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 hatchback body style within the same 'Micro car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (rear for the Renault and front in the case of the Toyota). The first one has a Renault-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 73hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 71hp engine designed by Daihatsu.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Renault being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the micro car segment, which is generally a misfortune safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the French car offers a marginal difference of 6% 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, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Renault with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Toyota badge with 4.6 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the French car rank it on average as 4.1, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 1.8 out of 5.

Toyota is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 160 kilometers per hour, 3km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 3.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (76 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 19% difference compared to the French car.

Renault 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 French car offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. 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. At the end, as much as I'd like to give you a winner here, it's simply a pure tie if you ask me. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.