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 front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. Both the engines are Hyundai-engineered . The first one has a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 100hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 177hp one.

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 Hyundai displaying significantly better structural stability. 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 it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, Kona offers a considerable difference of 19% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Hyundai 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 KIA with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Hyundai badge with 4.5 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Stonic as average reliability-wise, and Kona is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as Stonic rank it on average as 4.2, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Hyundai is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 4.7 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 205 kilometers per hour, 33km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be Stonic, averaging around 5.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (51 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 22% difference compared to Kona.

Hyundai 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, Kona beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Hyundai outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Hyundai. 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. 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.