Skoda Kylaq vs Mahindra XUV 3XO: The Enthusiast's Hero vs The People's King
 |
| image credits:autocarindia |
One has been called the segment champion. The other is the newcomer that dared to challenge it — and largely succeeded.
The Mahindra XUV 3XO won Autocar India's last compact SUV comparison test and has consistently been praised as the benchmark in its segment for features, space, and all-round value. The Skoda Kylaq entered the sub-4m SUV market in January 2025 as a deliberate character statement: European build quality, a focused driving experience, and the proven 1.0 TSI engine from the bigger Kushaq and Slavia, packaged in a sub-4m body at a competitive price.
Both measure just under 4 metres. Both use turbo-petrol engines. Both have earned 5-star Global NCAP ratings. Both are priced within ₹22,500 of each other at the starting level — and within ₹1.56 lakh at the top spec.
The question is not which is the objectively better car. The question — and this is the genuinely interesting one — is which is the right car for you. The answer, after back-to-back driving and the benefit of Autocar India's instrumented testing, is clear and specific.
Design: European Restraint vs Indian Boldness
Kylaq looks more proportionate and mature, while the 3XO is distinctive — and that single sentence summarises the design philosophy divide as clearly as any paragraph could.
The Skoda Kylaq follows Skoda's global design language with discipline and confidence. The wide black grille sits between sleek DRLs, with main split LED headlights positioned lower on the bumper. The bonnet is upright and flat, giving the Kylaq a strong presence without aggression. From the side, a traditional SUV shape, large 17-inch dual-tone alloys, and thick lower body cladding complete a look that CarDekho describes as "clean and timeless." The rear, however, divides opinion: large block-shaped LED tail lights connected by a black strip look cluttered relative to the neat overall design — a rare incoherence in an otherwise polished package.
The Mahindra XUV 3XO takes a far bolder approach. C-shaped LED DRLs dominate the front face, surrounding modern LED projector headlights. A sharp nose, sculpted panels, and strong body lines make the 3XO impossible to ignore in traffic. The full-width LED light bar at the rear and chunky bumper reinforce the assertive stance. The piano black grille, chrome accents, and large blacked-out bumper section can make the front look busy — not everyone's preference — but the diamond-pattern detailing on the grille and roof rails adds a layer of considered sophistication. Love it or hate it, it is impossible to ignore.
Overall, the XUV does appear to be the more substantial of the two — it is the widest sub-4m SUV in the segment, with the longest wheelbase, and 201 mm ground clearance versus the Kylaq's 189 mm. On broken Indian roads and rutted rural surfaces, that 12 mm ground clearance advantage is a genuine daily-use benefit.
Design verdict: Kylaq for timeless European proportions. XUV 3XO for bold, maximum visual impact. Both are authentic to their brands' identities.
 |
| image credits:autocarindia |
Dimensions: The XUV 3XO's Practical Advantage
| Dimension | Skoda Kylaq | Mahindra XUV 3XO |
|---|---|---|
| Length | 3,995 mm | 3,990 mm |
| Width | 1,783 mm | 1,821 mm (+38mm) |
| Height | 1,619 mm | 1,647 mm (+28mm) |
| Wheelbase | 2,566 mm | 2,600 mm (+34mm) |
| Ground Clearance | 189 mm | 201 mm (+12mm) |
| Boot Space | 360 litres | 295 litres (−65L) |
The XUV 3XO is wider by 38 mm, taller by 28 mm, and has a 34 mm longer wheelbase than the Kylaq — all of which directly translate into rear-seat space advantages. The Kylaq, however, compensates with a significantly larger boot: 360 litres vs 295 litres up to the parcel shelf (Kylaq's boot is also described as "quite deep"). Note: CarHP India lists Kylaq boot space at 446 litres to the headliner — the 360-litre figure is to the parcel shelf, representing the more usable everyday loading height.
The XUV 3XO's 201 mm ground clearance — 12 mm more than the Kylaq's 189 mm — is a practical Indian road conditions advantage for pothole-heavy city surfaces, raised speed breakers, and seasonal flooding in certain regions.
Powertrain: More Than One Engine on One Side
The engine comparison is the most structurally unequal element of this comparison — and buyers need to understand it before evaluating "which car is faster."
