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 MPV body style within the same 'MPV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Volkswagen and front in the case of the Chrysler). The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 204hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 151hp engine designed by Chrysler.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Volkswagen being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the mpv segment, which is generally a 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 American car offers a marginal difference of 1% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Volkswagen as a brand displays somewhat better results, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Volkswagen with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Chrysler badge with 4.4 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Sharan as average reliability-wise, and Voyager is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the German car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Volkswagen is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.7 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 214 kilometers per hour, 34km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 10.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (26 mpg), in combined cycle.

Volkswagen 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 German car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Volkswagen being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Volkswagen. 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.