We are here considering two somewhat similar cars, but we can't deny some of the obvious differences. For a start, they are not even classified under the same segment, with the Mitsubishi being a small family car and the Audi representing large family car vehicle class. The first one has a Mitsubishi-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 295hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 211hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

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 same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. The second vehicle is a large family car and that gives it a marginal advantage over the small family car competitor, at least that's what statistics show. On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 1% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Mitsubishi 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 Audi badge with 4.2 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Lancer as average reliability-wise, and A4 is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.6 out of 5.

Mitsubishi is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 240 kilometers per hour, 6km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy an obvious choice would be the German car, averaging around 7.3 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (39 mpg), in combined cycle. That's 40% 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 this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. But one thing that actually could is the performance, with Mitsubishi offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Audi. 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. 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.