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 hatchback body style within the same 'Small family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (rear for the BMW and front in the case of the Mazda). The first one has a BMW-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 143hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp engine designed by Mazda.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), 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 small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 1% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Mazda as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of BMW with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. Independent research findings rank 1 Series as average reliability-wise, and 3 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the German car rank it on average as 4.1, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Mazda is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.8 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 210 kilometers per hour, 2km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (69 mpg), in combined cycle.

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 Japanese car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Mazda offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the 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. 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™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.