Skoda Kylaq: Single powertrain option — the proven 1.0-litre 3-cylinder TSI turbo-petrol unit from the Kushaq/Slavia family. It produces 114 bhp @ 5,000–5,500 rpm and 178 Nm @ 1,750–4,000 rpm, available with a 6-speed manual or a 6-speed torque-converter automatic.
Mahindra XUV 3XO: Three engine options across the range:
- 1.2-litre Stallion TCMPFI: 110 bhp / 200 Nm — entry petrol
- 1.2-litre TGDi turbo-petrol: 129 bhp / 230 Nm — performance petrol
- 1.5-litre diesel: up to 115 bhp / 300 Nm — diesel variants
The fair comparison for the Kylaq is against the XUV 3XO 1.2 TGDi — the performance turbo-petrol that is closer in displacement and character. Against the TGDi: the Kylaq makes 14 bhp less and 52 Nm less. Against the entry Stallion petrol: the Kylaq has 4 bhp more but 22 Nm less.
The Kylaq has a 156 kg lighter kerb weight, which helps it maintain a slightly better power-to-weight ratio against the XUV 3XO 1.0 Stallion petrol — but the XUV 3XO TGDi's considerably higher torque output gives it a 13% better torque-to-weight ratio than the Kylaq.
Gearbox comparison: Both the turbo-AT Kylaq and XUV 3XO come with different automatic gearbox types. The Kylaq's 6-speed torque-converter automatic is smooth and predictable. The XUV 3XO TGDi comes with a 6-speed torque-converter automatic as well. The Kylaq also gets paddle shifters for a more engaged driving experience — the XUV 3XO does not.
Driving modes: The XUV 3XO TGDi offers Zip, Zap, and Zoom driving modes — tweaking acceleration and steering weight. The Kylaq does not offer driving modes, focusing instead on a single well-tuned delivery across all conditions.
 |
| image credits:autocarindia |
Performance: VBOX-Instrumented Reality
In the 0–100 km/h tests, the Mahindra XUV 3XO has a better acceleration right from the get-go. The Kylaq is slower to respond at low speeds — the 1.0-litre TSI's turbo lag is apparent in the 0–40 km/h phase — but after the initial lag, the Kylaq picks up speed swiftly with a strong mid-range further enhanced by paddle-shifter-initiated gear changes.
The XUV 3XO's higher torque from lower in the rev range enables faster exits from standstill — the TGDi's 230 Nm is available from lower rpm than the Kylaq's 178 Nm, and this off-the-line advantage is consistent. The 3-cylinder Skoda engine is noisier than the Mahindra's unit, though its sound is not unpleasant — merely more vocal.
However, the most revealing performance data point in this comparison is the braking test:
In the 80–0 km/h braking test — which simulates a real-world panic braking situation — the Kylaq comes to a standstill within 27.11 metres, which is 4.25 metres shorter than what the XUV 3XO takes to stop. The XUV 3XO also takes over half a second longer to come to a halt from 80 km/h.
That braking gap is not trivial. For a sub-4m SUV operating in Indian city traffic — where emergency braking scenarios are a regular occurrence — the Kylaq's 4.25-metre shorter stopping distance is a meaningful real-world safety advantage.
Performance summary:
- 0–100 km/h: XUV 3XO TGDi quicker off the line (higher torque from lower rpm)
- Mid-range acceleration: Kylaq catches up and pulls strongly from 60–100 km/h
- 80–0 km/h braking: Kylaq stops 4.25 metres shorter — decisive safety advantage
- Engine refinement: XUV 3XO is quieter; Kylaq has more pronounced 3-cylinder thrum
- Paddle shifters: Kylaq only
Driving Dynamics: The Most Significant Character Difference
This is where the Kylaq has staked its claim as one of the most fun-to-drive compact SUVs — and where the XUV 3XO takes a deliberately different approach.
The Kylaq is nimble and fun in corners. The steering is precise and weighted well — the VAG family is known for driving dynamics, stability, and precise steering that local brands can only dream of matching. The lower centre of gravity (lower by 28 mm than the XUV 3XO) and the tighter, more focused chassis setup make the Kylaq feel like a genuinely driver-oriented SUV. Directional changes are crisp. The front-end responds faithfully to steering inputs. For a buyer who enjoys driving — who looks forward to the Saturday morning canyon-road run — the Kylaq delivers a quality of engagement that is genuinely rare at this price point.
