Car comparison

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoostvsFord C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

Ford S-MAX II

2.0 EcoBoost

240 hp1999 ccGasolineFWDAutomaticTurbochargedMinivan / MPV2015-2018
VS

Ford C-MAX II

1.6 EcoBoost

182 hp1596 ccGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedMinivan / MPV2010-2015

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost

  • Lightest
    1,310 kg
    2,888 lb
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    6.2 L/100 km
    37.9 mpg US
    45.6 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    7.8 L/100 km
    30.2 mpg US
    36.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    5.3 L/100 km
    44.4 mpg US
    53.3 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    144 g/km
  • Best estimated range
    887 km
    551 mi
  • Largest trunk
    432 L
  • Best economy score
    90/100
  • Best practicality score
    84/100

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    8.4 s
  • Fastest top speed
    226 km/h
    140 mph
  • Most powerful
    240 hp
    179 kW
  • Highest torque
    345 Nm
    254 lb-ft
  • Best power-to-weight
    141 hp/t
    105 kW/t
    7.1 kg/hp
  • Best overall score
    60/100
  • Best performance score
    50/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelFordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostFordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
Power
240hp179kW
182hp136kW
Torque
345Nm254lb-ft
240Nm177lb-ft
Curb weight
1,704kg3,757lb
1,310kg2,888lb
Gross weight
2,510kg5,534lb
1,900kg4,189lb
Top speed
226 km/h
140 mph
217 km/h
135 mph
To 99% top speed
97.7s99% target: 224 km/h / 139 mph
Calculated
88.3s99% target: 215 km/h / 133 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
8.4s
8.5s
0-200 km/h
39.8s
Calculated
44.3s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.9s
Calculated
8.0s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
8.9L/100 km26.4mpg US31.7mpg UK
6.2L/100 km37.9mpg US45.6mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
12.5L/100 km18.8mpg US22.6mpg UK
7.8L/100 km30.2mpg US36.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
6.9L/100 km34.1mpg US40.9mpg UK
5.3L/100 km44.4mpg US53.3mpg UK
Quarter mile
16.1s
Calculated
16.2s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
141hp/t105kW/t64hp/1000 lb
Calculated
139hp/t104kW/t63hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
202Nm/t135lb-ft/ton
Calculated
183Nm/t123lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
787km489mi
Calculated
887km551mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,999cc122cu in
1,596cc97cu in
Length
4,796mm189in
4,380mm172in
Width
1,916mm75in
1,828mm72in
Height
1,655mm65in
1,626mm64in
Wheelbase
2,849mm112in
2,648mm104in
Front track
1,606mm63in
1,559mm61in
Rear track
1,606mm63in
1,569mm62in
Ground clearance
150mm6in
-
Trunk volume
285L
432L
Max trunk volume
2,020L
1,723L
Doors
5
5
Seats
7
5
Fuel tank
70L
55L
CO2 emissions
204g/km
144g/km

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoostFord C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoostPowerTorque
  • Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
  • Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost5,400 rpm2,300-4,900 rpm5,650 rpm
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost5,700 rpm1,600-5,000 rpm5,950 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricFordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostFordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.9 s
8.0 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
8.4 s
8.5 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
39.8 s
44.3 s
Top speed
226 km/h
140 mph
217 km/h
135 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.6 s
2.7 s
330 ft
101 m
7.0 s
7.0 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.5 s
10.6 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.5 s
13.6 s
1/4 mile
402 m
16.1 s
16.2 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
144 km/h
89 mph
143 km/h
89 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
240 hp
179 kW
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
182 hp
136 kW

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost has 58 hp more than Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost.

