Mitsubishi Triton VS LDV G10
Mitsubishi Triton
Likes
Dislikes
LDV G10
Likes
Dislikes
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 |
LDV G10
The LDV G10 arrived on the scene in the van segment a few years ago, with the aim of upsetting the equilibrium.
It was a budget-priced, Chinese-made mid-size van with its target set squarely on appealing to customers who might have wanted a HiAce, but couldn’t afford one.
After almost four-and-a-half years on the market in Australia, the LDV G10 is better than ever. It has seen new additions in the cabin, more comfortable seats, and still offers big value for money.
But with the van market moving forward at pace, does the LDV G10 offer appeal beyond the sticker price? We tested the diesel auto model to find out.
Safety rating | |
---|---|
Engine Type | 1.9L turbo |
Fuel Type | Diesel |
Fuel Efficiency | 8.3L/100km |
Seating | 2 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 |
LDV G106/10
The LDV G10 is a solid option for those buyers who just want a van that gets the job done. It was decent with weight on board, but is probably better suited to parcel carriers rather than pallet shifters.
Safety levels are the biggest concern, as it is falling behind in the class when it comes to active safety tech, and its weak crash test score could be enough to rule it out for some customers.Â
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.
LDV G10
The more you see LDV G10 vans, the more regular they look. Familiarity breeds ignorance, I guess, but I still think the G10 looks smart.Â
It isn’t quite as boxy as some, with its sleeker front-end styling and almost sedan-like tail-lights helping it stand out from the ‘box-on-wheels’ stigma. It gets 16-inch alloy wheels as standard, and has halogen headlights and misses out on daytime running lights.
But it still is a box on wheels, measuring 5168mm long (on a 3198mm wheelbase), 1980mm wide and 1928mm tall. That makes it a darn sight smaller than the new HiAce, which stepped up significantly in size, and about on par with a Renault Trafic SWB or Ford Transit Custom 300S SWB.Â
The perceived build quality is mostly okay, though our test car had a few loose plastics on the outside and a seemingly mis-fit windshield rubber.
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 |
LDV G10
Those dimensions translate to a cargo space of 5.2 cubic metres, with a load space spanning 2500mm long, 1590mm wide (1270mm between the arches) and 1270mm tall. That mightn’t be big enough for you, and that’s too bad - there is no high roof version, nor a long-wheelbase model; but you could get an LDV V80 if you really need to step up in size… but we wouldn’t suggest you do that.
The payload for this model is 1010kg, which is decent but not benchmark-setting. It has a gross vehicle mass of 3000kg, meaning a kerb weight of 1990kg. The gross combination mass depends on the model: the GCM for diesel models is 5000kg for a braked trailer, while petrol models have a GCM of 4750kg for a braked trailer (auto) and 4500kg (manual). All models have a GCM of 3750kg for unbraked trailers.
The petrol versions have 1093kg of payload, if you prefer that fuel type. Interestingly, the manual versions have leaf spring rear suspension, while the auto models have coil springs as part of a five-link suspension architecture.
The load area has a six floor-mounted and four wall-mounted tie-down hooks, and the floor is lined with a vinyl covering while up to half-height the inner walls are lined, too. There are four lights mounted on the walls, which is handy for after-hours work.
And every LDV G10 comes with dual sliding side doors (some brands charge thousands more for this convenience), while the back door is a tailgate as standard, with the option of barn doors for diesel models.
For those who need to fork loads in, the barn doors are a no brainer, because the side door apertures (at 820mm wide) aren’t broad enough to load in using a lift. The tailgate also makes it very difficult to load weight in, as we found on test, as our mates at Crown Lifts had to use long tines to fork in our 750kg ballast.
When it comes to creature comforts up front, there is a pair of low-mounted pop-out cupholders, and an open storage area between the seats. There isn’t much covered storage, so if you often carry valuables, you may need to keep that in mind.Â
The seats are comfortable and offer good adjustment, and they’ve been changed since the diesel auto model launched. They’re no longer a cheap-feeling fabric, but rather a faux-leather accented, mesh-lined set of seats, and both have armrests. Nice.
The presentation is okay, but the ergonomics could be better. The touchscreen is mounted down lower than most, and means you may need to take your eyes away from the road because the controls are down even lower. And the USB? Near the floor.
