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 'Large family car' segment, the only major difference here really is their wheel drive configuration (4 x 4 for the Škoda and front in the case of the Citroen). The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 140hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 136hp engine designed by Peugeot.

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 Citroen being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the large family car segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? On the other hand, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the French car offers a considerable difference of 11% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Škoda does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Citroen badge with 4.0 out of 5. The same official information place Octavia as average reliability-wise, and C5 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 4.4, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.

Škoda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.9 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 207 kilometers per hour, 8km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.8 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (49 mpg), in combined cycle.

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 French car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with Škoda outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say 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. 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.