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 (front for the KIA and 4 x 4 in the case of the Honda). The first one has a Hyundai-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 145hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 150hp engine designed by Honda.

The fact that the Honda got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. 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. On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 4% more metal.

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 official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of KIA with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Honda badge with 4.7 out of 5. The same official information place Sportage as average reliability-wise, and CR-V 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 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

KIA is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 179 kilometers per hour, 2km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Korean car, averaging around 8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (35 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 13% difference compared to the Japanese car.

Honda 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 beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with KIA being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.