Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Dimensons & Outlines
Check a car with 30% off a report
Engine
1.6 A16XER
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
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 suv body style within the same 'SUV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Mazda and front in the case of the Opel). The first one has a Mazda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 115hp engine designed by Opel.
SafetyBoth vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Opel being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very 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 Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.
ReliabilityReliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Mazda does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Mazda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Opel badge with 4.2 out of 5. The same official information place CX-3 as average reliability-wise, and Mokka X is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.8 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyMazda is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3.8 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 6.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (42 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
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, the German car 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. 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 Mazda. 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. 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.