Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Ford S-Max fuel consumption

Of all Ford S-Max modifications produced from 2006 to 2021 real fuel consumption according to user ratings is approximately 24% higher compared to advertised consumption. Starting from 2006 Ford S-Max average difference between actual owner-reported fuel consumption and stated consumption was slightly above industry average, at 2008 it was less than industry average, at 2010 difference became slightly above industry average and finally at 2016 difference between owner-reported and advertised fuel economy became significantly higher than average. It is noteworthy during this period that the gap between advertised and actual fuel economy changed significantly throughout the automotive industry. For more details, see the table below.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersFord S-MaxAll carmakersFord S-Max
2006+9%+14% +11%+11%
Show all years
2007+11%+11% +12%+11%
2008+12%+11% +13%+11%
2009+14%+11% +14%+11%
2010+16%+18% +16%+21%
2011+19%+24% +19%+24%
2012+21%+24% +23%+24%
2013+23%+24% +27%+24%
2014+26%+24% +30%+24%
2015+27%+28% +33%+31%
2016+28%+36% +36%+37%
2017+28%+36% +38%+37%
2018+28%+36% +39%+37%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Ford S-Max.

2015 - 2018

Ford S-Max 2015 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines24.0 MPG
9.8 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+36%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines43.9 MPG
5.4 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines32.0 MPG
7.4 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+38%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Ford S-Max 2015 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.4 liters per 100 km or 8% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Ford S-Max with automatic transmission consumes around 0.3 litres per 100 km or 5% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars of other manufacturers, the Ford S-Max advertised fuel economy is noticeably below average - at least two thirds of similar cars have lower fuel consumption, but according to available user reports on actual consumption, real fuel economy is among the 20% worst in its class.
The best fuel economy in its class of all the modifications has one with 2.0 diesel engine and manual transmission (Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 180 Hp 180 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.5 liter petrol engine
Ford S-MAX 2015 1.5 160 HP manual 36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km
27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km+34%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 240 Hp 240 HP automatic 29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
21.6 MPG
10.9 l/100km+38%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 150 Hp 150 HP manual 47.0 MPG
5.0 l/100km
33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km+42%
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 150 Hp Automatic 150 HP automatic 43.6 MPG
5.4 l/100km
32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km+35%
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 4x4 150 Hp 150 HP manual 43.6 MPG
5.4 l/100km
33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km+31%
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 180 Hp 180 HP manual 47.0 MPG
5.0 l/100km
33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km+42%
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 180 Hp Automatic 180 HP automatic 43.6 MPG
5.4 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km+39%
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 4x4 180 Hp Automatic 180 HP automatic 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km+29%
Ford S-MAX 2015 2.0 210 Hp 210 HP automatic 42.8 MPG
5.5 l/100km
29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km+44%
2010 - 2015

Ford S-Max 2010 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines24.1 MPG
9.8 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+24%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines40.1 MPG
5.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines32.4 MPG
7.3 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+24%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Ford S-Max 2010 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.3 liters per 100 km or 5% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Ford S-Max with automatic transmission consumes around 0.4 litres per 100 km or 6% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Ford S-Max fuel economy is noticeably below average - at least two thirds of similar cars have lower fuel consumption. The best fuel economy in its class of all the modifications has one with 2.0 diesel engine and manual transmission (Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 TDCi 163 Hp 163 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.6 liter petrol engine
Ford S-MAX 2010 1.6 EcoBoost 160 HP manual 33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km
26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km+29%
1.6 liter diesel engine
Ford S-MAX 2010 1.6 TDCi 115 HP manual 45.2 MPG
5.2 l/100km
34.6 MPG
6.8 l/100km+31%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 145 HP manual 28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km
24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km+16%
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 EcoBoost 203 Hp 203 HP automatic 29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km
23.3 MPG
10.1 l/100km+25%
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 EcoBoost 240 Hp 240 HP automatic 28.3 MPG
8.3 l/100km
22.6 MPG
10.4 l/100km+25%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 TDCi 140 Hp 140 HP manual 41.3 MPG
5.7 l/100km
34.1 MPG
6.9 l/100km+21%
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 TDCi 140 Hp Automatic 140 HP automatic 39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km+22%
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 TDCi 163 Hp 163 HP manual 41.3 MPG
5.7 l/100km
33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km+23%
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.0 TDCi 163 Hp Automatic 163 HP automatic 39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km+23%
2.2 liter diesel engine
Ford S-MAX 2010 2.2 TDCi 200 HP manual 35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km
29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km+23%
2006 - 2010

Ford S-Max 2006 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines25.6 MPG
9.2 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines23.5 MPG
10.0 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+11%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines35.5 MPG
6.6 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines31.2 MPG
7.6 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+10%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Ford S-Max 2006 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.2 liters per 100 km or 2% less fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Ford S-Max fuel economy is noticeably below average - at least two thirds of similar cars have lower fuel consumption. The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.3 petrol engine and automatic transmission (Ford S-MAX 2007 2.3 16v 161 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Ford S-Max with 2.0 diesel engine and manual transmission (Ford S-MAX 2006 2.0 TDCi 140 Hp 140 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter diesel engine
Ford S-Max 2006 1.8 TDCi 125 Hp 125 HP manual 37.9 MPG
6.2 l/100km
2.0 liter petrol engine
Ford S-MAX 2006 2.0 16v 145 HP manual 29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km
25.0 MPG
9.4 l/100km+16%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Ford S-MAX 2007 2.0 TDCi 130 Hp 130 HP automatic 32.2 MPG
7.3 l/100km
29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km+10%
Ford S-MAX 2006 2.0 TDCi 140 Hp 140 HP manual 36.8 MPG
6.4 l/100km
33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km+11%
2.2 liter diesel engine
Ford S-Max 2006 2.2 TDCi 175 HP manual 35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km
2.3 liter petrol engine
Ford S-Max 2006 2.3 T 161 HP manual 24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km
Ford S-MAX 2007 2.3 16v 161 HP automatic 24.8 MPG
9.5 l/100km
23.3 MPG
10.1 l/100km+6%
2.5 liter petrol engine
Ford S-MAX 2006 2.5 20v Turbo 220 HP manual 25.0 MPG
9.4 l/100km
22.4 MPG
10.5 l/100km+12%

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.