The Chevrolet Colorado and Ford Ranger are a breath of fresh air in the Thai pickup market. Which is the one to go for?

If you happen to be one of those pickup buyers bored with mainstream brands like Isuzu D-Max and Toyota Hilux Vigo Champ and prefer something different, then the Chevrolet Colorado and Ford Ranger might be of some interest to you.

Both the Colorado and Ranger come with American badges and have improved substantially in their latest generations in terms of packaging, technology and design.

And for those who don't use pickups as workhorses, the most sought-after derivative is probably the four-door, high-riding and two-wheel-drive version that makes for a good weekend vehicle.

In fact, many pickup manufacturers reckon this body style to become increasingly popular due to its fashionable faux 4x4 looks and raised ground clearance for battling floods.

However, the Colorado and Ranger compared here this week isn't exactly tailored to go head-to-head. Of course, both have the same kind of body, rear-wheel-drive 4x2 format and 150hp diesel performance.

But it's the Ranger that paves the way forward with an automatic transmission to appeal to modern-day buyers who don't like dipping the clutch pedal.

The Colorado, with a 2.5-litre engine, only comes with a manual gearbox.

That's why the 809,000 baht Ranger, albeit a smaller 2.2-litre yet as powerful as the Colorado, is 44,000 baht dearer than its rival. Compensating for the Ford's premium is more convenience features and, crucially, safety items like twin airbags.

If you really wanted the Colorado with an automatic system, then you need to go for the 180hp 2.8-litre version, which naturally means you need to pay more at 835,000 baht.

And if you crave for the Ranger's safety, you'll have to climb to the 905,000 baht LTZ trim for the Colorado whose 100k difference over the Ford is beginning to sound a little much for the average Somchai.

Has Chevrolet missed an opportunity here, you might ask?

Yes, because there is no LTZ uniform for the 2.5 (the one tested here is LT) and that means safety conscious buyers can dismiss this Chevy here in favour of the Ranger.

The same goes for the gearbox. If all you crave for is a two-pedal set-up with the cheapest possible price, then the Ranger is yours. You now start to suspect that Chevrolet is keeping some cards up its sleeve.

But on the other hand, you could argue that mating an automatic to the 2.5-litre engine might blunt performance in the Colorado.

That's why our Ranger test vehicle _ 2.2-litre motor and automatic _ provides only so-so performance.

For pickup users who have never driven with auto boxes, the Ranger would suffice; those who have had past experiences might find the Ford a little lazy in the mid-ranges despite a number-crunching six-speeder.

The Colorado 2.5 in manual form goes quite well, although the gearbox has a notchy feel when shifting down during overtaking. An automatic option won't really make this Colorado a winner, but we reckon it should have been made available for buyers to choose from.

As a manual gearbox usually tends to excel over an automatic in fuel economy terms, it wasn't surprising the see the Colorado holding a small advantage over the Ranger compared here.

During an outing to the lakeside in Kanchanaburi, the Colorado returned 12.5kpl and Ranger 12kpl when driving at an average speed of 120kph.

It is also worth mentioning that the two handle and ride quite differently on the move. One has seemingly heeded to demands of real-world users, while another has stuck to the pickup philosophy. After reviewing both pickups separately in past issues, it shouldn't be hard to know which is which.

Ford likes to highlight a good drive, meaning that the Ranger has a firm ride that can prove to be a little stiff on not-so-perfect road surfaces. But it pays for a stable and taut ride at high speeds, tidy handling and ability to cope with weight.

Chevrolet is hoping to appeal passenger car users, meaning that the Colorado has a soft ride that should attract most people with restrained driving styles. But the setup can be soggy for drivers with harder feet, so to speak.

Both makers may have valid reasons of going for different approaches, but the Ranger seems to suit the pickup concept better than the Colorado. And, on the contrary, you could say the same why Chevrolet isn't offering an automatic in the 2.5, fearing breathless performance under load.