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 petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Mazda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 153hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 147hp engine designed by Chrysler.

The fact that the Jeep got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, isn't really an advantage, taken the poor 3-star rating it received. 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 it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the American car offers a considerable difference of 14% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Mazda as a brand displays somewhat better results, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Mazda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Jeep badge with 4.0 out of 5. The same official information place Tribute as average reliability-wise, and Cherokee 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 4.0 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Mazda is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 171 kilometers per hour, 3km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 10.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (27 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 American 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 Mazda outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the 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. 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.