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 4-door sedan 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 4-cylinder, 16-valves 200hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 133hp engine designed by Chrysler.

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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Swedish car offers a considerable difference of 11% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Volvo as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Volvo with an average rating of 4.6, and models under the Chrysler badge with 4.4 out of 5. Independent research findings rank S40 as average reliability-wise, and Neon is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Swedish car rank it on average as 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.3 out of 5.

Volvo is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3.5 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 235 kilometers per hour, 35km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the American car, averaging around 7.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (36 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 13% difference compared to the Swedish car.

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 beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Volvo 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 Volvo. Nevertheless, let's not forget that people have different preferences and needs, so what really counts is your personal feel. I'm only here to help. 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.