That screen is still a 7.0-inch display, but now has the same software system as the newer models in the LDV range. That means a nice crisp colourful display with the added advantage of Apple CarPlay… if you can get it to work. We had a few issues when reconnecting a phone without re-starting the car.Â
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 |
LDV G10
If you’re buying an LDV G10, it’s because of the price. The cost of the diesel automatic model we’ve got is usually $32,490 drive-away for ABN holders, but there are promotions running listing it at $29,990 drive-away for ABN holders at the time of writing. If you’re not an ABN holder, just get one, because you’ll save heaps (the G10 diesel auto is $34,147 drive-away for non-ABN holders).
You can get other vans for around this money - the Renault Trafic Trader Life manual, with its gutless 66kW turbo-diesel engine, is $30,990 d/a. But you won’t find a diesel Hyundai iLoad, Peugeot Partner or Toyota HiAce within $10,000 of the LDV.
As for standard spec, you get 16-inch alloy wheels, tyre pressure monitoring, climate control air-conditioning, a 7.0-inch touchscreen with USB connectivity, Apple CarPlay, Bluetooth phone and audio streaming, CD player and AM/FM radio, a digital speedometer, two part fake-leather seats with arm-rests (driver’s side with height adjust), carpet flooring up front, and vinyl floor protective liner in the rear, and a reversing camera.Â
Standard body fit out is dual sliding side doors and a lift tailgate, though you can get barn doors fitted on diesel models. Unlike some competitors, there is no option for glazing in the rear doors or side panels.Â
There are also no auto headlights, no auto wipers, push-button start, keyless entry, leather-lined steering wheel, reach adjustment for the steering, and there’s quite a bit missing in the safety section of this review - see below.
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 |
LDV G10
Under the bonnet of the diesel G10 is a 1.9-litre four-cylinder turbo-diesel with 106kW of power and 350Nm of torque. There’s the choice of a six-speed manual or six-speed automatic, and the G10 is rear-wheel drive. It has a diesel particulate filter, but not stop-start or AdBlue.
Prefer petrol? There’s a 2.4-litre five-speed manual model (105kW/200Nm) or a 2.0-litre turbocharged six-speed auto (165kW/330Nm). Those models are cheaper - $25,990 for the manual for ABN holders, while the turbo-petrol auto is $30,990 d/a.Â
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 |
LDV G10
The combined cycle fuel use claim for the LDV G10 diesel auto is 8.6 litres per 100 kilometres. The manual version uses 8.3L/100km according to the brand.
On test we saw a fuel use return of 9.7L/100km at the pump, across a mix of urban, highway and freeway driving, with and without a load.Â
Petrol models use a claimed 11.5L (manual) and 11.7L (auto) per hundred.
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.
LDV G10
You probably wouldn’t choose an LDV G10 as a daily driver if you didn’t intend to use the cargo zone at least 80 per cent of the time.
But if - for whatever reason - you really want to use a van like this on a day-to-day basis, you won’t hate it.Â
The G10 drives pretty nicely for this type of vehicle. It isn’t as bouncy when unladen as some of the other vans out there, with the suspension proving very quick to settle and mostly very compliant across mixed surfaces.Â
The steering wheel can jostle a bit over sharp edges, but it steers well, with decent (not too heavy) weighting and predictable response at all speeds.Â
Without weight on board the engine feels reasonably urgent in its response, which is a bit of a surprise because it’s not a powerhouse based on its outputs. It revs smoothly and pulls with good strength, with little turbo lag to contend with. While it is a bit of a grumbly engine at times, the response is better than adequate.
Plus the transmission is well sorted, with smooth shifts that are predictable.
The braking response is definitely better without weight on board, with a decent progression to the pedal and decent bite when you press hard on the anchors.
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) |
LDV G10
If safety matters to you, this could be your reason not to buy an LDV G10.
The van scored a mediocre three-star ANCAP crash test safety score - which would be more acceptable if that was under the current, strictest criteria, but it was actually tested in 2015. Which means it would be even lower if tested today.
One of the reasons is the safety equipment - there’s not a lot of it. You get dual front airbags, but no side airbags or curtains. There is no advanced tech like auto emergency braking (AEB), no lane keeping assistance or lane departure warning, no blind spot monitoring or rear cross-traffic alert… But you do get a reversing camera and rear parking sensors.
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 |
LDV G10
LDV isn’t close to the leaders in the segment for ownership, with a behind-the-times three-year/100,000km warranty (admittedly with the same cover for roadside assist), and no capped price servicing plan.Â
Service intervals are every 12 months/10,000km, which is short, and you need to get an initial service done at 5000km, too.Â
If you’re worried about long-term longevity, you can check out our LDV G10 problems page.