VS

BMW X3 vs Skoda Kodiaq comparison

Compare performance (398 HP vs 265 HP), boot space and price (51300 £ vs 36800 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – BMW X3 or Skoda Kodiaq?

X3

BMW X3 vs Skoda Kodiaq: The Battle of SUV Titans

The automotive market is increasingly dominated by SUVs, and two strong competitors vying for your attention are the BMW X3 and the Skoda Kodiaq. Both vehicles offer distinct advantages in terms of performance, space, and technological innovation. This article delves into the technical aspects and innovations of both models, providing a comprehensive comparison to help potential buyers make an informed decision.

Kodiaq

Design and Aesthetics

Starting with their design, the BMW X3 boasts a more aggressive stance, featuring the brand's iconic kidney grille and sleek lines that highlight its sporty edge. The dimensions of the X3 range from 4708mm to 4755mm in length, with an overall height of approximately 1676mm. On the other hand, the Skoda Kodiaq provides a magnetically appealing rugged look, designed to accommodate larger families with its consistently family-friendly layout. The Kodiaq measures 4758mm in length, and its height varies between 1663mm to 1683mm, reinforcing its robust character.

X3

Power and Performance

Moving to the performance aspect, the BMW X3 offers a range of powerful engine options, including Diesel MHEV, Petrol MHEV, and Plugin Hybrid configurations, with power outputs ranging from 184 HP to a staggering 510 HP. The acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h ranges between 3.8 seconds to 8.4 seconds, showcasing an impressive array of performance. Its all-wheel-drive system ensures optimal traction in various driving conditions.

In contrast, the Skoda Kodiaq offers engines ranging from traditional petrol and diesel to modern plugin hybrids, producing between 150 HP and 265 HP. While its acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h spans from 6.3 seconds to 9.7 seconds, it emphasizes a balance between efficiency and power. Both models feature an automatic transmission, but the Kodiaq utilizes a dual-clutch automatic, enhancing its shift responsiveness.

Kodiaq

Fuel Efficiency and Emissions

Fuel efficiency remains critical for many buyers, and the BMW X3 presents an economical choice with combined fuel consumption figures ranging from 5.8 L/100km to 10.8 L/100km, depending on the engine variant. Notably, the plugin hybrid versions can achieve an impressive consumption rate as low as 0.9 L/100km.

Meanwhile, the Skoda Kodiaq showcases commendable efficiency with fuel consumption figures between 5.3 L/100km to 8.2 L/100km. Its plugin hybrid model provides an electric range of up to 123 km, improving its utility for short daily commutes while minimizing CO2 emissions, making it a greener choice with emissions as low as 9 g/km for the hybrid variant.

X3

Interior and Technology

Inside, the BMW X3 is known for its luxurious feel, filled with high-quality materials and an intuitive iDrive infotainment system. Despite its classic BMW ergonomics, it offers ample trunk space measuring between 450L to 570L, making it practical for everyday use.

The Skoda Kodiaq, similarly, is spacious, offering an impressive trunk capacity of up to 910L. Skoda’s typical ‘Simply Clever’ features improve the overall usability of the interior. Its infotainment system is user-friendly, but lacks some of the high-end feel found in the BMW.

Kodiaq

Safety and Assistance Features

In terms of safety, both SUVs come equipped with a suite of advanced driver assistance systems. The BMW X3 includes features such as lane departure warning, adaptive cruise control, and forward collision warning. Skoda Kodiaq likewise is equipped with key safety technologies, including automatic emergency braking and blind-spot monitoring, emphasizing its family-friendly focus.

X3

Conclusion: Which SUV Should You Choose?

Ultimately, the choice between the BMW X3 and the Skoda Kodiaq boils down to individual needs and preferences. If you’re seeking luxury, performance, and an extensive array of engine options, the BMW X3 may be the right fit. However, for those prioritizing space, value for money, and family-oriented features, the Skoda Kodiaq shines as a compelling alternative. Whichever you prefer, both these SUVs epitomize the best that the automotive world has to offer in terms of technology and innovation.

BMW X3 vs Skoda Kodiaq: Key differences

BMW X3

4.6 (1 Reviews)
rate
  • clearly perceptible more power
  • noticeable quicker from 0–100 km/h

Skoda Kodiaq

5 (4 Reviews)
rate
  • noticeable cheaper
  • convincingly more efficient
  • noticeable more electric range
  • a bit lighter
  • noticeable more trunk space

All details on performance, efficiency, range and trunk space can be found in the technical comparison below – including user reviews for both models.

Here’s where it gets real: The technical differences in detail

Kodiaq

Costs and Efficiency:

Price and efficiency are often the first things buyers look at. Here it becomes clear which model has the long-term edge – whether at the pump, the plug, or in purchase price.

Skoda Kodiaq has a noticeable advantage in terms of price – it starts at 36800 £ , while the BMW X3 costs 51300 £ . That’s a price difference of around 14409 £.

