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 diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Mazda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 185hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 170hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

Both 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. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 7% 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, at least on all of the models level. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Mazda, as well as Škoda, with the same average rating of 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place 6 as average reliability-wise, and Octavia is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.

Both of the cars accelerate exactly the same, so we couldn't put one above the other. Car No. 2 is faster though, reaching top speed of 226 kilometers per hour, 8km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (50 mpg), in combined cycle.

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 offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Mazda. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.