Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the 4 x 4 wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Peugeot-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 90hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 83hp engine designed by Mazda.

The fact that the Suzuki got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, isn't really an advantage, taken the poor 3-star rating it received. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 1% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Suzuki as a brand displays somewhat better results, at least on all of the models level. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the KIA badge with 4.6 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Grand Vitara as average reliability-wise, and Sportage is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Japanese car rank it on average as 4.3, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Suzuki is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.7 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 142 kilometers per hour, 3km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 7.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (36 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 17% difference compared to the Korean car.

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, the Japanese car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with Suzuki offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Suzuki. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.