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 mpv segment and utilize the same 5-door MPV 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 Chrysler-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 147hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 164hp engine designed by Mitsubishi.

The fact that the Chrysler got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, doesn't actually do much for it, as it's still a lousy 2-star coffin on wheels. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the mpv segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the American car offers a considerable difference of 12% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Mitsubishi as a brand displays somewhat better results, at least on all of the models level. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Chrysler with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Mitsubishi badge with 4.6 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Voyager as average reliability-wise, and Grandis is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the American car rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 17km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 9.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (30 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 7% difference compared to the American car.

Mitsubishi 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 American car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Mitsubishi being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Mitsubishi. 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. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.