The biggest power difference is between Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost and Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: 58 hp (43 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
345 Nm
254 lb-ft
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
240 Nm
177 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
1,704 kg
3,757 lb
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
1,310 kg
2,888 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
226 km/h
140 mph
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
217 km/h
135 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost8.4 s
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost8.5 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost and Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost: 0.1 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
8.9 L/100 km
26.4 mpg US
31.7 mpg UK
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
6.2 L/100 km
37.9 mpg US
45.6 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost and Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: 2.7 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
141 hp/t
105 kW/t
7.1 kg/hp
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
139 hp/t
104 kW/t
7.2 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
787 km
489 mi
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
887 km
551 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
240 hp
179 kW
8.4 s
226 km/h
140 mph
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
182 hp
136 kW
8.5 s
217 km/h
135 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h8.4 s
Top speed
226 km/h
140 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
7 seats
Trunk
285 L
10.1 cu ft
Length
4,796 mm
188.8 in
Height
1,655 mm
65.2 in
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
Power
182 hp
136 kW
0-100 km/h8.5 s
Top speed
217 km/h
135 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
432 L
15.3 cu ft
Length
4,380 mm
172.4 in
Height
1,626 mm
64.0 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h8.4 s
Top speed
226 km/h
140 mph
8.9 L/100 km
26.4 mpg US
31.7 mpg UK
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
Power
182 hp
136 kW
0-100 km/h8.5 s
Top speed
217 km/h
135 mph
6.2 L/100 km
37.9 mpg US
45.6 mpg UK

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
8.9 L/100 km
26.4 mpg US
31.7 mpg UK
8.4 s
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
6.2 L/100 km
37.9 mpg US
45.6 mpg UK
8.5 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
141 hp/t
105 kW/t
7.1 kg/hp
8.9 L/100 km
26.4 mpg US
31.7 mpg UK
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
139 hp/t
104 kW/t
7.2 kg/hp
6.2 L/100 km
37.9 mpg US
45.6 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleFordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostFordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
Power
240 hp
179 kW
182 hp
136 kW
Torque
345 Nm
254 lb-ft
240 Nm
177 lb-ft
Acceleration
8.4 s
8.5 s
Top speed
226 km/h
140 mph
217 km/h
135 mph
Lightness
1,704 kg
3,757 lb
1,310 kg
2,888 lb
Fuel consumption
8.9 L/100 km
26.4 mpg US
31.7 mpg UK
6.2 L/100 km
37.9 mpg US
45.6 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
7 seats
Trunk
285 L
10.1 cu ft
Length
4,796 mm
188.8 in
Height
1,655 mm
65.2 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
432 L
15.3 cu ft
Length
4,380 mm
172.4 in
Height
1,626 mm
64.0 in
Range score
787 km
489 mi
887 km
551 mi
CO2 score
204 g/km
144 g/km
Trunk score
285 L
10.1 cu ft
432 L
15.3 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
141 hp/t
105 kW/t
7.1 kg/hp
139 hp/t
104 kW/t
7.2 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleFord S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoostFord C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost
Consumption8.9 L/100 km26.4 mpg US31.7 mpg UK6.2 L/100 km37.9 mpg US45.6 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km15.58 LC100 km10.85 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi25.07 LC100 mi17.46 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,335 L353 US gal294 UK gal930 L246 US gal205 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,336 LC/year1,628 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost

  • Has 58 hp more
  • Has 105 Nm more
  • Is 0.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 9 km/h (6 mph) higher top speed
  • Has 2 hp/t better power-to-weight

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Most powerful
  • Highest torque
  • Best power-to-weight ratio

Cons

  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest
  • Smallest trunk
  • Highest CO2 emissions

Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost

  • Is 394 kg lighter
  • Uses 2.7 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 101 km (62 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 147 L more trunk volume
  • Emits 60 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest power
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost
Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 Bi-Turbo EcoBlue
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsFordS-MAX IIFacelift 20192.0 Bi-Turbo EcoBlue
1.6 EcoBoost
2.0 TDCi
VS
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoostvsFordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi
2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsFordS-MAXFacelift 20102.0 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBoost
2.5 i 20V
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsFordS-MAX2.5 i 20V
1.6 EcoBoost
2.0 TDCi
VS
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoostvsFordS-MAX II2.0 TDCi
2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsFordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 TSI
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenSharan IIFacelift 20152.0 TSI
1.6 EcoBoost
1.4 TSI
VS
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI
2.0 EcoBoost
225i
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsBMW2 Series Active Tourer (F45)225i
1.6 EcoBoost
2.0 TSI
VS
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI
2.0 EcoBoost
220i
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsBMW2 Series Gran Tourer (F46)220i
1.6 EcoBoost
1.8 TSI
VS
FordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenTouran II1.8 TSI
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost vs Ford C-MAX II 1.6 EcoBoost - car comparison - FastVsFaster