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 petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Mercedes Benz-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 166hp engine designed by Honda.

The fact that the Honda 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. 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? Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Korean car offers a considerable difference of 26% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Honda is significantly less fault-prone, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of SSangYong with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Honda badge with 4.7 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Actyon as average reliability-wise, and CR-V is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Korean car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Honda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.2 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 190 kilometers per hour, 26km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy an obvious choice would be the Japanese car, averaging around 9.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (30 mpg), in combined cycle. That's 21% difference compared to the Korean car!

Honda 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 Honda 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 Honda. 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. 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.