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 small family car segment and utilize the same 4-door sedan 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 Chrysler-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 133hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 88hp engine designed by Mazda.

Unfortunatelly, neither of the two vehicles was submitted to the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) testing. This makes it virtually impossible for me to pick one over the other and I'm generally against buying such cars as the safety should really always come first. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the American car offers a considerable difference of 10% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that KIA as a brand displays somewhat better results, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Chrysler with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the KIA badge with 4.6 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the American car rank it on average as 4.3, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Chrysler is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 20km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 7.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (36 mpg), in combined cycle.

Chrysler 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 American car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. It all continues in the same direction, with Chrysler outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Chrysler. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.