We are here considering two somewhat similar cars, but we can't deny some of the obvious differences. For a start, they are not even classified under the same segment, with the Škoda being a city car and the Dacia representing small family car vehicle class. The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 3-cylinder, 12-valves 70hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 75hp 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 Škoda being a slightly better choice apparently. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. The second vehicle is a small family car and that gives it a marginal advantage over the city car competitor, at least that's what statistics show. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Romanian car offers a marginal difference of 1% more metal.

I don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Škoda does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. 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 Dacia badge with 4.1 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed Fabia as average reliability-wise, and Logan is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the Czech car rank it on average as 4.4 out of 5, exactly the same as the other one.

Dacia is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.4 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 156 kilometers per hour, 7km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (50 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 this case though, it seems that both cars show similar levels of passenger protection all together, so that won't break a tie. When it comes to performance, both vehicles provide similar experience, so I wouldn't point any of them out. the Czech car still consumps less fuel, which needs to be taken into consideration. No mistake, whatever you decide here, but I'd still go for 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. 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™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.