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 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 Subaru and front in the case of the Mazda). The first one has a Subaru-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 162hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 145hp engine designed by Mazda.

The fact that the Mazda got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, Legacy offers a marginal difference of 4% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Mazda does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Subaru with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place Legacy as average reliability-wise, and 6 is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as Legacy rank it on average as 4.4, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.

Subaru is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 204 kilometers per hour, 2km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 8.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (32 mpg), in combined cycle.

Mazda 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, Mazda 6 offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. From there things take a different direction, with Subaru 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. 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.