the options list.
Payload is nearly 100kg higher in the Triton compared to the D-Max, although both utes share the same rated towing capacity at 750kg unbraked and 3500kg braked. The Triton gets an alloy spare while the D-Max gets a steel spare.
Off-road prowess was not the focus of this Tradie Guide review, but if you’re curious to see the technical figures, they’re in the spec table below.
Do we have a practicality winner? Seems like the Triton gets ahead here slightly with its higher payload, wider tray, and more spacious-feeling cabin.
 | Triton GLS 4x4 | MU-X LS-U+ 4x4 |
L x W x H | 5320mm x 1865mm x 1795mm | 5285mm x 1870mm x 1790mm |
Kerb weight | 2125kg | 2110kg |
Payload | 1075kg | 990kg |
Towing capacity b/ub | 750kg/3500kg | 750kg/3500kg |
Tub capacity L x W x H | 1555mm x 1545mm x 525mm | 1570mm x 1530mm x 490mm |
Tub Width between arches | 1135mm | 1122mm |
Spare | Full-size alloy | Full-size steel |
Tub liner | Y | Y |
Tonneau cover | N | N (ours fitted with a manual roller $3521.76) |
Off-Road
 | Triton GLS 4x4 | D-Max LS-U+ 4x4 |
Clearance | 228mm | 240mm |
Approach | 30.4 degrees | 30.5 degrees |
Departure | 22.8 degrees | 19 degrees |
Breakover | 23.4 degrees | 23.8 degrees |
Holden Colorado
The Z71 has a Colorado carry-over interior, which is nice and simple, with some Z71 branding stitched in the front seats.
For starters, there are grab handles for the driver and front passenger – I'm a big fan of grab handles.
The dash is a basic layout – but made family-friendly with expanses of tough plastic and soft-touch leather – and it has everything you need. The centre console houses an 8.0-inch colour touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto and standard nav.
There is a USB port in the centre-bin, and there's a 12V socket in the back of that bin for back-seat passengers.
The cabin is reasonably comfortable; the front seats – in fact all of the Z71's seats – err on the side of firm rather than being well-cushioned. But, even in the back seat, when I sat behind my driving position, I had ample head- and leg-room.
There are the usual collection of storage spaces around the cabin – sunglasses, glove box, door pockets, seat-back pockets – but a long centre-bin lid impedes access to the cupholders in between driver and front-seat passenger, and there are no cupholders in the back seat's fold-down centre arm-rest.
There are shallow storage spots under the rear seats, one of which contains your jack etc.
Overall fit and finish is impressive without being spectacular, but that's fine with me.
The tray is 1484mm long, 1534mm wide (1122mm between the wheel-arches) and 466mm high. Back there, you get Premium DuraGuard Spray–on tub liner, which seems sturdy and durable, as well as four solid tie-down points.
Price and features
Mitsubishi Triton
First up, let’s talk price-tags. Usually, if you want all the luxuries without spending too much, this second-from-the-top variant is where it’s at, and our two competitors here are very closely matched.
Straight away, the Mitsubishi Triton GLS appears to get a clear advantage. At $59,090 before on-roads, it’s nearly $6000 more affordable than than its D-Max LS-U+ rival here, although to make it match spec-for-spec, you need to add $1580 to its price-tag for the Deluxe Pack which adds things like leather seat trim, heating, and power adjust for the driver.
Meanwhile, the D-Max LS-U+ needs no extras added, but is significantly more expensive, starting at $65,500. Our test example also had a manual roller cover fitted, which adds a further $3521.76 to the price, but doesn’t affect the outcome here as the Triton doesn’t get one as standard anyway.
Both of our utes here score 18-inch alloy wheels clad in highway terrain tyres (on the spec sheet, our test Triton had all-terrains for some reason), LED headlights, 9.0-inch multimedia touchscreens, 7.0-inch digital instrument elements, keyless entry with push-start, dual-zone climate, and side-steps.
