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 4 x 4 wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Hyundai-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 148hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 163hp engine designed by Mitsubishi.

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. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. 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, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 5% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Hyundai does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Hyundai with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Mitsubishi badge with 4.6 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Terracan as average reliability-wise, and Pajero is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Korean car rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.7 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 170 kilometers per hour, 4km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Korean car, averaging around 8.6 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (33 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 10% difference compared to the Japanese 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 Japanese car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Mitsubishi outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... 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. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.