Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by diesel engines and utilizing the 5-door wagon body style within the same 'Large family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Volvo and front in the case of the Mazda). The first one has a Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 5-cylinder, 20-valves 205hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 185hp engine designed by Mazda.

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, 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 large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Swedish car offers a marginal difference of 9% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Mazda does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Volvo with an average rating of 3.2, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place V60 as average reliability-wise, and 6 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Swedish car rank it on average as 3.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Volvo is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 225 kilometers per hour, 9km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 5.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (52 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 28% difference compared to the Swedish car.

Mazda is apparently more reliable, not too much, but just enough. 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, the Swedish car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Volvo being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Mazda. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.