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 suv body style within the same 'SUV' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Land Rover and front in the case of the Volvo). The first one has a Ford-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 6-cylinder, 24-valves 248hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 5-cylinder, 20-valves 163hp engine designed by Volvo.

A starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, 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 suv segment, which is generally a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the British car offers a considerable difference of 22% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Volvo as a brand displays somewhat better results, all the models observed together. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Land Rover with an average rating of 3.8, and models under the Volvo badge with 4.6 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Discovery as average reliability-wise, and XC90 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 4.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Land Rover is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.2 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 180 kilometers per hour, 10km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Swedish car, averaging around 8.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (34 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 13% difference compared to the British car.

Volvo is apparently more reliable, not too much, but just enough. 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 Land Rover 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 not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.