Help please - VW Amorak or Hilux

mosesgun

Hopefully someone can give me some advice on this. I'm currently driving a 09 landrover discovery 3 commercial for work. Fine machine. Almost 250k Kms on the clock so going to change now. They don't do the same again brand new. They've all gone down the route of the 5 seater business version. Big money though and big road tax. I have kids so back seats would be an advantage but I'd prefer not to go for a car.

Option 1: I like the look of the VW Amarok. Great reviews on web and YouTube. Nice 8 speed automatic version. 2 litre twin turbo chargers. Looks good for towing and drives fairly nice too.
Option 2: the Hilux twin cab looks good and is cheaper than the Amarok. 3L engine, 5 speed auto I think. Leather seats etc. I've heard they're not brilliant on Road.
Option 3: forget the seats and go for a LWB Toyota landcruiser commercial.

I do a fair few miles and am not off road all that regularly. I often carry some fairly heavy and bulky truck parts in the back. I like a bit of comfort too. In an ideal world I'd go for a new disco as the air suspension is great for carrying a bit of weight and it drives more like a car. Unfortunately these new 5 seater commercial yokes are not a runner.

Any advice or suggestions would be really welcome as my head is melted weighing up the pros and cons of each. Thanks.

Aya xxv

Nissan navara tried all of them except the amarok. Best by a country mile

mosesgun

Aya xxv wrote: »

Nissan navara tried all of them except the amarok. Best by a country mile

Cheers. Hadn't really given that one any thought. I'll take a look.

ROSSKI

My two cents 1 Ford Ranger - a neighbour has one that had land cruiser and hilux in the last 4 years and he reckons they are miles ahead of anything he has drove.

mosesgun

ROSSKI wrote: »

My two cents 1 Ford Ranger - a neighbour has one that had land cruiser and hilux in the last 4 years and he reckons they are miles ahead of anything he has drove.

I did consider the ford ranger but haven't driven one. I was kind of put off because I thought they were enormous, like a big American pick up. Thanks for that. Must get on to carzone now and see what's there.

pete4130

I drive the 3L Auto hilux in work in Australia, doing about 1400km+ a week currently. It's got 171hp. It's a dual cab with tray and tool boxes on the back. It's slow to accelerate and throttle is slow to respond. It's pretty gutless compared to the manuals. Other than that it's good. Slightly softer suspension than the Mazda BT-50 (identical to the Ford Ranger) so a bit more body roll but more comfortable off road.

The BT-50/Ford Ranger has lots of power. The BT-50/Ranger I drove was about 200hp and fun to drive, nice shorter shift on the gearbox than the manual Hilux too. The BT-50/Ranger has a nice 3.2L engine which is nice in the auto, it's 8 speed I think and has diff locks as standard too (here at least).
The Hilux is better off road from my experience and better vision over the bonnet.

The Amarok is meant to be really nice to drive, good power from the 2.0 unit and is fairly frugal. It's meant to be better than the Hilux all round, on the road, off the road, power delivery and spec as far as I've heard. It's probably a bit too new to know of any issues. Try Australian 4wd forums to see how it compares.

The Rangers are larger than other 4x4's for sure, even compared to the BT-50. The bonnet is very high but not ridiculous like an F-150 or something. It's quite aggressive looking.

mosesgun

pete4130 wrote: »

I drive the 3L Auto hilux in work in Australia, doing about 1400km+ a week currently. It's got 171hp. It's a dual cab with tray and tool boxes on the back. It's slow to accelerate and throttle is slow to respond. It's pretty gutless compared to the manuals. Other than that it's good. Slightly softer suspension than the Mazda BT-50 (identical to the Ford Ranger) so a bit more body roll but more comfortable off road.

The BT-50/Ford Ranger has lots of power. The BT-50/Ranger I drove was about 200hp and fun to drive, nice shorter shift on the gearbox than the manual Hilux too. The BT-50/Ranger has a nice 3.2L engine which is nice in the auto, it's 8 speed I think and has diff locks as standard too (here at least).
The Hilux is better off road from my experience and better vision over the bonnet.

The Amarok is meant to be really nice to drive, good power from the 2.0 unit and is fairly frugal. It's meant to be better than the Hilux all round, on the road, off the road, power delivery and spec as far as I've heard. It's probably a bit too new to know of any issues. Try Australian 4wd forums to see how it compares.

The Rangers are larger than other 4x4's for sure, even compared to the BT-50. The bonnet is very high but not ridiculous like an F-150 or something. It's quite aggressive looking.

Thanks for that reply. Much appreciated. That's heavy enough mileage you're doing in the Hilux. I hope it's comfortable! I've taken a demo Amarok auto on trial for today and tomorrow and it's nice. very car like. Might take a look at the ranger. Sounds nice too.

pete4130

A few guys I've worked with have said the BT-50 suffers from rattling after a while, the Ranger could have different build quality? Granted, we're driving on corrugated first roads a lot of the time. I usually do about 1000km a week in work but the last week or two has had more travelling.

The Hilux is comfortable enough. I've found that not being able to life the base of the seat, where it meets the backrest an issue. You can tend to slide down the seat a little. If you are really tall I'd recommend something other than the Hilux. A guy I work with is 6'5" and is hunched in the hilux. All our vehicles being mine spec and having to meet a certain roll over crash standard means the hilux needs a roll cage limiting the space for the seat to move where the BT-50 meets the standards without a roll cage being installed.


For me, the BT-50 manual was great to drive on the road. Lots of power. 0-100kmh it would leave the Hilux far behind. Off road, I'd prefer the Hilux in manual over the auto. The auto in the Hilux is quite numb, feels sluggish, a bit unresponsive from a standing start, T junction, traffic lights etc.

Stavros Murphy

I was in the Ford dealer today getting van spares and had a sit in a new Ranger - verry nice. I have the old model, a 03 and was sorely tempted - looks savage in black and if the 03 is anything to go by, should be a cracking jeep. The old model, I love, tbh, and the new just looks streets ahead. Very classy looking crewcab. I'll snag a test drive next time I'm down.

BalingMad

why dont you go for discovery 4 commercial with no seats in the back. They can be got. have the 5 seater version which is called a "utility" which allows you to claim the vat. You can get the disco 4 with only 2 seats. refer to the link for one example.
https://sites.google.com/site/apluckwill/land-rovers/discovery-4-commercial-van-2011---republic-of-ireland

shooter69

Ive tested all of the above but was warned off the navara by a friend - nothing but trouble. I bought the Amarok and love it. 8 speed auto 180 ps and relatively frugal. Came out of a touareg and while not quite as comfy the Amarok gets my vote.

shooter69

Ive tested all of the above but was warned off the navara by a friend - nothing but trouble. I bought the Amarok and love it. 8 speed auto 180 ps and relatively frugal. Came out of a touareg and while not quite as comfy the Amarok gets my vote.

mosesgun

Thanks for the advice lads. I've decided on the Amarok. Should be getting it in a week or so. Getting the auto 180bhp. Leather seats, side steps, tow hitch, reverse camera, canopy etc. looking forward to it now!