RE: Ford S-Max: You Know You Want To
Discussion
The Crack Fox said:
It's all about the engine, right?
I'd have a Volvo V70 T5 (where this engine more-or-less originated from) instead. Estates are cooler than MPVs. Actually, fast estates are way cooler than anything
I agree. And I might just be picking up a Mondeo estate with this engine in on Friday I'd have a Volvo V70 T5 (where this engine more-or-less originated from) instead. Estates are cooler than MPVs. Actually, fast estates are way cooler than anything
I had a top spec S-Max on loan for three weeks over Christmas 2009. Mrs Vroom blagged it via Mumsnet of all places! It had everything you could possibly need for a family, including DVD screens in the headrests. It had the 163bhp 2.2 diesel engine and it certainly shifted for such a large vehicle. We were sad to see it go, and getting back in the sh%tbox Renault Scenic we had at the time was a big disappointment.
tankplanker said:
Axionknight said:
One thing - the article says "cloth seats: bonus", I'm not a parent (yet) but surely leather seats would be better as they are easier to clean, or am I missing a trick here?
I completely agree, cloth is more work to clean than the cheaper leathers as that sort of leather just wipes clean like vinyl. My kids drew on my light grey leather in one of my cars with a biro, came straight out with hair spray, can't say that would have worked on cloth.However if you get milk or milk sick on the car seats regardless of type and let it soak in you are going to have a bad time.
In my experience sick rarely gets on the seats due to the enormous acreage covered by modern child seats, which are roughly 4 times the size of any child likely to occupy them.
We've got an early 2.5T Titanium, though it's a pretty basic one with none of the options ticked other than the 18in wheels.
What's good?
The way it drives. The ride is excellent, the handling is far better than it has any right to be and the steering is perfectly geared, and weighted. The 2.5T engine is silky smooth, and I think it's pretty likely Ford fitted it as they would have fitted a V6 to an older Mondeo or Galaxy. It pulls from 1000rpm in 6th gear easily.
The driving position is good, for a van. Eats miles, no problem. Genuinely, I think it's one of the best cars Ford have ever made, and probably one of the best cars we've ever owned as an all-rounder. There isn't much I can think of that is as good in so many different criterias. Seems like I haven't mentioned much in relation to the below, but it's genuinely because it's competent at so many different aspects of being a car.
What's not so good?
The economy, as mentioned, isn't great. Around town it's a 24mpg car, possibly 25-26 if you drive with a feather foot (which is actually very easy to do, seeing as the engine is so flexible). On a run, if you stay at 70mph or just below, you'll get it up to about 35mpg average across a sensible mileage.
It's a heavy car, and because they managed to get it to soak up corners the way it does, the front tyres are the scapegoats. It eats them pretty quickly.
It's not as quick as everyone makes out. They're nothing like a Focus ST, which has much shorter gear ratios and (seemingly) a more aggressive power curve. The gearing is quite tall, which is why the economy isn't quite as bad as you'd think (bearing in mind a much lower, lighter Focus ST struggles to do any better) and is also why it's such a good cruiser, but the gearing does blunt the acceleration a bit. The S-Max owners club (mostly) seems to be full of Mums and Dads who still long to be girl/boy racers, and think that a 2.5T S-Max is a serious performance machine. It isn't, it's just a bit quicker than you'd expect an MPV to be. I can tell you for a fact that a Saxo VTS will pull away from you
Lastly, it's not exactly reliable. Ford's motto used to be "Designed for living, engineered to last" or something like that. It should be "Designed for living, engineered to last a bit longer than the warranty period." We've had it 18months and it's eaten a steering rack, a fuel pump, a boost control solenoid, the front brakes creak loudly, the alarm keeps saying it needs servicing (How? A f
king oil change or something?!), the rear lights work intermittently, the radio (which is a bit guff) always comes on loudly when you first start it (and going through the menu to change this doesn't work) and it's currently parked at my work having sprung a bad fuel leak, which looks like a plastic pipe has failed underneath somewhere. it's just a bit shoddy at times, given that all the other cars we tend to have are cheap old snotters with more miles on, that seem to go wrong less.
