Lynk & Co 02 vs Škoda Elroq
Biggest differences: WLTP range — Lynk & Co 02 445 km, Škoda Elroq 573 km · 0–100 km/h — Lynk & Co 02 5.5 s, Škoda Elroq 6.6 s · Battery — Lynk & Co 02 66 kWh, Škoda Elroq 77 kWh.
Lynk & Co 02
The Lynk & Co 02 Long Range (Model Year 2025) is a compact SUV with rear-wheel drive and a WLTP range of 445 kilometers.
Škoda Elroq
The Škoda Elroq is a compact SUV in the C-segment, offering rear-wheel drive or all-wheel drive options, and power outputs ranging from 170 to 340 horsepower.
Profile against the market: Lynk & Co 02 vs Škoda Elroq
Lynk & Co 02Long Range
Škoda Elroq85
Lynk & Co 02 or Škoda Elroq — who wins where
Škoda Elroq leads 6 to 3
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmŠkoda Elroq +128 km
- Battery kWhŠkoda Elroq +11 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmŠkoda Elroq −1.9 kWh/100 km
- Power PSŠkoda Elroq +14 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sLynk & Co 02 −1.1 s
- Top speed km/hNo difference
- DC charging kWLynk & Co 02 +15 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minŠkoda Elroq −2 min
- Weight ↓ kgLynk & Co 02 −230 kg
- Boot lŠkoda Elroq +60 l
Technical data: Lynk & Co 02 vs Škoda Elroq
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Lynk & Co 02 Long Range | Škoda Elroq 85 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 445 km | 573 km | Škoda +128 km |
| Battery | 66 kWh | 77 kWh | Škoda +11 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 17.1 kWh/100 km | 15.2 kWh/100 km | Škoda −1.9 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 150 kW | 135 kW | Lynk & Co +15 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 30 min | 28 min | Škoda −2 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 10.4 km/min | 14.3 km/min | Škoda +3.9 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 272 PS | 286 PS | Škoda +14 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 5.5 s | 6.6 s | Lynk & Co −1.1 s |
| Top speed | 180 km/h | 180 km/h | No difference |
| Drivetrain | RWD | RWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1820 kg | 2050 kg | Lynk & Co −230 kg |
| Boot | 410 l | 470 l | Škoda +60 l |
| V2L (external power) | Yes | No | only Lynk & Co |
| Length | 4460 mm | 4488 mm | Škoda +28 mm |
| Width | 1845 mm | 1884 mm | Škoda +39 mm |
| Height | 1573 mm | 1625 mm | Škoda +52 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2755 mm | 2765 mm | Škoda +10 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Lynk & Co 02
Škoda Elroq
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Lynk & Co 02
Škoda Elroq
Other comparisons in this class: SUV, segment C
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Lynk & Co 02 or Škoda Elroq?
The Škoda Elroq goes further: 573 km WLTP against the 445 km of the Lynk & Co 02. That is a difference of 128 km.
Which one can power appliances from a socket (V2L)?
Only the Lynk & Co 02 — its 66 kWh battery then works as a power source. The Škoda Elroq, with 77 kWh, does not offer it.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Škoda Elroq takes more: 470 l against 410 l in the Lynk & Co 02. The difference is 60 l.
Which charges faster?
The Lynk & Co 02 accepts up to 150 kW DC, the Škoda Elroq up to 135 kW. Charging from 10 to 80% takes 30 and 28 min respectively.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.