Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Marketing
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 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 Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 160hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 120hp engine designed by Mazda.
SafetyBoth vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Mazda 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 large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.
ReliabilityManufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place Octavia as average reliability-wise, and 6 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Czech car rank it on average as 4.2, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyŠkoda 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 222 kilometers per hour, 28km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (41 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 Japanese car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. From there things take a different direction, with Škoda outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Škoda. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.