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 3-cylinder, 12-valves 75hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 90hp engine designed by Honda.

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, with the Honda being a slightly better choice apparently. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the city car segment, which is generally not a very good thing safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, Jazz offers a marginal difference of 8% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Honda as a brand displays somewhat better results, 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 Honda badge with 4.7 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Colt as average reliability-wise, and Jazz is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as Colt rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Honda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.5 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 177 kilometers per hour, 12km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (55 mpg), in combined cycle.

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, Jazz offers much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.