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 micro 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 Suzuki-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 94hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 81hp engine designed by Chevrolet.

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 same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the micro car segment, which is generally a misfortune safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Japanese car offers a considerable difference of 15% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Suzuki does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Chevrolet badge with 4.2 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Splash as average reliability-wise, and Spark 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 5.0 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Suzuki is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 175 kilometers per hour, 11km/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.

Suzuki 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 offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. It all continues in the same direction, with Suzuki offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Suzuki. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. 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.