Volkswagen Touran I · Facelift 2010
Car comparison
Volkswagen Touran I · Facelift 2010 1.4 TSIvsFord C-MAX II · Facelift 2015 2.0 TDCi
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonFord C-MAX II · Facelift 2015
2.0 TDCi
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Ford C-MAX II Facelift 2015 2.0 TDCi
- Highest torque400 Nm295 lb-ft
- Lightest1,444 kg3,183 lb
- Best power-to-weight118 hp/t88 kW/t8.5 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption4.8 L/100 km49.0 mpg US58.9 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption5.5 L/100 km42.8 mpg US51.4 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption4.4 L/100 km53.5 mpg US64.2 mpg UK
- Best estimated range1,250 km777 mi
- Best performance score47/100
- Best economy score94/100
Volkswagen Touran I Facelift 2010 1.4 TSI
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.5 s
- Fastest top speed213 km/h132 mph
- Most powerful170 hp127 kW
- Largest trunk695 L
- Best overall score60/100
- Best practicality score94/100
Specification comparison
| Model | VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 170hp127kW | 170hp127kW |
| Torque | 240Nm177lb-ft | 400Nm295lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,492kg3,289lb | 1,444kg3,183lb |
| Gross weight | 2,160kg4,762lb | 2,050kg4,519lb |
| Top speed | 213 km/h 132 mph | 212 km/h 132 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 92.0s99% target: 211 km/h / 131 mph Calculated | 88.3s99% target: 210 km/h / 130 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.5s | 8.5s |
| 0-200 km/h | 50.6s Calculated | 50.5s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 8.0s Calculated | 8.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6.6L/100 km35.6mpg US42.8mpg UK | 4.8L/100 km49mpg US58.9mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 8.5L/100 km27.7mpg US33.2mpg UK | 5.5L/100 km42.8mpg US51.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.6L/100 km42mpg US50.4mpg UK | 4.4L/100 km53.5mpg US64.2mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.2s Calculated | 16.2s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 114hp/t85kW/t52hp/1000 lb Calculated | 118hp/t88kW/t53hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 161Nm/t108lb-ft/ton Calculated | 277Nm/t185lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 909km565mi Calculated | 1,250km777mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,390cc85cu in | 1,997cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,397mm173in | 4,379mm172in |
| Width | 1,794mm71in | 1,828mm72in |
| Height | 1,674mm66in | 1,610mm63in |
| Wheelbase | 2,678mm105in | 2,648mm104in |
| Front track | 1,541mm61in | 1,557mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,514mm60in | 1,569mm62in |
| Ground clearance | 140mm6in | - |
| Trunk volume | 695L | 432L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,989L | 1,684L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 60L | 60L |
| CO2 emissions | 154g/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.
- Volkswagen Touran I Facelift 2010 1.4 TSI: Power / Torque
- Ford C-MAX II Facelift 2015 2.0 TDCi: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 6,000 rpm | 1,500 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 3,500 rpm | 2,000-2,500 rpm | 3,750 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 8.0 s | 8.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.5 s | 8.5 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 50.6 s | 50.5 s |
| Top speed | 213 km/h 132 mph | 212 km/h 132 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.6 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.9 s | 7.0 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.5 s | 10.5 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.6 s | 13.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.2 s | 16.2 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 141 km/h 88 mph | 141 km/h 88 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 170 hp 127 kW |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 170 hp 127 kW |
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 240 Nm 177 lb-ft |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 1,492 kg 3,289 lb |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 1,444 kg 3,183 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 213 km/h 132 mph |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 212 km/h 132 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 8.5 s |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 8.5 s |
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 6.6 L/100 km 35.6 mpg US 42.8 mpg UK |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 4.8 L/100 km 49.0 mpg US 58.9 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ford C-MAX II Facelift 2015 2.0 TDCi and Volkswagen Touran I Facelift 2010 1.4 TSI: 1.8 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 114 hp/t 85 kW/t 8.8 kg/hp |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 909 km 565 mi |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 1,250 km 777 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 170 hp 127 kW | 8.5 s | 213 km/h 132 mph |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 170 hp 127 kW | 8.5 s | 212 km/h 132 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI |
| 6.6 L/100 km 35.6 mpg US 42.8 mpg UK | ||||||
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi |
| 4.8 L/100 km 49.0 mpg US 58.9 mpg UK | ||||||
Ford C-MAX II Facelift 2015 2.0 TDCi 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.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 6.6 L/100 km 35.6 mpg US 42.8 mpg UK | 8.5 s |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 4.8 L/100 km 49.0 mpg US 58.9 mpg UK | 8.5 s |
Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption
The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | 114 hp/t 85 kW/t 8.8 kg/hp | 6.6 L/100 km 35.6 mpg US 42.8 mpg UK |
| FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 kg/hp | 4.8 L/100 km 49.0 mpg US 58.9 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | VolkswagenTouran IFacelift 20101.4 TSI | FordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 170 hp 127 kW | 170 hp 127 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 240 Nm 177 lb-ft | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.5 s | 8.5 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 213 km/h 132 mph | 212 km/h 132 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,492 kg 3,289 lb | 1,444 kg 3,183 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.6 L/100 km 35.6 mpg US 42.8 mpg UK | 4.8 L/100 km 49.0 mpg US 58.9 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 909 km 565 mi | 1,250 km 777 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 154 g/km | - | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 695 L 24.5 cu ft | 432 L 15.3 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 114 hp/t 85 kW/t 8.8 kg/hp | 118 hp/t 88 kW/t 8.5 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
| Vehicle | Volkswagen Touran I Facelift 2010 1.4 TSI | Ford C-MAX II Facelift 2015 2.0 TDCi |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6.6 L/100 km35.6 mpg US42.8 mpg UK | 4.8 L/100 km49 mpg US58.9 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 11.55 LC100 km | 8.40 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 18.59 LC100 mi | 13.52 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 990 L262 US gal218 UK gal | 720 L190 US gal158 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,733 LC/year | 1,260 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Volkswagen Touran I Facelift 2010 1.4 TSI
- Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Has 263 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Heaviest
Ford C-MAX II Facelift 2015 2.0 TDCi
- Has 160 Nm more
- Is 48 kg lighter
- Uses 1.8 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 4 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 341 km (212 mi) more estimated range
Pros
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Best estimated range
Cons
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