Both get wireless Apple CarPlay connectivity, but only the D-Max gets wireless Android Auto (it’s wired in the Triton), however, the Triton hits back with its wireless phone charger which is missing from the D-Max. The D-Max also gets auto walk-away locking, but misses out on the auto folding mirrors the Triton gets. Technically, the D-Max has more speakers, but the Triton’s audio system sounded better.
Check out the table below for the full specs laid out neat and tidy.
In terms of which one is a winner here? They’re such a close match it’s too close to call on features alone, but the Triton’s price advantage, even with the Deluxe Pack, is hard to ignore.
 | Triton GLS 4x4 (Deluxe Pack) | D-Max LS-U+ 4x4 |
Price (MSRP) | $59,090 (+1580) | $65,500 |
Wheel size | 18-inch alloy | 18-inch alloy |
Tyre | Maxxis A/T | Bridgestone H/T |
LED headlights | Y | Y |
Multimedia screen | 9.0 inches | 9.0-inches |
Apple CarPlay/Android Auto | Wireless CarPlay, wired Android Auto | Wireless CarPlay and Android auto |
Wireless phone charger | Y | Â N |
Digital dash | No (7.0-inch info display) | Partial (7.0-inch centre) |
Seat trim | Leather (Deluxe Pack) | Leather |
Speakers | 6 | 8 |
Climate | Dual-zone | Dual-zone |
Power adjust | Driver (8-way - Deluxe Pack) | Driver (8-way) |
Heated seats | Front (Deluxe Pack) | Front |
Connectivity 1st row | USB-C, USB-A, 12v | 2x USB-C, 1x USB-A (Dashcam), 12v |
Connectivity 2nd row | 2x USB-A | 1 x USB-C |
Rear air vents | Y (roof) | Y (console) |
Keyless entry and push-start | Y | Y |
Sidesteps | Y | Y |
Auto walk-away lock | N | Y |
Auto-folding wing mirrors | Y | N |
Built | Thailand | Thailand |
Holden Colorado
The Z71 auto 4x4 dual-cab has a list price of $57,490 MSRP. Our test vehicle is $59,260 MSRP because, over and above its comprehensive list of Z71 features (and those from cheaper variants), it has an electric brake controller ($740), and a towing package ($1030).
The Z71-specific features include a heap of style-based stuff, such as black fender flares, new front fascia, roof rails, and stickers on the bonnet, as well as 18-inch grey alloys (on Bridgestone Dueler H/Ts), sailplane sports bar, black highlights everywhere – including exterior door handles, mirrors and tailgate handle.
But the Z71 buyer gets plenty of useable real-world stuff such as roof rails, soft-drop tailgate, fold-away tonneau cover, and decent underbody protection.
Read More:
Camper-trailer reviewsThere's also a leather-wrapped steering wheel and leather seats.
It has a 2.8-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel Duramax engine, six-speed automatic transmission, a part-time 4WD system and a rear limited slip differential.
Bonus: there are plenty of genuine Holden-designed, -engineered and -tested accessories, including frontal protection bars, LED light bars, extended sports bars and more, that are probably available for your Colorado.
Under the bonnet
Mitsubishi Triton
Our utes again seem quite evenly matched. Both have diesel engines, both have a six-speed automatic transmission, both have 4x4 capability with low-range transfer cases, and both have locking rear differentials. One, however, comes out on top when it comes to pure numbers.Â
The Triton uses an upgraded version of the engine used in the previous-generation truck. It still measures 2.4-litres of capacity across four cylinders, but is now twin-turbocharged. Total power comes to 150kW/470Nm and peak torque arrives from 1500rpm.
Meanwhile, the D-Max continues to employ its renowned 3.0-litre four-cylinder single-turbo engine from the brand’s light-duty commercial range, producing a sturdy 140kW/450Nm. Peak torque arrives from 1600rpm.
A winner? The Triton’s additional power is backed by a higher payload, so we’re inclined to hand the win to it, although there’s more to the story in the driving and load test section of this review.
 | Triton GLS 4x4 | D-Max LS-U+ 4x4 |
Capacity | 2442cc | 2999cc |
Cylinders | 4 | 4 |
Turbo | Twin | Single |
Power | 150kW | 140kW |
Torque | 470Nm | 450Nm |
Transmission | Six-speed | Six-speed |
Diff locks | Rear | Rear |
Holden Colorado
The Z71 has a 2.8-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel Duramax engine (147kW at 3600rpm and 500Nm at 2000rpm), six-speed automatic transmission, a part-time 4WD system and a rear limited slip differential.
