Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Marketing
Dimensons & Outlines
Engine
2.0 DW10 BTED4 / RHR
2.0 DW10 BTED4 / RHR
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Not only that they both belong to the mpv segment and utilize the same 5-door MPV body style, they are even powered by the same Peugeot-developed diesel engine! There is not much there to point us towards one vehicle or the other. Or is it?
SafetyA starting point here would be to take a look at the results from European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP) tests which were performed on both of the cars, with the Citroen being a slightly better choice apparently. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the mpv segment, which is generally a good thing safety-wise, still it doesn't help us solve our dilemma, does it? Furthermore, taking kerb weight as an important factor into account, the French car offers a considerable difference of 11% more metal.
ReliabilityI don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Ford does have a slight advantage, when all the models are taken into account. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Citroen with an average rating of 4.1, and models under the Ford badge with 4.4 out of 5. Some independent research have also placed C4 Picasso as average reliability-wise, and C-Max is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as these two vehicles rank it on average as 4.2 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economyFord is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 2.8 seconds less than its competitor. In addition to that it accelerates all the way to 200 kilometers per hour, 5km/h more than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 5.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (48 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
Ford appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the French car beats the other contender by far, making it the best choice without even considering other things. From there things take a different direction, with Ford being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! At the end, as much as I'd like to give you a winner here, it's simply a pure tie if you ask me. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among more than 12.000 different ones in our database.
Related articles
Back in the 80's it was virtually impossible to describe any Volvo car without using insanely high number of superlatives. The MOST safe, the MOST reliable, the MOST comfortable... Still, they were puzzled on how to reach to a young drivers' hearts, creating the MOST interesting...
Back in the 80's it was virtually impossible to describe any Volvo car without using insanely high number of superlatives. The MOST safe, the MOST reliable, the MOST comfortable... Still, they were puzzled on how to reach to a young drivers' hearts, creating the MOST interesting...