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 Hyundai-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 248hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 260hp engine designed by Mazda.

The fact that the KIA got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. 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, the Korean car offers a considerable difference of 13% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Mazda does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of KIA with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Mazda badge with 4.4 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Sorento as average reliability-wise, and CX-7 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Korean car rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.7 out of 5.

Mazda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 210 kilometers per hour, 20km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 10.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (28 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 6% difference compared to the Korean car.

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 Korean 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 being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Mazda. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. 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.