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 5-door wagon body style within the same 'Small family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Audi and front in the case of the Volvo). The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 160hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 125hp engine designed by Mazda.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Volvo being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the small family car segment, which is generally classifying them somewhere in the middle safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the German 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 does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Audi with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Volvo badge with 4.6 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed A3 as average reliability-wise, and V50 is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the German car rank it on average as 4.2, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.6 out of 5.

Audi is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 220 kilometers per hour, 20km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 7.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (38 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 this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. But one thing that actually could is the performance, with Audi 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... It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Audi. 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. 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.