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 hatchback 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 Mazda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 100hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 131hp engine designed by SAAB.

The fact that the SAAB 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 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 Swedish car offers a considerable difference of 11% 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 Mazda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the SAAB badge with 4.2 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed 626 as average reliability-wise, and 9-3 is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Japanese car rank it on average as 3.0 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

SAAB is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.8 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 18km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 7.6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (37 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 20% difference compared to the Swedish 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 Swedish car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with SAAB 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... It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the SAAB. 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. 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™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.