Overall, I'd still recommend one, purely because overall they're still so bloody good at being a car and doing what you'd want a family car to do. I would also say it's a genuine alternative for those who say they can't have an MPV because their life isn't over yet (same people who can't think for themselves, so just repeat whatever Clarkson says). Ok, some MPVs are horrible to drive, and you'd sacrifice some practicality for something better to drive, but in this case it drives better than many normal cars I've driven - you're gaining nothing by choosing a cramped estate car over an S-Max, and losing a lot.
Can't believe the same company gave us the mk5 Escort!
What's good?
The way it drives. The ride is excellent, the handling is far better than it has any right to be and the steering is perfectly geared, and weighted. The 2.5T engine is silky smooth, and I think it's pretty likely Ford fitted it as they would have fitted a V6 to an older Mondeo or Galaxy. It pulls from 1000rpm in 6th gear easily.
The driving position is good, for a van. Eats miles, no problem. Genuinely, I think it's one of the best cars Ford have ever made, and probably one of the best cars we've ever owned as an all-rounder. There isn't much I can think of that is as good in so many different criterias. Seems like I haven't mentioned much in relation to the below, but it's genuinely because it's competent at so many different aspects of being a car.
What's not so good?
The economy, as mentioned, isn't great. Around town it's a 24mpg car, possibly 25-26 if you drive with a feather foot (which is actually very easy to do, seeing as the engine is so flexible). On a run, if you stay at 70mph or just below, you'll get it up to about 35mpg average across a sensible mileage.
It's a heavy car, and because they managed to get it to soak up corners the way it does, the front tyres are the scapegoats. It eats them pretty quickly.
It's not as quick as everyone makes out. They're nothing like a Focus ST, which has much shorter gear ratios and (seemingly) a more aggressive power curve. The gearing is quite tall, which is why the economy isn't quite as bad as you'd think (bearing in mind a much lower, lighter Focus ST struggles to do any better) and is also why it's such a good cruiser, but the gearing does blunt the acceleration a bit. The S-Max owners club (mostly) seems to be full of Mums and Dads who still long to be girl/boy racers, and think that a 2.5T S-Max is a serious performance machine. It isn't, it's just a bit quicker than you'd expect an MPV to be. I can tell you for a fact that a Saxo VTS will pull away from you
Lastly, it's not exactly reliable. Ford's motto used to be "Designed for living, engineered to last" or something like that. It should be "Designed for living, engineered to last a bit longer than the warranty period." We've had it 18months and it's eaten a steering rack, a fuel pump, a boost control solenoid, the front brakes creak loudly, the alarm keeps saying it needs servicing (How? A f
king oil change or something?!), the rear lights work intermittently, the radio (which is a bit guff) always comes on loudly when you first start it (and going through the menu to change this doesn't work) and it's currently parked at my work having sprung a bad fuel leak, which looks like a plastic pipe has failed underneath somewhere. it's just a bit shoddy at times, given that all the other cars we tend to have are cheap old snotters with more miles on, that seem to go wrong less.Overall, I'd still recommend one, purely because overall they're still so bloody good at being a car and doing what you'd want a family car to do. I would also say it's a genuine alternative for those who say they can't have an MPV because their life isn't over yet (same people who can't think for themselves, so just repeat whatever Clarkson says). Ok, some MPVs are horrible to drive, and you'd sacrifice some practicality for something better to drive, but in this case it drives better than many normal cars I've driven - you're gaining nothing by choosing a cramped estate car over an S-Max, and losing a lot.
Can't believe the same company gave us the mk5 Escort!
I love ours.
