Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual vs Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110HP manual

Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual

Source: wikipedia.org M 93 All Rights Released into the public domain

15 reasons for

Ford C-MAX II Grand, model available from 2010.
It has 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP petrol engine produced from 2012.
Drive on the front axle has manual, 6 speed gearbox.

4 reasons for

Nissan Cube III, model available from 2010.
It has 1.6 i 110HP petrol engine produced from 2010 to 2010.
Drive has manual, 5 speed gearbox.

Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110HP manual
Ford

15 reasons for Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125KM manual in comparison to Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110HP manual

Reasons for
135

Maximal power

125 > 110 hp
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.
112

Average consumption

5.2 > 6.6 l
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.
59

Maximal torque

170 > 153 Nm
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.
56

Urban consumption

6.6 > 8.3 l
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.
33

Top speed

185 > 175 km/h
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.
30

Maximal torque RPM

1,400 > 4,405 revolutions/minute
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.
24

Extra-urban consumption

4.6 > 5.4 l
22

Width

1,826 > 1,693 mm
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.
10

Number of gears

6 > 5 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.
8

Maximum load capacity

657 > 510 kg
6

Length

4,520 > 3,977 mm
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.
1

Height

1,684 > 1,650 mm
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.
0

Payload

2,146 > 1,704 kg
0

Gross trailer weight without breaks

746 > 513 kg
0

Curb weight

1,494 > 1,187 kg

Nissan

4 reasons for Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110KM manual in comparison to Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual

Reasons for
50

Acceleration 0-100 km/h

11.3 > 12.2 s
A small difference at the level of 7 percent suggests that the Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual is the worst car of these two presented. In the „minivan segment, being represented by the Ford C-MAX II, the medium acceleration amounts to 11.7 s and is by 5 percent higher than this of Ford vehicle.
14

Cylinders

4 > 3
8

Engine capacity

1,599 > 1,000 cc
The Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110HP manual has 60 percent bigger engine displacement in relation to the Ford C-MAX II. The difference is relatively substantia. For this reason the Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110HP manual should accelerate faster and be able to achieve higher maximum speed. On the other hand larger engine size usually results in worst fuel economy.
8

Gross trailer weight

1,000 > 898 kg

Cars specifications

Ford C-MAX II Grand 1.0 EcoBoost 125HP manual Nissan Cube III 1.6 i 110HP manual
    Gross trailer weight 898 kg 1,000 kg
    Price range popular popular
    Model release date 2010 2010
    Facelifting no no
    Class minivan minivan
By using this site, you agree to the storage and use of cookie files. OK