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 163hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 156hp engine designed by Peugeot.

The fact that the Mitsubishi 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. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. 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. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Korean car offers a considerable difference of 14% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Mitsubishi does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of SSangYong 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 Kyron as average reliability-wise, and Outlander 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 3.9, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.3 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 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 7.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (39 mpg), in combined cycle. That's 30% difference compared to the Korean 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. 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. 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.