Ford S-Max 2006 vs Ford C-Max 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.5 Petrol | 2.0 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: | 220 HP | 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 320 NM | 185 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Ford S-Max is more dynamic to drive. Ford S-Max engine produces 75 HP more power than Ford C-Max, whereas torque is 135 NM more than Ford C-Max. Thanks to more power Ford S-Max reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.4 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 10.5 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Ford C-Max is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford S-Max consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford C-Max, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford S-Max could require 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford S-Max consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford C-Max. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 740 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 400'000 km | 470'000 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: | 4 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Ford Focus, Ford Mondeo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Ford C-Max might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Ford S-Max 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 | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.60 m | |
|
Ford S-Max is larger. Ford S-Max is 44 cm longer than the Ford C-Max, 3 cm wider, while the height of Ford S-Max is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | 5 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 854 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 854 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
2100 litres | 1620 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford S-Max (by 480 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford S-Max is 0.9 metres more than that of the Ford C-Max, which means Ford S-Max can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`420 | 1`925 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Ford C-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Ford S-Max has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Ford C-Max, so Ford C-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 4.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford S-Max has
|
Ford C-Max has
| |