We are here considering two somewhat similar cars, but we can't deny some of the obvious differences. For a start, they are not even classified under the same segment, with the Suzuki being a city car and the Mini representing micro car vehicle class. The first one has a Suzuki-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 136hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 120hp engine designed by Peugeot.

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, 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. The first vehicle is a city car and that gives it a marginal advantage over the micro car competitor, at least that's what statistics show. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the British car offers a marginal difference of 5% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Suzuki as a brand displays somewhat better results, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Mini badge with 4.1 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Swift as average reliability-wise, and Mini is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.

Suzuki is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 195 kilometers per hour, 9km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the British car, averaging around 5.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (52 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 19% difference compared to the Japanese car.

Suzuki 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 this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. When it comes to performance, both vehicles provide similar experience, so I wouldn't point any of them out. the British car , on the other hand, consumps significantly less fuel, and that's a big plus. I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Mini. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.