Ford S-MAX II
Car comparison
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 Bi-Turbo EcobluevsFord Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonFord Galaxy III
2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.6 s
- Fastest top speed218 km/h135 mph
- Most powerful240 hp179 kW
- Highest torque500 Nm369 lb-ft
- Lowest combined fuel consumption6.3 L/100 km37.3 mpg US44.8 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption7.2 L/100 km32.7 mpg US39.2 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption5.3 L/100 km44.4 mpg US53.3 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions162 g/km
- Best estimated range1,111 km690 mi
- Largest trunk700 L
- Best overall score65/100
- Best economy score90/100
- Best practicality score95/100
Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
- Lightest1,704 kg3,757 lb
- Best power-to-weight141 hp/t105 kW/t7.1 kg/hp
- Best performance score52/100
Specification comparison
| Model | FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 240hp179kW | 240hp179kW |
| Torque | 500Nm369lb-ft | 500Nm369lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,766kg3,893lb | 1,704kg3,757lb |
| Gross weight | 2,575kg5,677lb | 2,620kg5,776lb |
| Top speed | 218 km/h 135 mph | 216 km/h 134 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 96.4s99% target: 216 km/h / 134 mph Calculated | 97.2s99% target: 214 km/h / 133 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.6s | 8.7s |
| 0-200 km/h | 46.2s Calculated | 48.9s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 8.1s Calculated | 8.2s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6.3L/100 km37.3mpg US44.8mpg UK | 6.3L/100 km37.3mpg US44.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.2L/100 km32.7mpg US39.2mpg UK | 7.4L/100 km31.8mpg US38.2mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5.3L/100 km44.4mpg US53.3mpg UK | 5.4L/100 km43.6mpg US52.3mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.2s Calculated | 16.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 136hp/t101kW/t62hp/1000 lb Calculated | 141hp/t105kW/t64hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 283Nm/t189lb-ft/ton Calculated | 293Nm/t196lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 1,111km690mi Calculated | 1,111km690mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,997cc122cu in | 1,997cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,796mm189in | 4,848mm191in |
| Width | 1,916mm75in | 1,916mm75in |
| Height | 1,655mm65in | 1,747mm69in |
| Wheelbase | 2,849mm112in | 2,849mm112in |
| Front track | 1,606mm63in | 1,606mm63in |
| Rear track | 1,606mm63in | 1,606mm63in |
| Ground clearance | 150mm6in | 124mm5in |
| Trunk volume | 700L | 300L |
| Max trunk volume | 2,200L | 2,339L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 70L | 70L |
| CO2 emissions | 162g/km | 163g/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 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue: Power / Torque
- Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 4,000 rpm | 2,000 rpm | 4,250 rpm |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 4,000 rpm | 2,000 rpm | 4,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 8.1 s | 8.2 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.6 s | 8.7 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 46.2 s | 48.9 s |
| Top speed | 218 km/h 135 mph | 216 km/h 134 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.6 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.0 s | 7.0 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.6 s | 10.6 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.7 s | 13.7 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.2 s | 16.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 141 km/h 88 mph | 140 km/h 87 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 240 hp 179 kW |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 240 hp 179 kW |
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 500 Nm 369 lb-ft |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 500 Nm 369 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 1,766 kg 3,893 lb |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 1,704 kg 3,757 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 218 km/h 135 mph |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 216 km/h 134 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 8.6 s |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 8.7 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Ford S-MAX II 2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue and Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo: 0.1 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK |
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 1,111 km 690 mi |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 1,111 km 690 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 240 hp 179 kW | 8.6 s | 218 km/h 135 mph |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 240 hp 179 kW | 8.7 s | 216 km/h 134 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue |
| 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK | ||||||
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo |
| 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK | ||||||
Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo 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 |
|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK | 8.6 s |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK | 8.7 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 |
|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK |
| FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | FordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 240 hp 179 kW | 240 hp 179 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 500 Nm 369 lb-ft | 500 Nm 369 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.6 s | 8.7 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 218 km/h 135 mph | 216 km/h 134 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,766 kg 3,893 lb | 1,704 kg 3,757 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK | 6.3 L/100 km 37.3 mpg US 44.8 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 1,111 km 690 mi | 1,111 km 690 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 162 g/km | 163 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 700 L 24.7 cu ft | 300 L 10.6 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 136 hp/t 101 kW/t 7.4 kg/hp | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 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 | Ford S-MAX II 2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue | Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6.3 L/100 km37.3 mpg US44.8 mpg UK | 6.3 L/100 km37.3 mpg US44.8 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 11.03 LC100 km | 11.03 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 17.74 LC100 mi | 17.74 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 945 L250 US gal208 UK gal | 945 L250 US gal208 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,654 LC/year | 1,654 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue
- Is 0.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 2 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Has 400 L more trunk volume
- Emits 1 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
- Is 62 kg lighter
- Has 5 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
- Highest CO2 emissions
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























