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 3-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, 8-valves 75hp 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. 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, the French car offers a considerable difference of 21% 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 results of an independent reasearch, 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. Some independent research have also placed Colt as average reliability-wise, and 207 is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 4.7, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.1 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 180 kilometers per hour, 13km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (57 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 26% 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 outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. 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. 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.