The XUV 3XO pushes harder, heavier, but remains composed on highways — especially with the ride height advantage. It feels like a bigger SUV behind the wheel — torque-heavy, wide, planted, and confident at speed. The 201 mm ground clearance gives it a more commanding sense of road presence. The Zoom driving mode sharpens throttle response for more assertive overtaking. For a buyer who values an SUV that absorbs roads rather than communicating them, the XUV 3XO's approach is the more appropriate choice.
Dynamics verdict: Kylaq for the enthusiast who drives; XUV 3XO for the buyer who prioritises SUV confidence and highway composure.
 |
| image credits:autocarindia |
Interior: Premiumness vs Roominess
Skoda Kylaq: Quality Over Volume
The Kylaq's interior reflects Skoda's no-nonsense approach to quality. Soft-touch materials, a clean layout, and light upholstery create a cabin that looks and feels more premium than its price suggests. The dashboard design is functional and uncluttered — there are no excessive screen banks, no polarising design experiments.
The Kylaq's front seats are better in this company — they offer better support and feature electric adjustment and ventilation. The ventilated front seats and electric adjustment are features the XUV 3XO does not offer even at equivalent pricing — a notable Kylaq advantage for the driver-comfort brief.
However, the rear seat is where the Kylaq concedes ground. The cabin is narrower (1,783 mm width vs XUV 3XO's 1,821 mm), and the seat contouring means the rear is best suited for two passengers rather than three. Legroom and headroom are adequate for average-sized adults, but it is not a car where three adults will travel comfortably for extended periods. Rear occupants do get AC vents, Type-C charging ports, adjustable headrests, and a centre armrest — the essentials are present, the space is the constraint.
Mahindra XUV 3XO: Features, Space, and the Panoramic Sunroof
The XUV 3XO's interior looks and feels more upmarket — a verdict that surprises many buyers at first encounter. The light-coloured upholstery (the ivory seats that will be challenging to keep clean, as Autocar India acknowledges), the panoramic sunroof, the twin 10.25-inch screens, and the physical dual-zone climate control buttons and knobs all contribute to a more feature-rich, premium visual impression.
XUV 3XO's rear seat is the segment leader. The wider cabin (1,821 mm) accommodates three adults comfortably side-by-side — a feature that is genuinely rare in sub-4m SUVs. The 2,600 mm wheelbase delivers legroom that is plenty for adults on long journeys. The raised ride height also gives rear occupants a better view out. The panoramic sunroof does eat into headroom for passengers taller than 6 feet, but for the majority of Indian buyers, this is not a daily concern.
Physical knobs and buttons for HVAC controls on the XUV 3XO is a functional advantage in daily use — the Kylaq relies more on screen-based controls, which require more visual attention while driving.
Features: The XUV 3XO's Technology Lead
The XUV 3XO has a clear advantage in technology breadth at equivalent price points. The XUV 3XO brings extras that the Kylaq simply does not offer: ADAS Level 2 (Automatic Emergency Braking, Lane Keeping Assist, Blind Spot Monitoring), 360-degree camera, electronic parking brake, and panoramic sunroof — none of which are currently available on the Kylaq even at the top Prestige AT variant.
| Feature | Skoda Kylaq Prestige AT | Mahindra XUV 3XO AX7 L TGDi AT |
|---|---|---|
| Engine Options | Petrol only | Petrol (2 options) + Diesel |
| Driving Modes | ❌ No | ✅ Yes (Zip/Zap/Zoom) |
| Paddle Shifters | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
| ADAS Level 2 | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
| 360° Camera | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
| Panoramic Sunroof | ❌ No (sunroof added Jan 2026) | ✅ Yes |
| Ventilated Front Seats | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
| Electric Front Seat Adjustment | ✅ Yes | ❌ No |
| Dual-zone Climate Control | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
| Physical HVAC Controls | ❌ No | ✅ Yes (knobs + buttons) |
| Harman Kardon Audio | ❌ No | ✅ Yes (top variant) |
| Electronic Parking Brake | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
| Boot Space | 360 litres | 295 litres |
| Ground Clearance | 189 mm | 201 mm |
| Top-spec Price | ₹12.80 lakh | ₹14.40 lakh |
| Diesel Engine Option | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
Key update (January 2026): Skoda added a sunroof to the Kylaq range with variant rejig — making the sunroof more accessible than in the launch spec. However, ADAS, 360° camera, dual-zone climate, and EPB remain exclusive to the XUV 3XO.
