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 petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 200hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 163hp engine designed by Renault.

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 same number of safety stars gained in the process. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the mpv segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the French car offers a marginal difference of 9% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Renault does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Seat with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Renault badge with 4.1 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Altea as average reliability-wise, and Grand Scenic is more or less at the same level.Above it all, drivers of cars with the same engine as the Spanish car rank it on average as 4.4 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Seat 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 220 kilometers per hour, 14km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 8.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (35 mpg), in combined cycle.

Seat 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 offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. From there things take a different direction, with Seat being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. Fuel consumption is more or less the same. It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Seat. 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. 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™, out of 12.000+ vehicles we currently have in our database.