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 small family car segment and utilize the same 5-door wagon 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 Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 5-cylinder, 20-valves 170hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 145hp engine designed by Hyundai.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. 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. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Swedish car offers a marginal difference of 4% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem 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, as well as KIA, with the same average rating of 4.6 out of 5. The same official information place V50 as average reliability-wise, and Ceed 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 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.7 out of 5.

Volvo is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 220 kilometers per hour, 15km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Korean car, averaging around 7.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (39 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 18% difference compared to the Swedish car.

KIA 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 slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Volvo 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 KIA. 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 thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.