Efficiency
Mitsubishi Triton
We ran a distance-controlled fuel test on both vehicles in the kinds of conditions we reckon tradies will drive them in. This included about 65km straight through the middle of Sydney on expressways and high-traffic urban roads, then about 55km as part of a return journey on the freeway.
The results were interesting because both vehicles were very close but used less fuel than the official claim, check the table below for details.
Both can claim nearly 1000km on the official consumption numbers, and neither is a hero when it comes to carbon emissions - check the figures out in the table below. Only the Triton requires AdBlue which will occasionally need to be topped up.
 | Triton GLS 4x4 | D-Max LS-U+ 4x4 |
Diesel consumption (official/combined) | 7.7L/100km | 8.0L/100km |
Diesel consumption (on-test) | 7.9L/100km | 7.8L/100km |
Fuel tank | 75L | 76L |
Est. driving range | 974km | 950km |
C02 | 203g/km | 207g/km |
AdBlue | Y | N |
Holden Colorado
Our dash display read 7.9L/100km, but we recorded actual fuel consumption on test of 9.7L/100km. It has a 76-litre fuel tank, so expect an approximate driving range of 753km (according to our on-test fuel consumption), factoring in a 30km safety buffer.
On our towing loop, of more than 200km total, the dash was showing 14.5L/100km, but we recorded an actual fuel-consumption figure of 15.5L/100km. Expect an approximate driving range of 460km (according to our on-test fuel consumption), factoring in a 30km safety buffer.
Driving
Mitsubishi Triton
Both utes on this test provide a very competent and nearly SUV-like experience, and while you can do even better in this segment with the likes of the Ford Ranger or Volkswagen Amarok, these two are very evenly matched. Still, there are some subtleties that may affect your choice.
Triton unladen driving
Starting with the Triton, and straight away you notice its excellent visibility and commanding driving position. The modern feel for the cabin is reflected in the driving experience thanks to a tidy layout, easy operation of screens and dials, and relatively straightforward software.
The steering is notably heavier in the Triton and it takes more effort to drive over longer periods of time, as a result it can be more fatiguing. It does lend itself to plenty of feel in the corners and on uneven terrain, however.
The ride is also firmer in the Triton. It can deal with undulations and larger bumps quite well, but smaller, sharper road imperfections were communicated to the cabin. On the other hand, the cabin feels overall more refined, with not as much road and engine noise making its way inside. The wider track on this new-generation version offered plenty of stability and confidence in the corners.
When it comes to deploying power the Triton certainly feels as strong as a dual-cab should, although a slight moment of additional lag required to actually get the power to the wheels was notable, even though technically peak torque arrives at lower rpm in the Triton. It leaves a feeling of the Triton needing to work harder than its rival despite its higher outputs on paper.
While the six-speed auto was also mostly as smooth as it should be, it can get caught off guard and take a moment to change up or down.
The safety systems in the Triton are reasonably well tuned. The example we tested scored a software update Mitsubishi deployed to address issues it had from the launch with an over-active driver monitoring suite. The result is good, with the system being mostly hands off. The tech was a bit confused by the use of sunglasses, however.
Its lane keep software was also more aggressive than the system in the D-Max on the rare occasion it intervened. These kinds of issues are quite common on modern SUVs and passenger vehicles, and as a symptom of being one of the first utes to fully deploy them, the Triton’s systems are a little imperfect.
On the whole we like the Triton. It’s a very modern drive experience, although it was interesting to find some parts aren't as smooth or seamless as its rival in this test.
D-Max unladen driving
The D-Max feels a bit more closed in than its Triton rival here in the cabin, with loads of dark trim and slightly more limited visibility out the rear compared to the Triton. It does have massive wing mirrors which offer a wide view of neighbouring lanes.
