Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the mpv segment and utilize the same 5-door MPV body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. Both the engines are VM Motori-engineered . The first one has a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 111hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 140hp one.

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 Hyundai being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the mpv segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the American 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 Hyundai is significantly less fault-prone, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Hyundai with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Chrysler badge with 4.4 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Trajet as average reliability-wise, and Voyager is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Korean car rank it on average as 4.9, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.

Chrysler is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 185 kilometers per hour, 15km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 7.5 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (38 mpg), in combined cycle.

Hyundai 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 Chrysler being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. 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 Hyundai. 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. 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.