Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol engines and utilizing the 5-door hatchback body style within the same 'City car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Suzuki and front in the case of the Mazda). The first one has a Suzuki-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 90hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 90hp engine designed by Mazda.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the city car segment, which is generally not a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, Swift offers a marginal difference of 7% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Suzuki does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place Swift as average reliability-wise, and 2 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as Swift rank it on average as 4.9, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Mazda is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 30km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (58 mpg), in combined cycle.

Suzuki appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, Swift offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. From there things take a different direction, with Mazda outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Mazda. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.