Somewhat frustratingly, the screens (both in the dash and multimedia screen) appear more dull than the ones in the Triton and more susceptible to glare. The software is better than the pre-facelift model and it’s faster, but still a bit clumsily laid out.
The D-Max starts to impress as soon as you set off, however. Its steering is much lighter than the Triton, but manages to maintain enough feel in the corners to imbue the driver with confidence.
The ride is also excellent. It’s comfortable and compliant over most bumps and imperfections, while maintains control without being bouncy. It has an element of the ladder chassis jiggle common among ladder frame vehicles, but hides it well.
The D-Max’ 4JJ3 3.0-litre engine is renowned for being simple and powerful, and this is especially clear when compared to its technically more powerful rival.
It feels as though the power is delivered more quickly and more smoothly than the Triton. The six-speed unit in the D-Max is slick and straightforward and seemingly never caught off-guard. Perhaps the only area where the D-Max trails the Triton in this respect is the amount of noise the physically larger engine generates. Cabin ambiance isn’t quite as nice in the D-Max generally.
Safety systems are also seemingly better tuned. Not a single safety system interfered with the drive experience in our entire time with the D-Max, which speaks well to those who like to be in full control.
To sum the D-Max up, it does almost everything when it comes to driving slightly better than the Triton. On top of this, its light steering and softer seats will leave you less fatigued at the end of the day.
Load test
While we didn’t take our utes off-road for this review, we did load their trays up to see how they would handle work duties. Our new friends at BC Sands in Sydney’s Taren Point helped us out by lending us 500kg of firewood and some of their expert forklift operators to make this test possible, check them out here.
In total we had 500kg of firewood in the tray and two occupants in the cab for about 660kg on board of both vehicles. From there we took them on the same 13km loop which involved roundabouts, T-junctions, speed bumps, downhill and uphill stints as well as a brief jaunt on a multi-lane expressway.
First we loaded up the D-Max. Its narrower tray made it harder for the forklift operator to drop the bag of wood in, and once loaded its suspension compressed a significant amount.
The edges of its tray proved useful for mounting ratchet straps, although it is notable how limiting the smaller distance between the wheel arches is and the amount of space the manual roller cover takes up. Our total 660kg load is about two-thirds of the D-Max’ total permissible 990kg.
With the weight in the tray, the D-Max was initially unsettling, but confidence grew. This is because its big engine barely feels the additional weight and the suspension is capable enough to handle the mass despite the initial compression. While the softness feels like it requires caution in the corners, it handles additional compression from speed bumps, road imperfections and hills in its stride, with no secondary bouncing and a good amount of remaining ride comfort. The steering feels only slightly heavier with the additional weight.
After our short stint, the D-Max consumed 11.9L/100km according to its computer, which is reasonable.
Next up, we loaded the Triton. Its firmer springs did not compress as much as the D-Max, and the additional width in its tray made it significantly easier for the forklift operator to drop the bag of firewood in the tray.
The Triton seems more confident in its footing initially, with less compression and the additional track width making it feel as though it would be better than the D-Max. However, things changed as we drove it.
The Triton’s engine also barely feels the additional load, but does need to rev a smidge more. The transmission mostly copes well, although the odd occasion where it's caught out for a moment when changing up or down is more noticeable. The steering, which was already firm, remains unchanged.
The biggest issue the Triton faces is its suspension. With the additional load over the rear axle, large bumps cause a pogo effect with two or three secondary bounces after the initial compression. This particularly gnarly trait is what set it apart from the comparatively smoother D-Max.
The Triton claimed to use slightly less fuel than the D-Max under load on our short route, at 11.1L/100km.
Holden Colorado
The Z71 has a steel ladder-frame chassis, double-wishbone front suspension and leaf-spring live rear axle, so it's more aligned with heavy-duty work than smooth on-road performance.
Having said that, the Z71 is quite settled over most surfaces, including highway bitumen and rough back-road backtop, and at most speeds – rather impressive for an unladen ute.
Steering is a bit floaty, with some play in it, and there is noticeable understeer on corners.