Fuel Efficiency: Kylaq Leads on Petrol
ARAI claimed mileage:
- Kylaq 1.0 TSI Manual: 19.68 km/l
- XUV 3XO 1.2 Stallion Petrol MT: 18.89 km/l
- XUV 3XO 1.2 TGDi AT: 20.6 km/l (ARAI claim — lower in real-world AT conditions)
- XUV 3XO 1.5 Diesel: 21.2 km/l — best in class for diesel buyers
For petrol buyers comparing the two turbo-petrol automatics: the Kylaq AT's 19.05 km/l ARAI vs XUV 3XO TGDi AT's claimed 20.6 km/l — the XUV 3XO edges ahead on paper, but real-world AT efficiency typically closes this gap significantly.
The Kylaq has a 45-litre fuel tank. The XUV 3XO's petrol tank size varies by variant. For diesel buyers: the XUV 3XO's diesel at 21.2 km/l ARAI is not a choice the Kylaq offers at all — no diesel option exists in the Kylaq range.
Safety: Both 5-Star, Kylaq Edges on Braking
Both the Kylaq and XUV 3XO carry 5-star Global NCAP safety ratings — one of the most important and consistent findings across both cars. At this price point, this is a meaningful shared achievement.
Standard safety equipment: 6 airbags (both cars), ABS with EBD, rear parking sensors, ISOFIX child seat anchors, seatbelt reminders, speed sensing door locks, and child lock — comprehensively covered on both.
Where the XUV 3XO leads: Level 2 ADAS (AEB, Lane Keeping Assist, Blind Spot Monitoring) on higher variants; 360-degree camera.
Where the Kylaq leads: Instrumented braking — 4.25 metres shorter than the XUV 3XO from 80 km/h in Autocar India's panic braking test. This is a fundamental vehicle dynamics advantage that cannot be addressed by feature additions.
Price Landscape: Entry vs Top Spec Compared
| Variant | Price (ex-showroom) |
|---|---|
| Skoda Kylaq Classic (entry petrol MT) | ₹7.59 lakh |
| Mahindra XUV 3XO MX1 (entry petrol MT) | ₹7.37 lakh |
| Skoda Kylaq Prestige AT (top turbo-AT) | ₹12.80 lakh |
| Mahindra XUV 3XO AX7 L TGDi AT (top petrol AT) | ₹14.40 lakh |
| Mahindra XUV 3XO AX7 L Diesel AT (top diesel AT) | Approximately ₹14.40–14.55 lakh |
At the starting level, the XUV 3XO is ₹22,500 cheaper. At the top spec, the Kylaq is ₹1.60 lakh cheaper — making the fully-loaded Kylaq a more affordable top-of-range proposition.
This price structure rewards buyers differently depending on which part of the range they're evaluating. Mid-spec XUV 3XO variants — particularly the MX3 Pro and AX5 — offer compelling value with well-specced feature sets at accessible prices. The Kylaq's top Prestige AT at ₹12.80 lakh is where its feature-per-rupee proposition is strongest.
3 Real-World Case Studies
Case Study 1: The Family-First Buyer — Suresh, Bengaluru
Suresh has two children and his parents visit regularly from Mysore — three-to-four adults in the rear seat is a regular occurrence. He evaluated both cars and bought the XUV 3XO AX5 after the rear seat comparison was decisive. The 3XO's wider cabin, longer wheelbase, and genuinely comfortable three-abreast rear seating made it the only practical choice for his family use profile. He also values the panoramic sunroof — his children's enthusiasm for it is unambiguous. His fuel efficiency on the petrol AT averages 14–15 km/l in Bengaluru traffic. His standing observation: the ivory interior is as challenging to keep clean as Autocar India warned. He's installed seat protectors.
