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 city 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 110hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 68hp one.

The fact that the Volkswagen got tested by the European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), while the other contender didn't, offers a slight advantage, as the 4-star rating is better than none. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the city car segment, which is generally not a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the Spanish 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 both brands display similar results in faults and breakdowns, at least on all of the models level. That's the official data, while our visitors describe reliability of Seat with an average rating of 4.5, and models under the Volkswagen badge with 4.2 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Cordoba as average reliability-wise, and Polo 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 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.3 out of 5.

Seat is way more agile, reaching 100km/h in 6.3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 190 kilometers per hour, 32km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.2 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (55 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 German car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Seat outracing its opponent in any situation possible, making it better choice for boy racers. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Seat. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. 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.