The engine is one of the torquiest in the current-day ute mob – only matched by V6 utes – and it delivers that torque quite evenly and smoothly across the rev range. The Duramax turbo-diesel can, however, be noisy, and because of that it seems like it's working hard, though it never feels too stressed, even when towing a caravan that has a caravan with a tare (empty) weight of 2600kg.
There's plenty of life in terms of acceleration with active pedal-feel but, when it comes time to pulling up to a fast stop on front disc and rear drum brakes, the brake pedals are rather spongy.
The six-speed auto is generally spot-on for all duties, although it did occasionally down-shift with an extra violence of action when it didn't really need to.
Ride and handling are pretty good, with its Aussie-tuned suspension (including traditional-ute leaf-springs at the rear) doing a decent job of sorting everything evenly, and it was only ever rattled by very severe bumps, wash-outs, and ruts at lower speeds, i.e. during low-range 4WDing.
The Z71's on-road performance and refinement are generally not as polished as segment leaders, but that's nowhere near a deal-breaker.
Safety
Mitsubishi Triton
Safety equipment is impressive on both utes, which come with near-passenger car levels of active equipment.
Both score the now essential auto emergency braking, lane keep assist, and blind spot monitoring, as well as adaptive cruise control and driver monitoring, however, only the Triton comes with active driver monitoring as standard, and front cross-traffic alert as a no-cost option.
It is worth noting the lane keep software and the driver monitoring equipment in the Triton is significantly more sensitive than the equivalent technologies in the D-Max, and more annoying as a result.
Our Triton has the latest software update designed to abate the driver monitoring issues it had at launch, and while they are mostly addressed, the system still gets confused by sunglasses.
Both cars score reversing cameras and both have an impressive array of eight airbags.
The D-Max is covered by the maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating secured by the pre-facelift model in 2022, while the new-generation Triton only recently secured a maximum five-star ANCAP safety rating in 2024.
 | Triton GLS 4x4 | D-Max LS-U+ 4x4 |
AEB | Yes | Yes |
LKAS | Yes | Yes |
BSM | Yes | Yes |
RCTA | Yes | Yes |
FCTA | No-cost option | No |
Adaptive cruise | Yes | Yes |
Driver monitoring | Full monitoring | Attention alert |
TSR | Yes | Yes |
TPMS | Yes | Yes |
Reversing camera | Yes, reverse only | Yes, reverse only |
Airbags | 8 | 8 |
ANCAP | Five stars (2024) | Five stars (2022) |
Holden Colorado
The Colorado line-up has a five-star ANCAP rating as a result of testing in 2016.
Safety gear includes seven airbags, front and rear parking sensors, a reversing camera, Forward Collision Alert), Lane Departure Warning, a tyre-pressure-monitoring system, Hill Descent Control, Hill Start Assist, Trailer Sway Control and Roll Over Mitigation.
Ownership
Mitsubishi Triton
Ownership looks like a clear win to the Triton which is offered with a whopping 10-year and 200,000km warranty (conditional on the servicing being completed with Mitsubishi on time during this period.) It also offers a matching ten years of capped-price servicing (see details in the table below) and four years of roadside assist.
On the other hand, the D-Max shouldn’t be written off as it still offers above par ownership terms.
There’s six years and 150,000km of warranty coverage, five years of fixed-price servicing, and its roadside assist can be extended for up to seven years if you continue to service with Isuzu.
Both utes require servicing once every 12 months or 15,000km, whichever occurs first.
 | Triton GLS 4x4 | D-Max LS-U+ 4x4 |
Warranty | 10 years/200,000km | Six years/150,000km |
Fixed price servicing | Ten years | Five years |
Annual cost | $489 (5yrs) | $449 |
Service interval | 12 months/15,000km | 12 months/15,000km |
Roadside assist | Four years | Up to seven years |
Holden Colorado
Holden offers a five-year, unlimited-kilometre warranty across the Colorado range, with servicing required every 12 months or 12,000km. Capped price servicing applies over seven years/ 84,000km with the average annual cost over three years working out to be $405.