Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by diesel engines and utilizing the 5-door suv body style within the same 'SUV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (rear for the SSangYong and 4 x 4 in the case of the Mitsubishi). The first one has a SSangYong-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 141hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 140hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

The fact that the Mitsubishi 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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Korean car offers a marginal difference of 8% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Mitsubishi does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of SSangYong with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Mitsubishi badge with 4.6 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Kyron as average reliability-wise, and Outlander 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 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.3 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 187 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 6.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (41 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 16% difference compared to the Korean car.

Mitsubishi 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 Japanese car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. It all continues in the same direction, with Mitsubishi outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Mitsubishi. 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.