Volkswagen T-Roc VS Isuzu MU-X

Inside the T-Roc is a bit of an interesting dichotomy.

Some of what’s in here is ‘old-gen’ Volkswagen stuff, but it still holds up today against even some recently introduced models.

The dichotomy is that while it’s very usable and slick, some of its materials and surfaces let it down a touch.

The good points are that the cabin tech is a perfect level of physical and digital. The buttons and controls are easy to use and feel solid and even though the climate controls could be more physical, they’re still good as far as touch panel style controls go.

The older VW gear is arguably better than a lot of what’s found in newer models where some use of touchscreens and haptic panels has drawn negative feedback from customers.

The multimedia software managed via the 8.0-inch touchscreen is more simple and sensible than the new version, plus the Digital Cockpit Pro display for the driver is clear and, importantly, customisable. It’s a similar cockpit system that used to seem quite impressive in high-end Audis.

But what doesn’t feel very high-end is some of the plastic and the decisions around function in the rest of the space.

The leather on the seats is not a cheap option box to tick at $3450, but it feels a little cheap to the touch. It’s a tad hard and even has a bit of a rough look to it.

That option also makes them heated and electrically adjustable, though, which is welcome in winter. Otherwise, cloth seats without the optional leather or heating would be absolutely fine, and that means you get a storage space under them, too.

This central space between the driver and front passenger, too, is a little awkward with the cupholder placement. It’s behind the shifter meaning a tall bottle will be in the way and it’s got slightly odd sizing for bottles or cups with nothing to stop them wobbling.

I am, however, a fan of the angled-away phone slot under the climate controls to minimise phone screen visibility (and distraction) and the traditional shifter itself is welcome.

Look up, and (in our test car) there’s an optional ($2000) panoramic sunroof there. It’s yours if you want it, and it does have an electric blind, but some Japanese and Korean cars at this price point get that as standard.

An average-sized adult will find the second row is spacious enough and relatively comfortable. There’s an armrest, dual-directional vents and two USB-C ports.

Behind that, boot space is generous at 445L with the seats up thanks to an adjustable floor, which is very useful for tall items and even manages to fit a space saver spare tyre under it.

It’s a total of 1290L with the split-fold seats down, too, though they’re not super flat with the adjustable floor down.

Not a lot separates these two vehicles in terms of functionality or comfort because they share essentially the same interior with only a few differences.

The X-Terrain does, however, pip the LS-T overall with a slightly more premium look and feel to the cabin. Subtle touches such as red stitching in the cabin trim enhance the interior’s quiet charm.

Both cabins have a pleasant, familiar feel about them and are easy spaces in which to swiftly get comfortable and to quickly figure out where all controls are. And it’s easy to use those controls.

The X-Terrain has a black leather-accented trim, but there are plenty of durable plastic surfaces to cope with the messiness of real life.

The MU-X also has a leather-accented trim, but the same, practical plastic surfaces are present.

Charging options are numerous throughout the cabins of both vehicles – a mix of USB-A, USB-C and 12V up front, and USB-A for the second row.

Storage places (in both vehicles) include recesses for your everyday carry gear, a suitably deep centre console , as well as dual cupholders up front, cupholders in the rear fold-down centre armrest and bottle holders in the doors.

There are also cupholders either side of the third row in the MU-X for passengers riding back there.

There’s one seemingly minor but noticeable difference between the operation of the 9.0-inch multimedia touchscreen systems.

The MU-X has physical button options to activate some functions (including to switch on the audio system, to adjust volume, access sat nav etc), while those functions and others are activated/adjusted via on-screen buttons in the D-Max. No big deal, but you may prefer one of those approaches.

The load spaces on offer are obviously also a big point of difference in these vehicles.

The D-Max has a tub and it is shielded by a manually-operated roller-shutter cover that can be partially or fully opened or closed.

The tub is 1495mm long, 1530mm wide (1122mm between the wheel arches) and 490mm deep.

It is a double-walled tub, with an under-rail tub liner, two cargo tie-down points and it has tailgate assist.

The roller cover offers at least some degree of security from thieves, and protection from the elements (rain, mud, snow etc), but the drum (in which the cover is stored when it is rolled open) does impact the packability of the load space. 

Another option for D-Max owners is to get an Isuzu or aftermarket canopy, although that impacts the versatility of the load space because once it’s an enclosed area it makes it a bit more difficult to carry long and/or large loads in the tub.

The MU-X has the advantage here in terms of security and protection from the elements because its load space is fully enclosed from the factory.

The MU-X’s cargo area is 311 litres with all three rows in use; 1119 litres with the third row flat; and it’s 2138 litres with the second and third rows folded.

The rear cargo area has a cargo cover (so any potential crooks who look through your windows are unable to see your valuables), tie-down points and a 12V power outlet. There is a storage space under the rear cargo area floor and a tool storage space inside the driver’s side rear cargo wall.