It has it's fair share of gremlins, but it's comfy, safe, easy for the kids to get in and out of and the other day my wife bought a £30 3-seater sofa which it managed to swallow without fuss with the seats down.
It's not that fast though - the low-pressure turbo does not give the shove you would expect and the acceleration is quite linear.
It has it's fair share of gremlins, but it's comfy, safe, easy for the kids to get in and out of and the other day my wife bought a £30 3-seater sofa which it managed to swallow without fuss with the seats down.
It's not that fast though - the low-pressure turbo does not give the shove you would expect and the acceleration is quite linear.
I had a totally irrational liking for these - I saw one as a future dogvan and then I borrowed one (not dissimilar to this one)
As a practical vehicle it's not great for moving actual stuff or dogs - WAY too much farting about to get any usable space. It's clearly aimed at moving those noisy things which piss and puke everywhere - look like small people - horrible things...
It's also pretty nasty to drive - the one I had felt like a jacked-up Mondeo on tired springs - maybe it was just on tired springs but it was neither comfy nor sporty
Just a one-off experience obv but I stopped wondering if one would be a dogvan because it just isn't a practical solution for me, her, the 2 dogs and things like shopping...
If you want a swappable multi-seater cum van and don't mind crippling yourself to swap between those - I'm sure they're great!
As a practical vehicle it's not great for moving actual stuff or dogs - WAY too much farting about to get any usable space. It's clearly aimed at moving those noisy things which piss and puke everywhere - look like small people - horrible things...
It's also pretty nasty to drive - the one I had felt like a jacked-up Mondeo on tired springs - maybe it was just on tired springs but it was neither comfy nor sporty
Just a one-off experience obv but I stopped wondering if one would be a dogvan because it just isn't a practical solution for me, her, the 2 dogs and things like shopping...
If you want a swappable multi-seater cum van and don't mind crippling yourself to swap between those - I'm sure they're great!
We've got one of the 200PS diesel models at work. It's not a bad car. Not fast, but quicker than you'd expect. The handling is pretty good too; it manages the body roll well enough on turn in, but as with any tall vehicle, it suffers on the rebound if you try and dart back in the other direction. It's a bit of a waste as we rarely use it more than two up, but it'd make a great family car.
Ozzie Osmond said:
chrislloyd81 said:
I don't see the point having a fast family car.....
^^^ This.The logic behind ours was that if we wanted a diesel in similar age/spec/mileage etc, we'd have paid £1.5-£2k more outright to buy the thing, and the diesel's aren't exactly great on economy either (high 30's for most). Add in the fact the diesels tend to bork more frequently, with dual mass flywheels, injectors and fuel pumps considered consumable items, and the £100 a year saving in tax doesn't look like much of a saving after all, especially given ours only does 6k miles a year. It wasn't a case of trying to figure out if a 2.5T was worth paying a premium for, over a diesel, at all. It was more a case of wondering whether the 2.5T would actually cost any more to own over the course of 4-5 years, full stop. 18months later, the 2.5T is still easily in the green
The diesel would only make more sense if you were doing 12k + per annum.
I can't think of a mass market car on sale in the UK (apart from a Boxster if that's mass market) that so well nails it's design brief than an S Max. If you want a practical bus, get a Galaxy or a slidy door Alhambra van, but if you want a big family car that's great to drive, then this is it. I had a '10 plate facelift Titanium X Sport with the 200bhp Ecoboost engine and it was great. The kids loved the toys, my wife loved the space and practicality and when I took the wheel on our annual summer trip to France, I really enjoyed the driving experience. It was not exactly BMW build quality but it was robust enough and nothing fell off.
I was so impressed that when it came to replace it, I got another - this time a 2015 new shape. 240 bhp this time, again top spec Titanium Sport with X Pack. It has a fair turn of speed but it's not hot hatch quick, but the the handling on a fast A road is lovely.