Case Study 2: The Driver — Priya, Pune
Priya works in product design and evaluates everything for its craft and usability. She chose the Kylaq Signature Plus AT after back-to-back test drives. Her deciding factors: the precision of the VAG steering, the ventilated and electrically adjustable front seats, the shorter braking distance (which she verified with independent research), and the European build quality that she found more satisfying to interact with daily. After seven months of Pune commuting and weekend rides on the Pune–Mahabaleshwar road, her verdict is unreservedly positive about the driving experience — and specifically about the 0–100 in the mid-range, where the Kylaq feels more rewarding than the XUV 3XO she test-drove. Her standing concession: the rear seat can fit her two passengers but feels narrow after the XUV 3XO's generous rear.
Case Study 3: The Value-at-Mid-Spec Buyer — Vikram, Chennai
Vikram evaluated both at the ₹9–11 lakh mid-spec range — avoiding top-spec pricing. His comparison: Kylaq Signature Plus MT (₹9.76 lakh) vs XUV 3XO AX5 MT (₹10.89 lakh). At this mid-spec comparison, the XUV 3XO AX5's feature list — which includes ADAS features, a 360° camera, Harman Kardon audio, dual-zone climate, and panoramic sunroof at ₹10.89 lakh — was meaningfully more comprehensive than the Kylaq Signature Plus's feature set at ₹9.76 lakh. He chose the XUV 3XO AX5 for the feature breadth and the diesel option. His 1.5-litre diesel MT returns 20–21 km/l on his 55 km Chennai highway commute — the most practically efficient option in this entire comparison.
Head-to-Head Verdict Table
| Category | Winner | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Design (Proportions) | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | More proportionate and mature; coherent from all angles |
| Design (Road Presence) | XUV 3XO ✅ | Wider, taller, bolder — harder to ignore in traffic |
| Ground Clearance | XUV 3XO ✅ | 201 mm vs 189 mm — 12 mm more for Indian road conditions |
| Boot Space | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | 360L vs 295L to parcel shelf — 65L or 22% more |
| 0–100 km/h (TGDi vs 1.0 TSI) | XUV 3XO ✅ | Higher torque from lower rpm; quicker off the line |
| 80–0 km/h Braking | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | 4.25 metres shorter — decisive safety advantage (VBOX tested) |
| Driving Dynamics | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | VAG-precision steering; lower centre of gravity; more engaging chassis |
| Front Seat Comfort | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | Ventilated, electrically adjustable; XUV 3XO lacks both |
| Rear Seat Space | XUV 3XO ✅ | Wider, longer wheelbase; fits three adults comfortably |
| Interior Feel | XUV 3XO ✅ | More upmarket appearance; panoramic sunroof; twin 10.25" screens |
| HVAC Controls | XUV 3XO ✅ | Physical knobs and buttons; Kylaq is more screen-dependent |
| ADAS Safety Features | XUV 3XO ✅ | Level 2 ADAS, 360° camera; Kylaq has neither |
| Engine Choice | XUV 3XO ✅ | Petrol (2 options) + diesel; Kylaq is petrol-only |
| Fuel Efficiency (diesel) | XUV 3XO ✅ | 21.2 km/l ARAI diesel option; Kylaq has no diesel |
| Top-spec Value | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | ₹1.60 lakh cheaper at top spec for comparable AT variants |
| Braking Safety | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | Shorter stopping distance in panic braking test |
| Driving Enjoyment | Skoda Kylaq ✅ | Enthusiast verdict: Kylaq is the more rewarding car to drive |
| Family Practicality | XUV 3XO ✅ | More space, more features, diesel option, three-abreast rear seating |
Who Should Buy Which?
