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 mpv segment and utilize the same 5-door MPV 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 Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 150hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 116hp engine designed by Toyota.

The fact that the Toyota got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the mpv segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Ford with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Toyota badge with 4.6 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Galaxy as average reliability-wise, and Previa is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the American car rank it on average as 4.2, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Ford is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 199 kilometers per hour, 24km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the American car, averaging around 6.6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (43 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 9% difference compared to the Japanese car.

Toyota 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 beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with Ford being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! 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. 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. 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.