Renault Megane E-Tech vs Škoda Elroq
Škoda Elroq leads 7 to 1
Biggest differences: Power — Renault Megane E-Tech 218 PS, Škoda Elroq 299 PS · 0–100 km/h — Renault Megane E-Tech 7.6 s, Škoda Elroq 6.2 s · Weight — Renault Megane E-Tech 1772 kg, Škoda Elroq 2132 kg.
Renault Megane E-Tech
An electric crossover in the C-segment, offering a range of up to 500 km and fast charging (DC).
Škoda Elroq
The Škoda Elroq is an all-electric SUV in the C segment, available with either RWD or AWD: it offers power outputs ranging from 190 to 340 horsepower, a range of up to 576 km according to the WLTP standard, and DC fast charging capabilities up to 165 kW.
Profile against the market: Renault Megane E-Tech vs Škoda Elroq
Renault Megane E-TechComfort Range 67 kWh
Škoda Elroq85x
Renault Megane E-Tech or Škoda Elroq — who wins where
Škoda Elroq leads 7 to 1
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmŠkoda Elroq +76 km
- Battery kWhŠkoda Elroq +10 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmŠkoda Elroq −0.2 kWh/100 km
- Power PSŠkoda Elroq +81 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sŠkoda Elroq −1.4 s
- Top speed km/hŠkoda Elroq +20 km/h
- DC charging kWNo difference
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Weight ↓ kgRenault Megane E-Tech −360 kg
- Boot lŠkoda Elroq +30 l
Technical data: Renault Megane E-Tech vs Škoda Elroq
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Renault Megane E-Tech Comfort Range 67 kWh | Škoda Elroq 85x | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 500 km | 576 km | Škoda +76 km |
| Battery | 67 kWh | 77 kWh | Škoda +10 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 15.7 kWh/100 km | 15.5 kWh/100 km | Škoda −0.2 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 165 kW | 165 kW | No difference |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging ⚠ | 24 min 15–80% | 29 min 10–80% | 5 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 13.5 km/min | 13.9 km/min | Škoda +0.4 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 218 PS | 299 PS | Škoda +81 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 7.6 s | 6.2 s | Škoda −1.4 s |
| Top speed | 160 km/h | 180 km/h | Škoda +20 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | AWD | different type |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1772 kg | 2132 kg | Renault −360 kg |
| Boot | 440 l | 470 l | Škoda +30 l |
| V2L (external power) | Yes | Yes | — |
| Length | 4200 mm | 4488 mm | Škoda +288 mm |
| Width | 1768 mm | 1884 mm | Škoda +116 mm |
| Height | 1522 mm | 1620 mm | Škoda +98 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2685 mm | 2766 mm | Škoda +81 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
Renault Megane E-Tech
Škoda Elroq
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Renault Megane E-Tech
Škoda Elroq
Other comparisons in this class: Crossover / SUV, segment C
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Renault Megane E-Tech or Škoda Elroq?
The Škoda Elroq goes further: 576 km WLTP against the 500 km of the Renault Megane E-Tech. That is a difference of 76 km.
How do the drivetrains of the Renault Megane E-Tech and the Škoda Elroq differ?
The Renault Megane E-Tech has FWD and 218 PS. The Škoda Elroq has AWD and 299 PS.
Which is more powerful — Renault Megane E-Tech or Škoda Elroq?
The Škoda Elroq is stronger: 299 PS against the 218 PS of the Renault Megane E-Tech. The gap is 81 PS.
Which charges faster?
The Renault Megane E-Tech accepts up to 165 kW DC, the Škoda Elroq up to 165 kW.
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.