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 diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Mercedes Benz-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 5-cylinder, 10-valves 120hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 163hp engine designed by Mitsubishi.

Unfortunatelly, neither of the two vehicles was submitted to the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) testing. This makes it virtually impossible for me to pick one over the other and I'm generally against buying such cars as the safety should really always come first. 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 that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Japanese car offers a considerable difference of 10% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Mitsubishi does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, 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. The same official information place Musso as average reliability-wise, and Pajero 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 4.6, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 4.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 170 kilometers per hour, 8km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Korean car, averaging around 8.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (32 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 8% difference compared to the Japanese 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 significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. It all continues in the same direction, with Mitsubishi 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 really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say 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. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.