Compare Volkswagen Up facelift vs Skoda Rapid Spaceback vs Chrysler PT Cruiser

Volkswagen Up / Skoda Citigo / SEAT Mii facelift Hatchback (2016)

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

Chrysler PT Cruiser Hatchback (2000-2010)

Volkswagen | Cars

Skoda | Cars

Chrysler | Cars

Variants

1.0 60

1.0 60 ASG

1.0 75

1.0 75 ASG

1.0 75 Euro6d

1.0 EcoFuel 68

1.0 EcoFuel 68 Euro6d

1.0 MPI 65

1.0 TSI 90

1.0 TSI 90 Euro6d

GTI

GTI Euro6d

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

Coolant Capacity

6.2 L / 6.6 qt

Engine Oil Capacity

4.7 L / 5.0 qt

Fuel Capacity

55.0 L / 14.5 gal

57.0 L / 15.1 gal

Passengers

Chassis

Brakes | Front

Ventilated discs

Offroad | Approach Angle

13.8 deg

Offroad | Departure Angle

16.5 deg

Power Steering

Electric Steering

Hydraulic Steering

Suspension | Front

MacPherson strut

Suspension | Rear

Semi-independent

Semi-independent, Torsion beam

Semi-independent

Turning Circle

9.8 m / 32.1 ft

10.9 m / 35.8 ft

Construction

Body Style

3-5-door Hatchback

5-door Hatchback

5-door Station Wagon

Dimensions

Ground Clearance

144 mm / 5.7 in

134 mm / 5.3 in

Size | Length

3600 mm / 141.7 in

Size | Width

1706 mm / 67.2 in

Track Width | Front

1412.0 mm / 55.6 in

Track Width | Rear

1408.0 mm / 55.4 in

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout

Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive

Engine | Displacement

1.0 L / 61.0 cu-in / 999.0 cc

Reviews

Neofiliac score

Pros

Low fuel consumption
Small turning circle

Low official fuel consumption

So ugly that it's an icon

Cons

Horrible performance
Miserably low engine output
Only available with tiny engines
Poor 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.