Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
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 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. The first one has a Renault-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 90hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 105hp engine designed by Volkswagen.
SafetyA 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 Škoda 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? Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the German car offers a considerable difference of 21% more metal.
ReliabilityReliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Škoda as a brand displays somewhat better results, when all the models are taken into account. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Mercedes Benz with an average rating of 4.3, and models under the Škoda badge with 4.4 out of 5. Unfortunatelly, I don't have enough insight that would allow me to comment in more details on the specific models level. Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the German car rank it on average as 4.5 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.
Performance & Fuel economyŠkoda is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.8 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 181 kilometers per hour, 26km/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 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 Škoda outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Škoda. 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. 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.
Related articles
A year ago I payed Mercedes dealership a visit, not in order to buy one, but rather to personally check an information coming from the Sci-Fi domain. Apparently, under the hood of A and B class, in their 160 & 180 CDI versions, there's a Renault 1.5 dCi...