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 'Luxury car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Volvo and front in the case of the Chrysler). The first one has a Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 286hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 193hp engine designed by Chrysler.

Unfortunatelly, neither of the two vehicles was submitted to the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) testing. This makes it virtually impossible for me to pick one over the other and I'm generally against buying such cars as the safety should really always come first. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. Both vehicles belong to the luxury car segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the American car offers a marginal difference of 4% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Volvo as a brand displays somewhat better results, 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 Chrysler badge with 4.4 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed S80 as average reliability-wise, and 300C 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 3.0 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Volvo is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 4.2 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 250 kilometers per hour, 41km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 11.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (26 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 American car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. From there things take a different 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... At the end, as much as I'd like to give you a winner here, it's simply a pure tie if you ask me. 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™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.