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 wagon body style within the same 'Small family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (front for the Volvo and 4 x 4 in the case of the Subaru). The first one has a Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 200hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 225hp engine designed by Subaru.

The fact that the Volvo got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Japanese car offers a marginal difference of 7% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Volvo with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Subaru badge with 4.2 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed V40 as average reliability-wise, and Impreza is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Swedish car rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.0 out of 5.

Subaru is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.1 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 230 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 9.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (31 mpg), in combined cycle.

Volvo 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 much better overall protection, which launches it ahead of the other contender. From there things take a different direction, with Subaru being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Volvo. 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. 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 thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.