Citroen Xsara Picasso 2004 vs Ford C-Max 2007
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.6 - 2.0 | 1.6 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 - 137 HP | 90 - 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 135 - 240 NM | 145 - 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 - 15 seconds | 9.6 - 13.1 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.9 - 8.7 | 4.8 - 8.1 | |
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso petrol engines consumes on average 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than Ford C-Max. On average, Citroen Xsara Picasso equipped with diesel engines consume 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford C-Max. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.28 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.75 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.60 m | |
|
Citroen Xsara Picasso is smaller, but slightly higher. Citroen Xsara Picasso is 6 cm shorter than the Ford C-Max, 7 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen Xsara Picasso is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1620 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.5 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Xsara Picasso is 0.8 metres more than that of the Ford C-Max, which means Citroen Xsara Picasso can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`267 | ~ 1`933 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Xsara Picasso has
|
Ford C-Max has
| |