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 suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the 4 x 4 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 173hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 173hp engine designed by Renault.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Renault being a slightly better choice apparently. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 9% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning 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 with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Renault badge with 4.1 out of 5. Independent research findings rank CX-7 as average reliability-wise, and Koleos 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 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.8 out of 5.

Renault is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.4 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 191 kilometers per hour, 9km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 7.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (38 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 French car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Renault being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Renault. 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. 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 thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.