Ford S-MAX II
Car comparison
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoostvsVolkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonVolkswagen Sharan II
2.0 TSI
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.3 s
- Lowest combined fuel consumption8.4 L/100 km28.0 mpg US33.6 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption11.5 L/100 km20.5 mpg US24.6 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption6.6 L/100 km35.6 mpg US42.8 mpg UK
- Lowest CO2 emissions196 g/km
- Best estimated range833 km518 mi
- Largest trunk885 L
- Best overall score62/100
- Best economy score84/100
- Best practicality score96/100
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost
- Fastest top speed226 km/h140 mph
- Most powerful240 hp179 kW
- Highest torque345 Nm254 lb-ft
- Lightest1,704 kg3,757 lb
- Best power-to-weight141 hp/t105 kW/t7.1 kg/hp
- Best performance score50/100
Specification comparison
| Model | FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 240hp179kW | 200hp149kW |
| Torque | 345Nm254lb-ft | 280Nm207lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,704kg3,757lb | 1,790kg3,946lb |
| Gross weight | 2,510kg5,534lb | 2,360kg5,203lb |
| Top speed | 226 km/h 140 mph | 218 km/h 135 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 98.4s99% target: 224 km/h / 139 mph Calculated | 100.7s99% target: 216 km/h / 134 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.4s | 8.3s |
| 0-200 km/h | 40.0s Calculated | 47.2s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 7.9s Calculated | 7.8s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 8.9L/100 km26.4mpg US31.7mpg UK | 8.4L/100 km28mpg US33.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 12.5L/100 km18.8mpg US22.6mpg UK | 11.5L/100 km20.5mpg US24.6mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 6.9L/100 km34.1mpg US40.9mpg UK | 6.6L/100 km35.6mpg US42.8mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.1s Calculated | 16.0s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 141hp/t105kW/t64hp/1000 lb Calculated | 112hp/t83kW/t51hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 202Nm/t135lb-ft/ton Calculated | 156Nm/t105lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 787km489mi Calculated | 833km518mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,999cc122cu in | 1,984cc121cu in |
| Length | 4,796mm189in | 4,854mm191in |
| Width | 1,916mm75in | 1,904mm75in |
| Height | 1,655mm65in | 1,720mm68in |
| Wheelbase | 2,849mm112in | 2,919mm115in |
| Front track | 1,606mm63in | 1,569mm62in |
| Rear track | 1,606mm63in | 1,617mm64in |
| Ground clearance | 150mm6in | - |
| Trunk volume | 285L | 885L |
| Max trunk volume | 2,020L | 2,430L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 7 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 70L | 70L |
| CO2 emissions | 204g/km | 196g/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 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
- Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 5,400 rpm | 2,300-4,900 rpm | 5,650 rpm |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 5,100 rpm | 1,700-5,000 rpm | 5,350 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 7.9 s | 7.8 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.4 s | 8.3 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 40.0 s | 47.2 s |
| Top speed | 226 km/h 140 mph | 218 km/h 135 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.6 s | 2.5 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.0 s | 6.8 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.5 s | 10.4 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.5 s | 13.4 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.1 s | 16.0 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 143 km/h 89 mph | 141 km/h 88 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 240 hp 179 kW |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 200 hp 149 kW |
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost has 40 hp more than Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI.
The biggest power difference is between Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI and Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: 40 hp (30 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 345 Nm 254 lb-ft |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 1,704 kg 3,757 lb |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 1,790 kg 3,946 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 EcoBoost | 226 km/h 140 mph |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 218 km/h 135 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 8.4 s |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 8.3 s |
Although Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost has more power, Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI and Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: 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 EcoBoost | 8.9 L/100 km 26.4 mpg US 31.7 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI and Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost: 0.5 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 112 hp/t 83 kW/t 8.9 kg/hp |
Estimated range comparison
Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 787 km 489 mi |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 833 km 518 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 240 hp 179 kW | 8.4 s | 226 km/h 140 mph |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 200 hp 149 kW | 8.3 s | 218 km/h 135 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 EcoBoost |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
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 EcoBoost |
| 8.9 L/100 km 26.4 mpg US 31.7 mpg UK | ||||||
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI |
| 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 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.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | 8.9 L/100 km 26.4 mpg US 31.7 mpg UK | 8.4 s |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK | 8.3 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 EcoBoost | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp | 8.9 L/100 km 26.4 mpg US 31.7 mpg UK |
| VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | 112 hp/t 83 kW/t 9.0 kg/hp | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | FordS-MAX II2.0 EcoBoost | VolkswagenSharan II2.0 TSI | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 240 hp 179 kW | 200 hp 149 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 345 Nm 254 lb-ft | 280 Nm 207 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.4 s | 8.3 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 226 km/h 140 mph | 218 km/h 135 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,704 kg 3,757 lb | 1,790 kg 3,946 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 8.9 L/100 km 26.4 mpg US 31.7 mpg UK | 8.4 L/100 km 28.0 mpg US 33.6 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 787 km 489 mi | 833 km 518 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | 204 g/km | 196 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 285 L 10.1 cu ft | 885 L 31.3 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 141 hp/t 105 kW/t 7.1 kg/hp | 112 hp/t 83 kW/t 9.0 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 EcoBoost | Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 8.9 L/100 km26.4 mpg US31.7 mpg UK | 8.4 L/100 km28 mpg US33.6 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 15.58 LC100 km | 14.70 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 25.07 LC100 mi | 23.66 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 1,335 L353 US gal294 UK gal | 1,260 L333 US gal277 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 2,336 LC/year | 2,205 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Ford S-MAX II 2.0 EcoBoost
- Has 40 hp more
- Has 65 Nm more
- Is 86 kg lighter
- Has 8 km/h (5 mph) higher top speed
- Has 29 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Smallest trunk
- Highest CO2 emissions
Volkswagen Sharan II 2.0 TSI
- Is 0.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Uses 0.5 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 47 km (29 mi) more estimated range
- Has 600 L more trunk volume
- Emits 8 g/km less CO2
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best estimated range
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Lowest power
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























