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 4-door sedan body style within the same 'Large family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the SAAB and front in the case of the Chrysler). The first one has a Opel-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 280hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 186hp engine designed by Chrysler.

The fact that the SAAB 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. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Swedish car offers a marginal difference of 7% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that SAAB as a brand displays somewhat better results, at least on all of the models level. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of SAAB with an average rating of 4.1, and models under the Chrysler badge with 4.4 out of 5. Independent research findings rank 9-3 as average reliability-wise, and Sebring is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Swedish car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

SAAB is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 4.1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 250 kilometers per hour, 40km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the American car, averaging around 9.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (29 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 7% difference compared to the Swedish car.

SAAB 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 beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with SAAB 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... All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but SAAB. 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. 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™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.