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 micro car segment and utilize the same 5-door hatchback body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Daihatsu-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 68hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 68hp engine designed by Suzuki.

Unfortunatelly, neither of the two vehicles was submitted to the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) testing. This makes it virtually impossible for me to pick one over the other and I'm generally against buying such cars as the safety should really always come first. 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? On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, Pixo 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 Toyota with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Nissan badge with 4.3 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Aygo as average reliability-wise, and Pixo is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as Aygo rank it on average as 4.1, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.4 out of 5.

Nissan is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.7 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 155 kilometers per hour, 2km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (63 mpg), in combined cycle.

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, Pixo offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. When it comes to performance, both vehicles provide similar experience, so I wouldn't point any of them out. Pixo still consumps less fuel, which needs to be taken into consideration. It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Nissan. 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. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.