Fuel consumption also shows a difference: Skoda Kodiaq manages with 1.50 L and is therefore convincingly more efficient than the BMW X3 with 2.80 L. The difference is about 1.30 L per 100 km.

As for electric range, the Skoda Kodiaq performs noticeable better – achieving up to 122 km, about 34 km more than the BMW X3.

X3

Engine and Performance:

Under the bonnet, it becomes clear which model is tuned for sportiness and which one takes the lead when you hit the accelerator.

When it comes to engine power, the BMW X3 has a clearly perceptible edge – offering 398 HP compared to 265 HP. That’s roughly 133 HP more horsepower.

In acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h, the BMW X3 is noticeable quicker – completing the sprint in 4.60 s, while the Skoda Kodiaq takes 6.30 s. That’s about 1.70 s faster.

In terms of top speed, the BMW X3 performs minimal better – reaching 250 km/h, while the Skoda Kodiaq tops out at 226 km/h. The difference is around 24 km/h.

There’s also a difference in torque: BMW X3 pulls significantly stronger with 670 Nm compared to 400 Nm. That’s about 270 Nm difference.

Kodiaq

Space and Everyday Use:

Cabin size, boot volume and payload all play a role in everyday practicality. Here, comfort and flexibility make the difference.

Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.

In curb weight, Skoda Kodiaq is a bit lighter – 1684 kg compared to 1930 kg. The difference is around 246 kg.

In terms of boot space, the Skoda Kodiaq offers noticeable more room – 910 L compared to 570 L. That’s a difference of about 340 L.

In maximum load capacity, the Skoda Kodiaq performs slightly better – up to 2105 L, which is about 405 L more than the BMW X3.

When it comes to payload, BMW X3 hardly perceptible takes the win – 570 kg compared to 563 kg. That’s a difference of about 7 kg.

Who wins the race in the data check?

The Skoda Kodiaq holds a decisive overall lead in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.

Frequently compared as well

Skoda Kodiaq
VW Tayron
VS
The Skoda Kodiaq is the no-nonsense family hauler: cavernous boot, clever storage, and a sensible price that makes sense when you’ve got kids and a budget. The VW Tayron trades some of that practicality for sharper looks, a firmer ride and smarter tech — pick it if you want a touch more polish and …
Skoda Kodiaq
VW Touran
VS
If you need room for a football team and their luggage, the Skoda Kodiaq is the grown‑up SUV — cavernous interior, composed long‑distance ride and clever storage touches that make family life embarrassingly easy. The VW Touran, by contrast, is the sharper, more city‑friendly people‑carrier with …
BMW X3
Skoda Kodiaq

Costs and Consumption
View detailed analysis

Engine and Performance
View detailed analysis

Dimensions and Body
View detailed analysis
from about £36,800
Kodiaq

Skoda Kodiaq

  • Engine Type : Petrol, Petrol MHEV, Diesel, Plugin Hybrid
  • Transmission : Automatic
  • Drive Type : All-Wheel Drive, Front-Wheel Drive
  • Power HP : 150 - 265 HP
  • Consumption L/100km : 1.5 - 8.2 L
  • Electric Range : 119 - 122 km
details

BMW X3

4.6 (1 Reviews)
rate

The BMW X3 mixes Bavarian poise with everyday practicality, delivering a composed ride and a cabin that feels both premium and lived-in. It’s the sort of SUV that lets you enjoy sporty handling without sacrificing family-friendly space, so you get fun and sense in one neat package.

details
P90444059_highRes_bmw-x3-xdrive30d-11-
P90424715_highRes_the-new-bmw-x3-xdriv
P90424688_highRes_the-new-bmw-x3-xdriv
P90424707_highRes_the-new-bmw-x3-xdriv
P90424709_highRes_the-new-bmw-x3-xdriv

Skoda Kodiaq

5 (4 Reviews)
rate

The Skoda Kodiaq blends sensible practicality with surprising style, so families and weekend adventurers get roomy comfort without looking like a moving van. It feels calm and composed on the road, packs clever storage and user-friendly tech, and manages to deliver a near-premium vibe without the pretension.

details
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112967
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112975
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112969
KODIAQ_45646
KODIAQ_ueberarbeitet_2022_112984

Reviews BMW X3

4.6 (1 Reviews)
rate

Reviews Skoda Kodiaq

5 (4 Reviews)
rate
zlatko P.
10 Feb 2026, 10:37:54

more for money, pracical

How do you mainly use this car? (optional): Family car
Efficiency / Consumption & Range
Comfort & Interior
Driving Fun / Performance
Technology & Infotainment
Safety
Practicality / Trunk & Everyday Use
Value for Money
BMW X3
Skoda Kodiaq

Costs and Consumption
Price
51300 - 72400 £
Price
36800 - 50600 £
Consumption L/100km
2.8 - 7.7 L
Consumption L/100km
1.5 - 8.2 L
Consumption kWh/100km
-
Consumption kWh/100km
-
Electric Range
88 km
Electric Range
119 - 122 km
Battery Capacity
-
Battery Capacity
-
co2
64 - 175 g/km
co2
35 - 186 g/km
Fuel tank capacity
60 - 65 L
Fuel tank capacity
55 - 58 L

