The horsepower of the Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual is by 15 horsepowers bigger in relation to the Nissan. Because the difference is not big this should not affect the car performance considerably.
The Ford C-MAX II burns up 1.4 l fewer fuel in the combined cycle in comparison to the Nissan Cube III. The difference in the amount of 21 % will be significant in everyday usage of the vehicle. In the long period of time it will result in a substantial cost reduction.
Maximum torque of the Ford C-MAX II Grand is 11 % greater than the Nissan Cube III. As a result, the Ford C-MAX II will accelerate slightly faster and be better for overtaking other cars. Appropriate use of the flexibility of the engine will also make that the Ford C-MAX II will burn up fever fuel per 100 kilometers.
The Ford C-MAX II Grand uses 21 % fewer fuel in urban cycle than the Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110HP manual. The difference at the level of 1.7 l will be quite significant in use of vehicle. Additionally, within many months it will give gigantic cost savings. Moreover bear in mind that presented results of the average fuel efficiency may be considerably raised if you move dynamically. The difference in fuel economy of the cars compared by you is so tremendous that you should consider to choose vehicles with engines of similar power and similar dimensions. Only then will the comparision have a sense.
The maximum speed possible to be reached by the Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual is greater than the Nissan Cube III by 10 kilometers/hour, which allows the Ford C-MAX II Grand to overcome faster large stretches of highway. The difference at the level of 10 kilometers/hour is small and will be insignificant in everyday driving.
Maximal torque RPM
A big difference in rotations per minute at which the maximum torque is produced distinctly shows that a car which does not require to be revved high is the one of the Ford C-MAX II Grand. The engine of the Nissan Cube III achieves its full efficiency at 4,405 revolutions per minute which is by 3,005 revolutions per minute lower compared with the Ford C-MAX II Grand.
Distance between two sides of a car directly affects room in the cabin and also stability during driving. The Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual is widther by 133 millimeters than the Nissan Cube III and is not really relevant. The medium for the „minivan” segment equals to approximately 1,785 mm and is by 41 millimeters smaller than the same attribute of the Ford C-MAX II.
Number of gears
The Ford have a higher gear count
in comparison to the Nissan Cube III which means
that Ford C-MAX II would achieve
faster acceleration and lesser fuel consumption. But the difference is not big and if you are not drag
racer at a timed event you would not even
feel the difference.
Maximum load capacity
The Ford C-MAX II Grand is 14 % longer in relation to the Nissan Cube III. Long vehicles have more interior space and in most cases provide plenty of trunk space. Although the Ford occurs to be better for families or persons who value soft, smooth long-distance rides, the Nissan Cube III may appeal to the young as it will not make problems with parking and will be more maneuverable.
The higher a car is, the the more convenient is a getting in to it and greater capacity of carrying big amount of thinks to it. The difference between these two cars that amounts to 2 % to the advantage of the Ford C-MAX II is insignificant and should not be really noticeable.