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 small 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 petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Hyundai-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 145hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 98hp engine designed by Lada.

The fact that the KIA 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. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Korean car offers a considerable difference of 13% 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 KIA with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Lada badge with 4.3 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Cerato as average reliability-wise, and Priora is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Korean car rank it on average as 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

KIA is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.5 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 208 kilometers per hour, 25km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Russian car, averaging around 6.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (45 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 19% difference compared to the Korean car.

KIA 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 Korean car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with KIA outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the KIA. 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.