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 city 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 Mitsubishi-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 95hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 90hp engine designed by Peugeot.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the Peugeot being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the city car segment, which is generally not a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the French car offers a considerable difference of 19% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Peugeot does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Mitsubishi with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Peugeot badge with 4.3 out of 5. The same official information place Colt as average reliability-wise, and 207 is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Japanese car rank it on average as 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.0 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.6 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 180 kilometers per hour, exactly the same as the other car does. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 5.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (49 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 10% difference compared to the French 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 French 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 Mitsubishi being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Mitsubishi. 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. 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.