The new shape is so much nicer inside and it feels like a quality car - still not quite Audi but nice enough. I got mine at 6 months old from a Ford dealer, 1 owner, £8,000 worth of factory extras for £10k below list.
I was so impressed that when it came to replace it, I got another - this time a 2015 new shape. 240 bhp this time, again top spec Titanium Sport with X Pack. It has a fair turn of speed but it's not hot hatch quick, but the the handling on a fast A road is lovely.
The new shape is so much nicer inside and it feels like a quality car - still not quite Audi but nice enough. I got mine at 6 months old from a Ford dealer, 1 owner, £8,000 worth of factory extras for £10k below list.
Kitchski said:
Ozzie Osmond said:
chrislloyd81 said:
I don't see the point having a fast family car.....
^^^ This.The logic behind ours was that if we wanted a diesel in similar age/spec/mileage etc, we'd have paid £1.5-£2k more outright to buy the thing, and the diesel's aren't exactly great on economy either (high 30's for most). Add in the fact the diesels tend to bork more frequently, with dual mass flywheels, injectors and fuel pumps considered consumable items, and the £100 a year saving in tax doesn't look like much of a saving after all, especially given ours only does 6k miles a year. It wasn't a case of trying to figure out if a 2.5T was worth paying a premium for, over a diesel, at all. It was more a case of wondering whether the 2.5T would actually cost any more to own over the course of 4-5 years, full stop. 18months later, the 2.5T is still easily in the green
The diesel would only make more sense if you were doing 12k + per annum.
Kitchski said:
Luckily, it's not a fast family car. The engine makes it a very smooth, relaxing cruiser. It also lends an element of character to something you wouldn't expect to have character. It's much nicer to potter around in than a small engine'd petrol, or diesel model.
The logic behind ours was that if we wanted a diesel in similar age/spec/mileage etc, we'd have paid £1.5-£2k more outright to buy the thing, and the diesel's aren't exactly great on economy either (high 30's for most). Add in the fact the diesels tend to bork more frequently, with dual mass flywheels, injectors and fuel pumps considered consumable items, and the £100 a year saving in tax doesn't look like much of a saving after all, especially given ours only does 6k miles a year. It wasn't a case of trying to figure out if a 2.5T was worth paying a premium for, over a diesel, at all. It was more a case of wondering whether the 2.5T would actually cost any more to own over the course of 4-5 years, full stop. 18months later, the 2.5T is still easily in the green
The diesel would only make more sense if you were doing 12k + per annum.
Interesting logic.The logic behind ours was that if we wanted a diesel in similar age/spec/mileage etc, we'd have paid £1.5-£2k more outright to buy the thing, and the diesel's aren't exactly great on economy either (high 30's for most). Add in the fact the diesels tend to bork more frequently, with dual mass flywheels, injectors and fuel pumps considered consumable items, and the £100 a year saving in tax doesn't look like much of a saving after all, especially given ours only does 6k miles a year. It wasn't a case of trying to figure out if a 2.5T was worth paying a premium for, over a diesel, at all. It was more a case of wondering whether the 2.5T would actually cost any more to own over the course of 4-5 years, full stop. 18months later, the 2.5T is still easily in the green
The diesel would only make more sense if you were doing 12k + per annum.
I bought mine for many of the same reasons, mostly horror stories around the DMF. We originally looked for another estate but then the Mrs spotted a Galaxy. I said no, but showed her an S-Max and that was it: sold!
It's just possible I didn't fully explain the engine size before suggesting this was the one we wanted though.
I drove the 240ps 2.0 SCTi Ecoboost model today, with PowerShift transmission. It felt positively lethargic! I know I've been spoiled by V10 goodness, but I swear my old 2.5T had a lot more grunt. It just felt like it wasn't trying.
I don't think it was a duff car either - it was being sold by a Ford dealer, and had just been serviced.
I don't think it was a duff car either - it was being sold by a Ford dealer, and had just been serviced.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff