Renault Scenic 2009 vs Ford C-Max 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 151 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.7 seconds | 12.9 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is more dynamic to drive. Renault Scenic engine produces 10 HP more power than Ford C-Max, whereas torque is 6 NM more than Ford C-Max. Thanks to more power Renault Scenic reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Ford C-Max is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Scenic consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford C-Max, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Scenic could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Scenic consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford C-Max. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 810 km in combined cycle | 790 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 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: | 26 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Ford Fiesta, Ford Fusion | |
| 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. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2009 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Scenic 2009 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.24 m | 4.33 m | |
| Width: | 1.85 m | 1.82 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.60 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Scenic is 9 cm shorter than the Ford C-Max, 3 cm wider, while the height of Renault Scenic is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 437 litres | 550 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1837 litres | 1620 litres | |
| Renault Scenic has 113 litres less trunk space than the Ford C-Max. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Scenic (by 217 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Scenic is 0.3 metres more than that of the Ford C-Max. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`877 | 1`855 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | high | |
| Ford C-Max has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Scenic has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Ford C-Max, so Ford C-Max quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Scenic has
|
Ford C-Max has
| |