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 (front for the Volvo and 4 x 4 in the case of the Škoda). The first one has a Volvo-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 254hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 280hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

The first thing to look into here would be the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests performed on the two cars. Good thing is that both vehicles got tested, with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. 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? Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Swedish car offers a considerable difference of 12% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Škoda does have a slight advantage, 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 Škoda badge with 4.3 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed S90 as average reliability-wise, and Superb 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 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.0 out of 5.

Škoda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 249 kilometers per hour, 19km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 6.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (42 mpg), in combined cycle.

Škoda 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 significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Škoda being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... 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. I suggest you spend two more minutes in order to find out which car, based on your needs and budget, would be picked by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.