Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
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 front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Renault-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, 16-valves 105hp engine designed by Mazda.
SafetyA starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the Renault being a slightly better choice apparently. 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, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 8% more metal.
ReliabilityReliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Renault with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the French car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 1.0 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyMazda is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 177 kilometers per hour, 6km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 3.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (74 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Renault 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 French 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. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... At the end, as much as I'd like to give you a winner here, it's simply a pure tie if you ask me. 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. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.
Related articles
A year ago I payed Mercedes dealership a visit, not in order to buy one, but rather to personally check an information coming from the Sci-Fi domain. Apparently, under the hood of A and B class, in their 160 & 180 CDI versions, there's a Renault 1.5 dCi...