Ford S-Max 2010 vs Volkswagen Sharan 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 145 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
| Ford S-Max engine produces 5 HP more power than Volkswagen Sharan, but torque is 135 NM less than Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.2 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.5 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Sharan is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford S-Max consumes 2.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford S-Max could require 405 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford S-Max consumes 2.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 1450 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Sharan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 500'000 km | 390'000 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 S-Max engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Ford Mondeo, Ford Galaxy | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Sharan 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.77 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.88 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Ford S-Max is smaller. Ford S-Max is 8 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Sharan, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Ford S-Max is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 285 litres | 809 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 285 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 809 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2000 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford S-Max is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`340 | 2`340 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Ford S-Max is better rated in child safety tests. | |||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Ford S-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volkswagen Sharan has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Ford S-Max, so Ford S-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 15 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford S-Max has
|
Volkswagen Sharan has
| |