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 (4 x 4 for the Škoda and front in the case of the Mitsubishi). The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 110hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 116hp engine designed by Mitsubishi.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. 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, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Czech car offers a marginal difference of 3% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Škoda does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Mitsubishi badge with 4.6 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Yeti as average reliability-wise, and ASX is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Czech car rank it on average as 4.9, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 189 kilometers per hour, 15km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 4.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (59 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 27% difference compared to the Czech car.

Škoda 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 Czech car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. From there things take a different direction, with Mitsubishi being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.