Compare Skoda Fabia 4 vs Skoda Rapid Spaceback vs Chrysler PT Cruiser

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

Chrysler PT Cruiser Hatchback (2000-2010)

Skoda | Cars

Chrysler | Cars

Variants

1.0 MPI 65

1.0 MPI 80

1.0 TSI 110

1.0 TSI 110 DSG

1.0 TSI 95

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

1.6

2.0 141PS

2.0 141PS AT

2.0 150PS

2.0 150PS AT

2.2D 150PS

2.2D 121PS

2.4

2.4 AT

2.4T 182PS

2.4T 182PS AT

2.4T 220PS

2.4T 220PS AT

Capacity

Cargo Capacity

380 L / 13.4 cu-ft ~ 1190 L / 42.0 cu-ft

Coolant Capacity

6.2 L / 6.6 qt

Engine Oil Capacity

4.7 L / 5.0 qt

Fuel Capacity

40.0 L / 10.6 gal

55.0 L / 14.5 gal

57.0 L / 15.1 gal

Passengers

Chassis

Brakes | Front

Ventilated discs

Offroad | Approach Angle

14.1 deg

13.8 deg

Offroad | Departure Angle

17.5 deg

16.5 deg

Power Steering

Electric Steering

Hydraulic Steering

Suspension | Front

MacPherson strut

Suspension | Rear

Semi-independent, Threaded twist beam

Semi-independent, Torsion beam

Semi-independent

Turning Circle

10.4 m / 34.1 ft

10.9 m / 35.8 ft

Construction

Body Style

5-door Hatchback

5-door Station Wagon

Dimensions

Ground Clearance

138 mm / 5.4 in

134 mm / 5.3 in

Size | Height

1459 mm / 57.4 in

Size | Length

4108 mm / 161.7 in

Size | Width

1780 mm / 70.1 in | 1954 mm / 76.9 in (mirror unfolded)

1706 mm / 67.2 in

Track Width | Front

1525.0 mm / 60.0 in

Track Width | Rear

1509.0 mm / 59.4 in

Wheelbase

2564 mm / 100.9 in

Performance

Coefficient Of Drag

0.278 ~ 0.315

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout

Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive

Emission Standard

Euro 6 AP

Engine | Displacement

1.0 L / 61.0 cu-in / 999.0 cc

Production

Availability

2021

Reviews

Neofiliac score

Pros

Cheap to purchase
Good 0.27 drag coefficient
Small turning circle

Low official fuel consumption

So ugly that it's an icon

Cons

Very poor performance
Miserably low engine output
Very basic suspension setup

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

Can't even reach 200km/h
No powerful engine options
Not independent rear suspensions
Truly epitomizes ugliness

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.