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 3-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 Peugeot-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 109hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 101hp engine designed by Mercedes Benz.

The fact that the Suzuki got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, isn't really an advantage, taken the poor 3-star rating it received. 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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Korean car offers a considerable difference of 24% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Suzuki is significantly less fault-prone, all the models observed together. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the SSangYong badge with 4.4 out of 5. The same official information place Grand Vitara as average reliability-wise, and Korando is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

There's not enough data for me to elaborate on the subject, I'm affraid.

Suzuki is apparently more reliable, not too much, but just enough. 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. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Suzuki. 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. 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.