Ford Ranger (right) and VW Amarok. Photo / Supplied
I don't know much about off-roading. Somewhat lazily, I usually leave the gory details of low-range gearboxes and rampover angles to colleagues who have big muddy boots.
But I do know this. Last year, the world of utes changed dramatically for us townies. With the arrival of the Volkswagen Amarok and Ford Ranger/Mazda BT-50, we found ourselves with heavy duty off-road utility vehicles that were genuinely entertaining on the road.
It might sound a bit odd to say I've been itching to find out which of these utes was sportiest on the road, but isn't it wonderful to have a calibre of pickup that allows you to consider such a thing?
Enter the $49,500 Amarok Highline and $46,990 Ranger XLT. Those prices are for two-wheel drive versions . And to be fair, I've gone for manual-transmission models because that's the only way you can have the Volkswagen at the moment. Actually that's not fair to the Ford at all, because the Ranger is also available with a simply superb six-speed automatic. An eight-speeder is mooted for Amarok in the near future - but it's not here yet.
On paper, the Amarok looks a little puny in this company, with a mere 120kW/400Nm from its 2.0-litre twin-turbo diesel four. The Ranger pumps out 147kW/470Nm from its 3.2-litre turbo diesel five-pot and feels every inch the muscle-ute. No question the Ranger's monster engine is the way to go off-road, but in spirited road driving the sprightly nature of the Amarok's powerplant is truly entertaining. There's a dearth of torque below 1500rpm, but when you're pressing on the 2.0-litre rips up and down the rev range like a petrol engine. Great manual gearshift, too.
The Ranger has an astonishingly strong power delivery down low - as expected, it puts the Amarok to shame - but once beyond 3000rpm it feels more like a traditional diesel, the power dropping off immediately and forcing you to grab the next gear.
Handling? They both have some. The Amarok has the better steering and a more immediate response to subtle inputs from the steering and throttle, but drive with true determination and the Ranger's performance and cornering stability allow it to cover ground much faster.
No roughing it inside these vehicles. The Amarok is as simple and stylish as a VW passenger car and the driving position is spot on. Shame it's lacking some high-end stuff that comes standard on the Ranger though: Bluetooth is a $750 option and you can't connect your iPod to the audio unit in any way, shape or form. The Ranger's cabin is swish by normal pickup standards but certainly more ute-like than the Amarok and a bit more fussy.
The Amarok and Ranger are more car-like than any utes before them. But are they like cars? Let's keeps things in perspective: no. With the tough suspension, bouncy tyres and ladder-chassis construction required for the ultimate in off-road ability, how could they be? The point is that while both are still determinedly trucks, I had a lot fun driving them around a road loop normally reserved for sporty cars. They were entertaining and safe.
But which is best on the sealed stuff? The head says Ranger, for it has sheer grunt and stability on its side. It's cheaper and better equipped. It's the absolute all-rounder, no question.
But for the purposes of this test I still preferred the Amarok's steering and chassis responses, the more rev-happy nature of its engine and that beautifully elegant dashboard design.