Ford S-Max 2010 vs Volkswagen Sharan 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 140 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
| Ford S-Max and Volkswagen Sharan have the same engine power, the torque is the same for both cars. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.3 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 0.5 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 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford S-Max consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1160 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1450 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Sharan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 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: | 9 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Mondeo, Ford Galaxy, Ford C-Max | 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. Volkswagen Sharan might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Ford S-Max 2010 2.0 engine: In early production engines, the camshaft timing chain often stretched, requiring timely replacement to avoid potential issues. The fuel system, equipped with piezo injectors, is highly sensitive to fuel ... More about Ford S-Max 2010 2.0 engine Volkswagen Sharan 2010 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen Sharan 2010 2.0 engine | |||
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`505 | 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 (€): | 6800 | 13 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford S-Max has
|
Volkswagen Sharan has
| |