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 2-door coupe body style within the same 'Sports car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (front for the Chrysler and rear in the case of the Jaguar). The first one has a Mercedes Benz-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 18-valves 335hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 8-cylinder, 32-valves 300hp engine designed by Jaguar.

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 sports car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the British car offers a considerable difference of 16% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Jaguar does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Chrysler with an average rating of 4.4, 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 American car rank it on average as 3.0 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Chrysler is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 255 kilometers per hour, 5km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 11.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (25 mpg), in combined cycle.

Jaguar 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 offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Chrysler outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! I believe that, when we take all into account, we have only one winner here - the Chrysler. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. 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.