Ford Kuga 2016 vs Ford C-Max 2014
Body: | Crossover / SUV | Minivan / MPV | |
---|---|---|---|
Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 149 HP | 185 HP | |
Torque: | 230 NM | n/a NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | n/a seconds | |
Ford Kuga engine produces 36 HP less power than Ford C-Max. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | no data | |
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.52 m | 4.38 m | |
Width: | 1.84 m | 1.83 m | |
Height: | 1.69 m | 1.63 m | |
Ford Kuga is larger. Ford Kuga is 14 cm longer than the Ford C-Max, 1 cm wider, while the height of Ford Kuga is 6 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 406 litres | 200 litres | |
Ford Kuga has more luggage capacity. Ford Kuga has 206 litres more trunk space than the Ford C-Max. | |||
Turning diameter: | 11.1 meters | 10.9 meters | |
The turning circle of the Ford Kuga is 0.2 metres more than that of the Ford C-Max. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | no data | no data | |
Safety: | |||
Ford Kuga scores higher in safety tests, but Ford C-Max is better rated in child safety tests. The Ford Kuga scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
Quality: | low | average | |
Ford C-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford Kuga has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Ford C-Max, so Ford C-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
Average price (€): | 13 800 | 8200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Ford Kuga has
|
Ford C-Max has
| |