Volkswagen Polo VI vs Skoda Rapid NH: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Volkswagen · 2017–present
Polo VI
- Power
- 48 kW65 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 15.5 s
- Top speed
- 164 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 1,105 kg
Skoda · 2012–2019
Rapid NH
- Power
- 55 kW75 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 13.9 s
- Top speed
- -
- Kerb mass
- -
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
Categories won: Polo VI 1 Rapid NH 1
- City Polo VI Length: 4,053 mm vs 4,483 mm
- Performance Rapid NH 0–100 km/h: 13.9 s vs 15.5 s
In plain words
Skoda Rapid NH is quicker: 0–100 km/h in 13.9 s against 15.5 s for Volkswagen Polo VI. Skoda Rapid NH is 430 mm longer than Volkswagen Polo VI (4,483 mm vs 4,053 mm). Skoda Rapid NH is the older design (from 2012); Volkswagen Polo VI arrived in 2017. Volkswagen Polo VI is still in production; Skoda Rapid NH is not. On the catalog figures, the Volkswagen Polo VI is the pick for city; the Skoda Rapid NH is the pick for performance. Our catalog has no kerb mass for the Skoda Rapid NH yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Race Stats side by side
Each figure is a 0–100 score from the catalog numbers, the same as on the 1CARS Race cards. PI is the overall performance index (100–999) and its class D–S.
| Stat | Polo VI | Rapid NH |
|---|---|---|
| PI | C · 402 | C · 412 |
| Power | 24 | 24 |
| Grip | 40 | 40 |
| Handling | 72 | 71 |
| Top speed | 25 | 28 |
| Launch | 12 | 17 |
Grip and handling are estimates from drive type, weight, height and body (hover a figure to see where it comes from). 1CARS Race
Who wins a race?
Quarter-mile (402 m) drag from a standing start, dry road, no reaction time - the 1CARS Race physics on the catalog figures of these versions.
- 1 Rapid NH1.2 MPI · petrol · 55 kW (75 PS) 18.81 sat 115 km/h
- 2 Polo VI1.0 MPI 65 · petrol · 48 kW (65 PS) 19.44 sat 111 km/h · +0.63 s
Size and weight
Side view to scale, all cars from the front bumper.
| Polo VI | Rapid NH | |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 4,053 mm159.6 in | 4,483 mm176.5 in +430 mm +16.9 in +10.6% |
| Width | 1,751 mm68.9 in | 1,706 mm67.2 in −45 mm −1.8 in −2.6% |
| Height | 1,438 mm56.6 in | 1,461 mm57.5 in +23 mm +0.9 in +1.6% |
| Wheelbase | 2,564 mm100.9 in | 2,602 mm102.4 in +38 mm +1.5 in +1.5% |
| Fits a standard garage? | Yes | Yes |
Difference vs Polo VI (±). Garage check: a standard single garage takes a car up to about 5.0 m (16 ft 5 in) long and 1.9 m (6 ft 3 in) wide (width as listed in the catalog; some makers include the mirrors). Leave about 0.6 m (2 ft) to open the doors.
Full specifications
| Volkswagen Polo VI | Skoda Rapid NH | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 1.0 MPI 65 · petrol · 48 kW (65 PS) | 1.2 MPI · petrol · 55 kW (75 PS) |
| Production years | 2017–present | 2012–2019 |
| Body | Hatchback | Hatchback, Liftback |
| Country | Germany | Czech Republic |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 48 kW (65 PS) 64 hp | 55 kW (75 PS) 74 hp Better |
| Power, all versions | 48–147 kW (65–200 PS) 64–197 hp | 55–92 kW (75–125 PS) 74–123 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | No data | 112 Nm 83 lb-ft |
| 0–100 km/h Why it matters: A shorter 0–100 km/h time means quicker getaways and safer merging onto fast roads. | 15.5 s | 13.9 s Better |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | 164 km/h 102 mph | No data |
| Power per tonne | 43 kW/t 53 hp/ton calculated | No data |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Petrol | Petrol |
| Engine | No data | 1,198 cc 1.2 l |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | Front-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | 4,053 mm 159.6 in | 4,483 mm 176.5 in |
| Width | 1,751 mm 68.9 in | 1,706 mm 67.2 in |
| Height | 1,438 mm 56.6 in | 1,461 mm 57.5 in |
| Wheelbase | 2,564 mm 100.9 in | 2,602 mm 102.4 in |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | 1,105 kg 2,436 lb | No data |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | 351 l 12.4 cu ft | No data |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | 40 l 10.6 gal US | No data |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | 4.7 l/100 km 50.0 mpg US | No data |
| CO₂ | 108 g/km | No data |
| Fuel cost per year | €1,230/year estimated | No data |
| Range on a full tank | 851 km 529 mi estimated | No data |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | ★★★★★ (2022) | ★★★★★ (2012) |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (2): Fuel, Drive.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol.