Ford C-Max 2007 vs Renault Scenic 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.1 seconds | 12.4 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is a more dynamic driving. Ford C-Max engine produces 20 HP less power than Renault Scenic, whereas torque is 25 NM less than Renault Scenic. Due to the lower power, Ford C-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.6 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Ford C-Max is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford C-Max consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic, which means that by driving the Ford C-Max over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford C-Max consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1140 km in combined cycle | 1130 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Scenic might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Ford C-Max 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. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2009 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Scenic 2009 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.33 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.60 m | 1.64 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford C-Max is 1 cm shorter than the Renault Scenic, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford C-Max is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 437 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1837 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Ford C-Max has 113 litres more trunk space than the Renault Scenic. The Renault Scenic may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Scenic (by 217 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford C-Max is 0.3 metres less than that of the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`920 | 1`944 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | high | average | |
| Ford C-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Scenic has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Ford C-Max, so Ford C-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2200 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford C-Max has
|
Renault Scenic has
| |