Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Marketing
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
1.5 dCi K9K 865
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
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 suv segment and utilize the same 5-door suv body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 105hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 110hp engine designed by Renault.
SafetyThe 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 Škoda displaying significantly better structural stability. 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, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the Czech car offers a considerable difference of 11% more metal.
ReliabilityManufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Škoda does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Dacia badge with 4.1 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Yeti as average reliability-wise, and Duster is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Czech car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyŠkoda is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.1 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 176 kilometers per hour, 7km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 4.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (60 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Škoda 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 Czech car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. It all continues in the same direction, with Škoda offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. 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 Škoda. 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™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.