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 large family car segment and utilize the same 5-door wagon body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Hyundai-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 245hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 165hp engine designed by Mazda.

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Korean car offers a considerable difference of 16% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem 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 KIA with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Optima 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 the Korean car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

KIA is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.5 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 232 kilometers per hour, 18km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy an obvious choice would be the Japanese car, averaging around 6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (47 mpg), in combined cycle. That's 37% difference compared to the Korean car!

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 Korean car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. It all continues in the same direction, with KIA 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. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. 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.