Overview

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 Mitsubishi and 4 x 4 in the case of the Volvo). The first one has a Mitsubishi-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 136hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 5-cylinder, 20-valves 213hp engine designed by Volvo.

Safety

Unfortunatelly, neither of the two vehicles was submitted to the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) testing. This makes it virtually impossible for me to pick one over the other and I'm generally against buying such cars as the safety should really always come first. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. 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, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Swedish car offers a considerable difference of 18% more metal.

Reliability

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, when all the models are taken into account. 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 Volvo badge with 3.2 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Outlander as average reliability-wise, and XC70 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 4.5 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Performance & Fuel economy

Volvo is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.6 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 210 kilometers per hour, 18km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 9.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (31 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 14% difference compared to the Swedish car.

Verdict

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 Swedish car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. It all continues in the same direction, with Volvo outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. 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 Volvo. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.