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 suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv 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 Nissan-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 117hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 117hp engine designed by Mitsubishi.

The fact that the Nissan got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, puts it sky-high safety-wise, in my eyes at least. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the suv segment, which is generally 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 marginal difference of 9% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Nissan does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Nissan with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Citroen badge with 4.1 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Juke as average reliability-wise, and C4 Aircross 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 4.5 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Nissan is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 178 kilometers per hour, 5km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (48 mpg), in combined cycle.

Nissan 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 Japanese car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Nissan offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Nissan. 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.