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 petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Suzuki-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 144hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 153hp 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, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, Tribute offers a considerable difference of 10% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Suzuki does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, 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. Independent research findings rank Grand Vitara as average reliability-wise, and Tribute is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as Grand Vitara rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.0 out of 5.

Mazda is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 171 kilometers per hour, 4km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 10.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (27 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 this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. But one thing that actually could is the performance, with Mazda offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Suzuki. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.