Two significantly similar cars, no doubt about that. Still, each one has something different to offer. Having both cars powered by petrol 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 Suzuki and front in the case of the Škoda). The first one has a Suzuki-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 140hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 122hp engine designed by Volkswagen.

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 same number of safety stars gained in the process. Moving further on, let's take a closer look at some additional safety-related facts. 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. On the other hand, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Czech car offers a marginal difference of 7% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Suzuki does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Suzuki with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Škoda badge with 4.3 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Vitara as average reliability-wise, and Yeti is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Japanese car rank it on average as 5.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.

Suzuki is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.4 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 15km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 5.4 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (52 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 19% difference compared to the Czech car.

Suzuki 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 offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. From there things take a different direction, with Suzuki offering somewhat better performance, just enough to call it quicker. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! It's not difficult to say then that if I'd need to make a choice, it would definitely be the Suzuki. 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. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.