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 rear in the case of the Jaguar). The first one has a Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 304hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 240hp engine designed by Jaguar.

The fact that the Jaguar 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. 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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the British car offers a marginal difference of 2% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Volvo does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Volvo with an average rating of 3.2, and models under the Jaguar badge with 4.2 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. That apart, owners of different cars powered by 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.

Volvo is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.6 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 250 kilometers per hour, 13km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 10.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (28 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 British car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with Volvo outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for the 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. 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.