Dimensions and Body
Body Type
SUV
Body Type
SUV
Seats
5
Seats
5
Doors
5
Doors
5
Curb weight
1930 - 2140 kg
Curb weight
1684 - 1970 kg
Trunk capacity
460 - 570 L
Trunk capacity
745 - 910 L
Length
4755 mm
Length
4758 mm
Width
1920 mm
Width
1864 mm
Height
1660 mm
Height
1679 - 1683 mm
Max trunk capacity
1700 L
Max trunk capacity
2105 L
Payload
570 kg
Payload
460 - 563 kg

Engine and Performance
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Diesel MHEV, Plugin Hybrid
Engine Type
Petrol, Petrol MHEV, Diesel, Plugin Hybrid
Transmission
Automatic
Transmission
Automatic
Transmission Detail
Automatic Gearbox
Transmission Detail
Dual-Clutch Automatic
Drive Type
All-Wheel Drive
Drive Type
All-Wheel Drive, Front-Wheel Drive
Power HP
197 - 398 HP
Power HP
150 - 265 HP
Acceleration 0-100km/h
4.6 - 7.8 s
Acceleration 0-100km/h
6.3 - 9.7 s
Max Speed
215 - 250 km/h
Max Speed
205 - 226 km/h
Torque
330 - 670 Nm
Torque
250 - 400 Nm
Number of Cylinders
4 - 6
Number of Cylinders
4
Power kW
145 - 293 kW
Power kW
110 - 195 kW
Engine capacity
1995 - 2998 cm3
Engine capacity
1498 - 1984 cm3

General
Model Year
2024 - 2025
Model Year
2024 - 2025
CO2 Efficiency Class
F, E, B
CO2 Efficiency Class
F, G, E, B
Brand
BMW
Brand
Skoda

Similar Comparisons

Skoda Kodiaq
Volvo XC60
VS
If you need cavernous family practicality and bang-for-buck, the Škoda Kodiaq is the no-nonsense choice that swallows car seats and weekend kit without complaint; the Volvo XC60, meanwhile, seduces with Scandinavian calm, sharper tech and a quieter, more refined drive. Pick the Kodiaq for space and …
CUPRA Terramar
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
The CUPRA Terramar is the sharper, sportier contender with taut handling and a premium design that puts fun at the top of the shopping list. By contrast, the Skoda Kodiaq plays the sensible family card — cavernous interior, clever storage and everyday practicality — making it the smarter buy if you …
Honda CR-V
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
The Honda CR-V is the sensible all‑rounder — refined, reliable and especially tempting if you want a supple ride and frugal hybrid tech, while the Skoda Kodiaq is the bigger, more pragmatic family hauler with genuine seven‑seat practicality and a cavernous boot. Choose the CR‑V for urban ease and …
Skoda Kodiaq
Toyota RAV4
VS
If you need seven seats, cavernous boot space and a grown-up ride, the Škoda Kodiaq is the sensible family hero that gets the job done without drama; it’s spacious, refined and embarrasses smaller SUVs at the supermarket run. The Toyota RAV4, meanwhile, is the rugged, hybrid-savvy all-rounder — …
Mazda CX-60
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
The Mazda CX-60 feels like a compact luxury tourer — beautifully detailed cabin, taut chassis and an engaging powertrain (there’s even a slick PHEV option) that rewards drivers who care about style and dynamics. By contrast, the Skoda Kodiaq is the family workhorse: cavernous interior, optional …
Skoda Kodiaq
Volvo XC90
VS
If you want pragmatic space and clever value, the Skoda Kodiaq is the family hauler that stretches your budget without feeling cheap; the Volvo XC90, by contrast, pampers with Scandinavian refinement, top-tier safety tech and a calmer motorway demeanour. Choose the Kodiaq for practical boots, …
Skoda Enyaq
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
The Skoda Enyaq is the slick, silent EV that turns everyday driving into a techy, whisper-quiet commute, while the Skoda Kodiaq remains the go-anywhere, seven-seat family SUV that swallows luggage and trailers without complaint. Choose the Enyaq for lower running costs, a modern cabin and …
Hyundai Tucson
Skoda Kodiaq
VS
In the competitive realm of mid-sized SUVs, the Hyundai Tucson flaunts its modern design and advanced safety features, making it a compelling choice for tech-savvy drivers. Meanwhile, the Skoda Kodiaq distinguishes itself with generous interior space and a versatile seating arrangement, appealing …
What drive types are available for the BMW X3?

The BMW X3 is offered with All-Wheel Drive.

The prices shown are estimates based on German list prices, adjusted for local VAT. Local registration taxes (e.g. NoVA, BPM or CO2 malus) are not included. This information is not legally binding.