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 small family car and the Citroen representing suv vehicle class. The first one has a Volkswagen-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 105hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 8-valves 99hp engine designed by Peugeot.

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 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 suv which already provides a serious advantage over the small family car competitor, at least that's what statistics show. On the other hand, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the Czech car offers a marginal difference of 8% more metal.

Manufacturers have been building their reliability reputation for decades now and, generally speaking, it appears that Škoda does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Škoda with an average rating of 4.4, and models under the Citroen badge with 4.0 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Rapid as average reliability-wise, and C4 Cactus is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the Czech car rank it on average as 4.5, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.2 out of 5.

Škoda is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.3 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 190 kilometers per hour, 6km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the French car, averaging around 3.1 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (91 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 26% difference compared to the Czech car.

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 my opinion, everything taken into account, the Czech car offers slightly better overall protection and takes the lead. It all continues in the same direction, with Škoda being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. It does come at a cost though, and that's the fuel consumption... It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Citroen. 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. 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 more than 12.000 different ones in our database.