Compare Skoda Rapid Spaceback vs Volkswagen Cross Up vs Volkswagen Polo 6 facelift

Skoda Rapid Spaceback (NH1) Hatchback (2013-2019)

Volkswagen Cross Up Hatchback (2013-2019)

Volkswagen Polo 6 facelift Hatchback (2021)

Skoda | Cars

Volkswagen | Cars

Variants

1.0 TSI 110

1.0 TSI 95

1.0 TSI 95 AT

1.2 TSI 105

1.2 TSI 110

1.2 TSI 86

1.2 TSI 90

1.2 TSI 90 DSG

1.4 TDI 90

1.4 TDI 90 AT

1.4 TDI 90 DSG

1.4 TSI 122 DSG

1.4 TSI 125 AT

1.4 TSI 125 DSG

1.4i 90

1.6 TDI 105

1.6 TDI 115

1.6 TDI 116

1.6 TDI 90

1.6 TDI 90 DSG

1.6i 110 Hp

1.6i 110 AT

1.0

1.0 Euro6

1.0 Euro6d

1.0 Euro6 AT

1.0 Euro6d AT

1.0 AT

1.0 TSI

1.0 TSI Euro6d

1.0 TGI 90

1.0 TSI 110 DSG

1.0 TSI 95

1.0 TSI 95 DSG

GTI DSG

Capacity

Cargo Capacity

351 L / 12.4 cu-ft ~ 1125 L / 39.7 cu-ft

Engine Oil Capacity

4.0 L / 4.2 qt

Fuel Capacity

55.0 L / 14.5 gal

35.0 L / 9.2 gal

40.0 L / 10.6 gal

Passengers

Chassis

Brakes | Front

Ventilated discs

Brakes | Rear

Disc

Offroad | Approach Angle

13.8 deg

Offroad | Departure Angle

16.5 deg

Power Steering

Electric Steering

Suspension | Front

MacPherson strut

Suspension | Rear

Semi-independent, Torsion beam

Semi-independent, Torsion

Tire Size

165/70 R14, 185/55 R15, 185/50 R16, 195/40 R17

Turning Circle

10.9 m / 35.8 ft

9.8 m / 32.1 ft

10.6 m / 34.8 ft

Construction

Body Style

5-door Hatchback

4-door Hatchback

5-door Hatchback

Dimensions

Ground Clearance

134 mm / 5.3 in

162 mm / 6.4 in

Size | Height

1516 mm / 59.7 in

Size | Length

4074 mm / 160.4 in

Size | Width

1706 mm / 67.2 in

Wheel Size

5J x 14, 5.5J x 15, 6J x 16, 6.5J x 17

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout

Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive

Emission Standard

Euro 6d-ISC-FCM

Engine | Compression Ratio

10.5:1

Engine | Displacement

1.0 L / 61.0 cu-in / 999.0 cc

Transmission | Gears

5-speed

Production

Availability

2021

Reviews

Neofiliac score

25%

Pros

Low official fuel consumption

Ugly enough to be theft-proof
Small turning circle

Decent handling
Low fuel consumption

Cons

Bad 0-100kph time
Miserably low engine output
Only available with small, unreliable engines
No independent rear suspensions
Very ugly

Horrible 0-100kph time
Can't even reach 200km/h
Miserably low engine output
Only available with tiny engines
Semi-independent rear suspensions

No powerful engine options
Only available with tiny engines
Basic suspension setup

Price

Offers (incl. referral links)

Remove

Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above

Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.