Ford C-Max 2015 vs Renault Scenic 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 85 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 141 NM | 151 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15.9 seconds | 11.7 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is a more dynamic driving. Ford C-Max engine produces 25 HP less power than Renault Scenic, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Renault Scenic. Due to the lower power, Ford C-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 4.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.4 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
|
The Ford C-Max is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford C-Max consumes 0.8 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 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford C-Max consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 720 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: | 8 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Fiesta | 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 2012 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 2012 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.38 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.63 m | 1.64 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford C-Max is 1 cm longer than the Renault Scenic, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Ford C-Max is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 432 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1684 litres | 1870 litres | |
|
Renault Scenic has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Ford C-Max has 38 litres less trunk space than the Renault Scenic. 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. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Scenic (by 186 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford C-Max is 0.1 metres more than that of the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`860 | 1`904 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Renault Scenic scores higher in safety tests. The Renault Scenic scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Ford C-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Scenic has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Ford C-Max, so Ford C-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford C-Max has
|
Renault Scenic has
| |