Overview

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 suv body style within the same 'SUV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Honda and front in the case of the Mitsubishi). The first one has a Honda-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 147hp engine designed by Mitsubishi.

Safety

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. 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, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, CR-V offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.

Reliability

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Honda as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Honda with an average rating of 4.7, and models under the Mitsubishi badge with 4.6 out of 5. The same official information place CR-V 20% above average, and Outlander 43% below the first one. We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as CR-V rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Performance & Fuel economy

Honda is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.6 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 190 kilometers per hour, 6km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be Outlander, averaging around 7.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (38 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 9% difference compared to CR-V.

Verdict

Honda definitely wins the reliability competition, everything taken into consideration. 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, CR-V offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Honda being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the Honda. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. 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.