Car comparison

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoostvsFord Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo

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

Comparison overview

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

Best choices

Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo

  • Highest torque
    500 Nm
    369 lb-ft
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    6.3 L/100 km
    37.3 mpg US
    44.8 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    7.4 L/100 km
    31.8 mpg US
    38.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    5.4 L/100 km
    43.6 mpg US
    52.3 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    163 g/km
  • Best estimated range
    1,111 km
    690 mi
  • Largest trunk
    300 L
  • Best overall score
    61/100
  • Best performance score
    52/100
  • Best economy score
    90/100
  • Best practicality score
    81/100

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
  • Lightest
    1,704 kg
    3,757 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    141 hp/t
    105 kW/t
    7.1 kg/hp

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelFordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostFordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Power
240hp179kW
240hp179kW
Torque
345Nm254lb-ft
500Nm369lb-ft
Curb weight
1,704kg3,757lb
1,704kg3,757lb
Gross weight
2,510kg5,534lb
2,620kg5,776lb
Top speed
226 km/h
140 mph
216 km/h
134 mph
To 99% top speed
97.7s99% target: 224 km/h / 139 mph
Calculated
96.5s99% target: 214 km/h / 133 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
8.4s
8.7s
0-200 km/h
39.8s
Calculated
48.6s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.9s
Calculated
8.2s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
7.9L/100 km29.8mpg US35.8mpg UK
6.3L/100 km37.3mpg US44.8mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
10.3L/100 km22.8mpg US27.4mpg UK
7.4L/100 km31.8mpg US38.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
6.5L/100 km36.2mpg US43.5mpg UK
5.4L/100 km43.6mpg US52.3mpg UK
Quarter mile
16.1s
Calculated
16.3s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
141hp/t105kW/t64hp/1000 lb
Calculated
141hp/t105kW/t64hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
202Nm/t135lb-ft/ton
Calculated
293Nm/t196lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
886km551mi
Calculated
1,111km690mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,999cc122cu 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
285L
300L
Max trunk volume
2,020L
2,339L
Doors
5
5
Seats
7
5
Fuel tank
70L
70L
CO2 emissions
180g/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 EcoBoostFord Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-TurboPowerTorque
  • Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
  • Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo: 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
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo4,000 rpm2,000 rpm4,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricFordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostFordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.9 s
8.2 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
8.4 s
8.7 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
39.8 s
48.6 s
Top speed
226 km/h
140 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
10.5 s
10.6 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.5 s
13.7 s
1/4 mile
402 m
16.1 s
16.3 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
144 km/h
89 mph
140 km/h
87 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
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
240 hp
179 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
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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
1,704 kg
3,757 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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
226 km/h
140 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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost8.4 s
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo8.7 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost and Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo: 0.3 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
7.9 L/100 km
29.8 mpg US
35.8 mpg UK
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
6.3 L/100 km
37.3 mpg US
44.8 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo and Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: 1.6 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
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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
886 km
551 mi
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
1,111 km
690 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
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.

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
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h8.7 s
Top speed
216 km/h
134 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
300 L
10.6 cu ft
Length
4,848 mm
190.9 in
Height
1,747 mm
68.8 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
7.9 L/100 km
29.8 mpg US
35.8 mpg UK
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Power
240 hp
179 kW
0-100 km/h8.7 s
Top speed
216 km/h
134 mph
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.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost
7.9 L/100 km
29.8 mpg US
35.8 mpg UK
8.4 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.

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
7.9 L/100 km
29.8 mpg US
35.8 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

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleFordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostFordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Power
240 hp
179 kW
240 hp
179 kW
Torque
345 Nm
254 lb-ft
500 Nm
369 lb-ft
Acceleration
8.4 s
8.7 s
Top speed
226 km/h
140 mph
216 km/h
134 mph
Lightness
1,704 kg
3,757 lb
1,704 kg
3,757 lb
Fuel consumption
7.9 L/100 km
29.8 mpg US
35.8 mpg UK
6.3 L/100 km
37.3 mpg US
44.8 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
300 L
10.6 cu ft
Length
4,848 mm
190.9 in
Height
1,747 mm
68.8 in
Range score
886 km
551 mi
1,111 km
690 mi
CO2 score
180 g/km
163 g/km
Trunk score
285 L
10.1 cu ft
300 L
10.6 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
141 hp/t
105 kW/t
7.1 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

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleFord S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoostFord Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
Consumption7.9 L/100 km29.8 mpg US35.8 mpg UK6.3 L/100 km37.3 mpg US44.8 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km13.83 LC100 km11.03 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi22.25 LC100 mi17.74 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,185 L313 US gal261 UK gal945 L250 US gal208 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,074 LC/year1,654 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost

  • Is 0.3 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 10 km/h (6 mph) higher top speed

Pros

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

Cons

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

Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo

  • Has 155 Nm more
  • Uses 1.6 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 225 km (140 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 15 L more trunk volume
  • Emits 17 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Highest torque
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

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

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost
Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
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
2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue
VS
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-TurbovsFordS-MAX II2.0 Bi-Turbo Ecoblue
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
2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsFordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
2.0 TDCi
VS
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-TurbovsFordC-MAX IIFacelift 20152.0 TDCi
2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
1.6 EcoBoost
VS
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-TurbovsFordC-MAX II1.6 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
2.0 TSI
VS
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-TurbovsVolkswagenSharan IIFacelift 20152.0 TSI
2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo
2.0 TDI SCR
VS
FordGalaxy III2.0 EcoBlue Bi-TurbovsVolkswagenTouran II2.0 TDI SCR
2.0 EcoBoost
225i
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsBMW2 Series Active Tourer (F45)225i
2.0 EcoBoost
220i
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsBMW2 Series Gran Tourer (F46)220i
2.0 EcoBoost
2.0 TSI
VS
FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost vs Ford Galaxy III 2.0 EcoBlue Bi-Turbo - car comparison - FastVsFaster