Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol 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 Toyota and front in the case of the Nissan). The first one has a Toyota-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 116hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 115hp engine designed by Nissan.

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. 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, C-HR offers a considerable difference of 24% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Toyota with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Nissan badge with 4.3 out of 5. The same official information place C-HR as average reliability-wise, and Juke is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as C-HR rank it on average as 3.9, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.4 out of 5.

Nissan is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.6 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 178 kilometers per hour, 2km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be Juke, averaging around 5.6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (50 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 13% difference compared to C-HR.

Nissan 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, C-HR offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Nissan offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Nissan. 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.