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 Nissan-engineered . The first one has a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 130hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 140hp 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 Nissan displaying significantly better structural stability. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. 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, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 4% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Nissan 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 Dacia with an average rating of 4.1, and models under the Nissan badge with 4.3 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Duster as average reliability-wise, and Qashqai is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Romanian car rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Dacia is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.1 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 191 kilometers per hour, 2km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 5.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (53 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 13% difference compared to the Romanian car.

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, the Japanese car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. When it comes to performance, both vehicles provide similar experience, so I wouldn't point any of them out. the Japanese car , on the other hand, consumps significantly less fuel, and that's a big plus. All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Nissan. 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.