Ford C-Max 2014 vs Renault Scenic 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 240 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Ford C-Max is more dynamic to drive. Ford C-Max engine produces 20 HP more power than Renault Scenic, whereas torque is 50 NM more than Renault Scenic. Thanks to more power Ford C-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.3 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Scenic is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. 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. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford C-Max consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 1070 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 330'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Ford C-Max engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Ford Focus | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Megane, Renault Grand Scenic | |
| 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. | |||
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 | 437 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1684 litres | 1870 litres | |
| Ford C-Max has 5 litres less trunk space than the Renault Scenic. 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): | 2`000 | 1`945 | |
| 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
| |