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 front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Honda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 156hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 165hp engine designed by Mazda.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. 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. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, CR-V offers a considerable difference of 11% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Honda does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Honda with an average rating of 4.7, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place CR-V as average reliability-wise, and CX-5 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as CR-V rank it on average as 4.8, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Mazda 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, 10km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be CX-5, averaging around 6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (47 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 20% difference compared to CR-V.

Honda 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, CR-V offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Mazda offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - 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. 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.