2003 • Ford
C-Max
Ford C-Max 1.8 16V (120 Hp) 2003Overall Score54.25/100
2003 Ford C-Max vs 2003 MG ZS Comparison
Compare technical specifications, scores and everyday-use differences side by side.
2003 • MG
ZS
MG ZS 1.8 16V (117 Hp) 2003Overall Score53.5/100
WINNER
Ford C-Max
Leads the overall E-Kıyasla score by 0.75 points.
54.25–53.5
SPECIFICATION GROUPS
Every difference between the two cars
Basic Specifications
Performance
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMG ZS
10,8 s0–100 km/h9,0 s
193 km/hTop speed19 km/h
1798 ccEngine displacement1795 cc
120 HPPower117 HP
165 NmTorque160 Nm
4Cylinders4
Fuel & Consumption
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMG ZS
PetrolFuel typePetrol
55 ltFuel tank55 lt
9,7 ltUrban consumption9,7 lt
5,6 ltExtra-urban consumption5,8 lt
7,1 ltAverage consumption7,3 lt
Transmission & Chassis
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMG ZS
Front-wheel driveDrivetrainFront-wheel drive
5Gears5
205/55 R16Tyre size205/45 R17
YesABSYes
Dimensions
Ford C-MaxSpecificationMG ZS
4330 mmLength4520 mm
1820 mmWidth1700 mm
1600 mmHeight1390 mm
1287 KgWeight1125 Kg
2640 mmWheelbase2620 mm
E-Kıyasla Editor’s Note
2003 Ford C-Max and 2003 MG ZS 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 0.75 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…