Ford C-Max 2004 vs Renault Scenic 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 114 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 155 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
Ford C-Max is more dynamic to drive. Ford C-Max engine produces 1 HP less power than Renault Scenic, but torque is 3 NM more than Renault Scenic. Despite less power, Ford C-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Ford C-Max is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford C-Max consumes 0.6 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 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford C-Max consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Focus | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | |
| 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. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2003 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Scenic 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.33 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.82 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.60 m | 1.62 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford C-Max is 7 cm longer than the Renault Scenic, 2 cm wider, while the height of Ford C-Max is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1620 litres | 1840 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`915 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Ford C-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Scenic has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Ford C-Max, so Ford C-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.6/10 | 5.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford C-Max has
|
Renault Scenic has
| |