2004 • Ford
C-Max
Ford C-Max 1.6 16V (100 Hp) 2004Overall Score51.25/100
2004 Ford C-Max vs 2004 Mitsubishi Space Star Comparison
Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.
2004 • Mitsubishi
Space Star
Mitsubishi Space Star 1.6 (98 Hp) 2004Overall Score50.25/100
WINNER
Ford C-Max
Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 1 points.
51.25–50.25
SPECIFICATION GROUPS
Every difference between the two cars
Basic Specifications
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMitsubishi Space Star
FordMakeMitsubishi
C-MaxModelSpace Star
2004Model year2004
MPVBody typeMinivan
5Seats5
5Doors5
Performance
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMitsubishi Space Star
12,9 s0–100 km/h12,0 s
175 km/hTop speed180 km/h
1596 ccEngine displacement1584 cc
100 HPPower98 HP
145 NmTorque150 Nm
4Cylinders4
Fuel & Consumption
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMitsubishi Space Star
PetrolFuel typePetrol
55 ltFuel tank55 lt
8,9 ltUrban consumption9,2 lt
5,7 ltExtra-urban consumption5,9 lt
6,9 ltAverage consumption7,1 lt
Transmission & Chassis
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMitsubishi Space Star
Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears5
195/65 R15Tyre size185/65 R14
YesABSYes
Dimensions
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMitsubishi Space Star
4330 mmLength4030 mm
1820 mmWidth1715 mm
1600 mmHeight1515 mm
1234 KgWeight1235 Kg
2640 mmWheelbase2500 mm
E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note
2004 Ford C-Max and 2004 Mitsubishi Space Star approach the same decision from different angles. We compare the exact versions so changes in engine, transmission, dimensions and equipment are not hidden behind the model names.
Overall, Ford C-Max leads the E-Kıyasla score by 1 points. The score provides a consistent summary, while the best choice can still change with priorities such as urban efficiency, luggage space, performance or equipment.
SIMILAR COMPARISONS
Similar comparisons
Explore related comparisons featuring cars from this matchup.
VS
VS
VS
VSComments are loading…