Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by diesel engines and utilizing the 5-door wagon body style within the same 'Luxury car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (rear for the Jaguar and 4 x 4 in the case of the Volvo). The first one has a Ford-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 275hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 5-cylinder, 20-valves 215hp engine designed by Volvo.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the Volvo being a slightly better choice apparently. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the luxury car segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the British 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 Volvo does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Jaguar with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Volvo badge with 3.2 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed XF as average reliability-wise, and V70 is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the British car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 3.2 out of 5.

Jaguar is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 250 kilometers per hour, 30km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 6.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (44 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 Jaguar outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Jaguar. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. 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.