Ford C-Max 2014 vs Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan 2014
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 159 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.8 seconds | 8.8 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan is a more dynamic driving. Ford C-Max engine produces 30 HP less power than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, whereas torque is 91 NM less than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan. Due to the lower power, Ford C-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford C-Max consumes 0.9 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 C-Max could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford C-Max consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1060 km on highway | ||
| 630 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan 2014 1.4 engine: One of the most notorious issues with this engine series is excessive oil consumption caused by stuck piston rings. Another common problem is the actuator of the turbocharger’s wastegate, which is prone to ... More about Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan 2014 1.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.34 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.58 m | |
|
Ford C-Max is larger. Ford C-Max is 4 cm longer than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, 2 cm wider, while the height of Ford C-Max is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 432 litres | 500 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1684 litres | no data | |
|
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Ford C-Max has 68 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan. This could mean that the Ford C-Max uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11.1 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`860 | 1`880 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan scores higher in safety tests. The Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford C-Max has serious deffects in 80 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, so Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 10 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford C-Max has
|
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan has
| |