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 large family car segment and utilize the same 5-door wagon body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific diesel engine choice they offer. Both the engines are Volkswagen-engineered . The first one has a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 140hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 143hp 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 Audi 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 German car offers a considerable difference of 16% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Škoda as a brand displays somewhat better results, all the models observed together. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Audi badge with 4.2 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Octavia as average reliability-wise, and A4 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 4.3 out of 5.

Škoda 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 210 kilometers per hour, 2km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (55 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 German 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 being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! At the end, as much as I'd like to give you a winner here, it's simply a pure tie if you ask me. 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 thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.