Ford C-Max 2014 vs Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan 2014

 
Ford C-Max
2014 - 2019
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan
2014 - 2017
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.5 Petrol1.4 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing beltTiming belt

Performance

Power: 150 HP150 HP
Torque: 240 NM250 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 9.4 seconds8.8 seconds
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan is a more dynamic driving.
Ford C-Max and Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan have the same engine power, but Ford C-Max torque is 10 NM less than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan. Ford C-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 6.15.5
Real fuel consumption: 8.0 l/100km6.7 l/100km
The Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy.
By specification Ford C-Max consumes 0.6 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 90 litres more fuel.
By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford C-Max consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan.
Fuel tank capacity: 55 litres50 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 900 km in combined cycle900 km in combined cycle
1070 km on highway1060 km on highway
680 km with real consumption740 km with real consumption
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy.
Ground clearance: 140 mm (5.5 inches)144 mm (5.7 inches)

Engines

Average engine lifespan: 330'000 km350'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used.
Engine production duration: 5 years12 years
Engine spread: Used also on Ford FocusInstalled on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A4, Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia
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: noyes
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: 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 m4.34 m
Width: 1.83 m1.81 m
Height: 1.63 m1.58 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 litres500 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down, if possible
1684 litres1520 litres
Despite its longer length, 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 Ford C-Max (by 164 litres).
Turning diameter: 11.1 meters11.1 meters
Gross weight: 1`915 kg1`880 kg
Net weight:1`394 kg1`391 kg
Load capacity:521 kg489 kg
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 85 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan, so Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan quality is probably significantly better
Average price (€): 62008000
Pros and Cons: Ford C-Max has
  • lower price
Volkswagen Golf Sportsvan has
  • more dynamic
  • lower fuel consumption
  • roomier boot
  • higher safety
  • better safety assist technologies
  • fewer faults
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv