Kia Soul vs. Toyota Urban Cruiser

Why the comparison?

It's not a new thing to say that cars are getting more innovative and varied, often melding two or more traditional genres together to form a new one. Well, these two mate the tall, square proportions of an SUV (itself a fairly new niche) with the dimensions of a small hatchback.

Because these two crossovers vie for exactly the same target market: young, hip urbanites that need space - either because they've got children or friends - but who want something different from the norm. Both cars land in a similar place despite their makers approaching things in a different way.

How are they similar?

Both squeeze loads of cabin space from a footprint no bigger than a supermini (the Urban Cruiser is based on the Yaris for instance) and both aim to mimic the boxy, aggressive style of a 4x4 via their styling. However, while 4x4s now carry the 'gas-guzzler' stigma because of their general massiveness and unbridled consumption of fuel (reputedly), this pair offers low running costs and a road presence unlikely to induce hatred among other road users. The Korean and the Japanese firms both make use of small petrol and diesel engines that make their cars relatively cheap to run too - each offering, as it happens, one of each: the Toyota a 1.33-litre petrol and 1.4-litre diesel and the Kia a pair of 1.6-litre units.

In short, they're the acceptable and miniscule face of sports utility.

How do they differ?

For a start, the Urban Cruiser is a lot more expensive than the Soul, although Toyota's crossover at least has a crack at being a proper off-roader, because unlike the Kia it offers the choice of a 4x4 drivetrain. That is, however, completely pointless and makes the car almost unbelievably expensive, but it's there if you need something more than the standard front-wheel drive setup. Kia offers a much wider range of models, allowing trendy urbanites into its crossover for just over £11,000, whereas Urban Cruiser ownership kicks off at £14,500. The four-wheel drive Toyota, available only in diesel form, is yet another £2k on top - and you'll struggle to spend that on a Soul, even if you go mad with its options list.

And, in fact, that's the other main area in which these two cars differ - whereas Toyota thinks the Urban Cruiser is a premium product (it isn't) and has given it only one spec level and set its price high, Kia offers a wide range of trim levels and a thick options book on top of that.

So which one would we have?

The Soul. It's that simple really. The Urban Cruiser is priced all wrong, it feels cheap, it's no fun to drive and it's not actually that spacious. The Soul is hardly a feast of sumptuousness either, but at least it can be bought at a more reasonable price. The Kia is more comfortable because the driving position has more adjustment, and its diesel engine is stronger; in both cars, the petrol engines feel underpowered, although Toyota forces you to take a pointless four-wheel drive version in order to get diesel power. Fuel economy is ok in both cases, with over 50mpg achievable in oil burning form.

The problem is, they're both compromised in terms of how they use their space, because both sacrifice luggage capacity in order to feel more spacious in the cabin. Family buyers will begrudge the lack of boot space for buggies and things, but at least the Urban Cruiser has a sliding bench to liberate more space if needs be. The Soul's boot is just too small.

Both these cars offer an interesting alternative to a small hatch, but we'd still go down the traditional route instead of either. Plenty of headroom is a nice thing, and both are comfortable and relatively refined, but they're hardly dynamic and they're not bursting with personality either, particularly the Urban Cruiser. The Soul has its own charm, but it's dull unless you buy higher up the range, at which price there are plenty of more dynamic, more entertaining and higher quality alternatives around.

Mark Nichol