Citroen C4 Picasso 2013 vs Ford Galaxy 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Citroen C4 Picasso is more dynamic to drive. Citroen C4 Picasso engine produces 10 HP more power than Ford Galaxy, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Ford Galaxy. Thanks to more power Citroen C4 Picasso reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C4 Picasso is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen C4 Picasso consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Galaxy, which means that by driving the Citroen C4 Picasso over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen C4 Picasso consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Galaxy. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1300 km in combined cycle | 1220 km in combined cycle | |
| 1440 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 530'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Peugeot 308, Peugeot 3008, Citroen C4, Peugeot 5008 | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Mondeo, Ford C-Max, Ford S-Max | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford Galaxy might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Ford Galaxy 2010 2.0 engine: In early production engines, the camshaft timing chain often stretched, requiring timely replacement to avoid potential issues. The fuel system, equipped with piezo injectors, is highly sensitive to fuel ... More about Ford Galaxy 2010 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.43 m | 4.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.88 m | |
| Height: | 1.61 m | 1.76 m | |
|
Citroen C4 Picasso is smaller. Citroen C4 Picasso is 39 cm shorter than the Ford Galaxy, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen C4 Picasso is 15 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | no data | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 537 litres | 390 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 390 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 537 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 2325 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen C4 Picasso is 1.1 metres less than that of the Ford Galaxy, which means Citroen C4 Picasso can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | no data | 2`505 kg | |
| Safety: | |||
| The Citroen C4 Picasso scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Citroen C4 Picasso has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Galaxy has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Citroen C4 Picasso, so Citroen C4 Picasso quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8000 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C4 Picasso has
|
Ford Galaxy has
| |