Ford B-Max 2012 vs Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan 2014
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 105 HP | 125 HP | |
Torque: | 150 NM | 200 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan is a more dynamic driving. Ford B-Max engine produces 20 HP less power than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan. Due to the lower power, Ford B-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.2 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 8.7 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
The Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford B-Max consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford B-Max could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford B-Max consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 48 litres | 50 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 960 km in combined cycle | |
940 km on highway | 1110 km on highway | ||
550 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 460'000 km | 380'000 km | |
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Ford B-Max engine could be longer. | |||
Engine production duration: | 8 years | 12 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford C-Max, Ford Fiesta | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Superb, Seat Leon, Audi A1 | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
The Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan 2014 1.4 engine: The engine is reliable, however, owners frequently report excessive oil consumption, which is usually linked to piston ring issues. Loss of power is another common complaint. It's advised against maintaining ... More about Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan 2014 1.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.08 m | 4.34 m | |
Width: | 1.75 m | 1.81 m | |
Height: | 1.60 m | 1.58 m | |
Ford B-Max is smaller, but slightly higher. Ford B-Max is 26 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Ford B-Max is 3 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 318 litres | 500 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1386 litres | no data | |
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan has more luggage space. Ford B-Max has 182 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan. | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 11.1 meters | |
The turning circle of the Ford B-Max is 0.6 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, which means Ford B-Max can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`830 | 1`900 | |
Safety: | |||
Quality: | average | high | |
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford B-Max has serious deffects in 70 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, so Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan quality is probably significantly better | |||
Average price (€): | 7200 | 10 400 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Ford B-Max has
|
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan has
| |