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 diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Mazda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 110hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 109hp engine designed by Peugeot.

The fact that the Citroen got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, doesn't actually do much for it, as it's still a lousy 2-star coffin on wheels. 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 French car offers a marginal difference of 4% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Mazda does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Mazda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Citroen badge with 4.0 out of 5. The same official information place 626 as average reliability-wise, and Xantia is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 3.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Mazda is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.8 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 185 kilometers per hour, 1km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (47 mpg), in combined cycle.

Citroen 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 French car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. When it comes to performance, both vehicles provide similar experience, so I wouldn't point any of them out. the French car still consumps less fuel, which needs to be taken into consideration. I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Citroen. 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.