Buy the Skoda Kylaq if:
- Driving is a priority and you actively enjoy the process — the VAG steering and chassis are class-leaders
- Front seat comfort, ventilation, and electric adjustment matter to your daily comfort
- A larger boot (360 litres) is important for luggage-carrying or weekend trips
- European build quality and interior material quality are priorities you'll appreciate daily
- At top spec (₹12.80 lakh), you want the best equipped turbo-AT in the sub-4m segment for less than the XUV 3XO top spec
- You primarily carry two rear passengers rather than three
- You value braking confidence — the Kylaq stops 4.25 metres shorter in panic braking
Buy the Mahindra XUV 3XO if:
- Family is the primary use case — the rear seat genuinely accommodates three adults
- ADAS Level 2 features, 360° camera, and electronic parking brake are must-have safety features
- A diesel engine option is important for high-mileage commuting or highway-heavy use
- The panoramic sunroof is non-negotiable for your family or your lifestyle
- Dual-zone climate control and physical HVAC buttons are ergonomic preferences
- The Harman Kardon audio system and twin 10.25-inch screen experience matter
- The XUV 3XO's broader mid-spec variant range — MX3 Pro, AX5 — offers compelling value for feature-focused buyers
Final Scorecard
| Category | Skoda Kylaq | Mahindra XUV 3XO |
|---|---|---|
| Design & Proportions | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Interior Quality (feel) | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Rear Seat Space | ⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Boot Space | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐ |
| Engine Performance | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Braking | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐ |
| Driving Dynamics | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Features & Technology | ⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Safety Technology (ADAS) | ⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Engine Options | ⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Value at Mid-spec | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Value at Top-spec | ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ | ⭐⭐⭐⭐ |
| Overall | 4.1 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
The XUV 3XO edges the overall score — but the margin is deliberately narrow and the context is important. XUV 3XO is the reigning people's king, while Kylaq remains the enthusiast's hero. The XUV 3XO's broader powertrain range, ADAS features, rear-seat superiority, and mid-spec value make it the stronger all-round proposition for the majority of Indian family buyers. The Kylaq's driving dynamics, front seat quality, boot space, braking performance, and top-spec value make it the correct choice for a specific, clearly defined buyer — one who drives, who values precision, and who spends most of their daily time in the front two seats.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Which has better boot space — Skoda Kylaq or Mahindra XUV 3XO? The Kylaq has meaningfully more boot space: 360 litres to the parcel shelf versus the XUV 3XO's 295 litres. The XUV 3XO's boot can be expanded by folding the rear seat, but in standard configuration, the Kylaq is the more practical luggage carrier. However, CarHP India measures Kylaq boot space at 446 litres to the headliner — confirm the measurement basis before comparing across different sources.
Q: Which is faster — Skoda Kylaq or Mahindra XUV 3XO? The XUV 3XO TGDi is quicker from 0–100 km/h due to its higher torque output from lower rpm. The Kylaq 1.0 TSI has a noticeable initial turbo lag but pulls strongly through the mid-range. Critically, the Kylaq stops 4.25 metres shorter from 80 km/h in Autocar India's panic braking test — a safety performance advantage that is as important as acceleration in real-world driving.
Q: Does the Skoda Kylaq have ADAS or a 360° camera? No — as of the current specification, the Skoda Kylaq does not offer Level 2 ADAS or a 360° camera in any variant. The Mahindra XUV 3XO offers both on its higher variants (AX5, AX7, and AX7 L). For buyers for whom ADAS is a must-have safety feature, the XUV 3XO is the only choice in this comparison.
Q: Which has better rear seat space for a family of five? The Mahindra XUV 3XO is significantly more comfortable for three rear passengers. Its wider cabin (1,821 mm vs Kylaq's 1,783 mm) and longer wheelbase (2,600 mm vs 2,566 mm) make genuine three-abreast seating practical for average-sized adults. The Kylaq rear seat is best suited for two passengers with the third middle seat as occasional use.
Q: Is the Skoda Kylaq available with a diesel engine? No. The Skoda Kylaq is available only with a 1.0-litre turbo-petrol engine. The Mahindra XUV 3XO offers a 1.5-litre diesel engine delivering up to 21.2 km/l ARAI fuel efficiency — the most fuel-efficient option in this comparison and the reason many high-mileage commuters choose the XUV 3XO diesel.
💬 Kylaq or XUV 3XO — Which One Sits in Your Driveway?
The Kylaq vs XUV 3XO debate is one of the most active in Indian compact SUV communities — and genuinely interesting because the right answer changes so clearly based on the buyer profile. Enthusiast drivers find the Kylaq's precision transformative. Family buyers find the XUV 3XO's rear seat space indispensable. High-mileage commuters choose the XUV 3XO diesel without hesitation.
Have you owned either car for an extended period? What made the decision for you — and has real-world ownership confirmed or surprised you?
Drop your ownership story, mileage figures, and honest verdict in the comments below. We read and respond to every one.
Found this comparison useful? Share it with someone currently evaluating sub-4m SUVs in the ₹8–13 lakh bracket. And subscribe to our newsletter for more comparison tests, long-term ownership reports, and India automotive coverage delivered weekly.
Post a Comment