Vendetta. We argue till we're hoarse, choosing the best of three compact vans

The two-liter engines of Citroen and Ford produce almost identical output — 143 and 145 hp respectively, while Volkswagen's 1.4-liter twin-charged TSI develops 140 hp. But the similarities end there: the trim levels and gearboxes differ. The C4 Picasso with a robotic six-speed transmission and rich equipment was priced at $50,500, while the Volkswagen at $34,400 and the C-MAX at $30,080 were more modest. The former has DSG, the latter a simple manual. When we picked up the Citroen, we discovered it had summer tires, although the competitors were already shod with studded tires. We had to find roads with the least ice for the test.

Each of us, naturally, immediately chose a favorite. Vitaliy Kabyshev liked the Ford, Dima Abramov fell in love with the Citroen, and Vlad Klepach settled on the Touran. And so the argument flared up — who among the three got the best car?

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — All these design gimmicks of yours are complete nonsense. A compact MPV is not a painting to decorate a living room. It's a family car that should be functional. Why all these frills that only get in the way of everyday driving? I don't like your C4 Picasso at all. I choose a car that is practical in any situation — the Ford C-MAX.

Dima Abramov: — Really? And who, like a child, was jumping with delight when I brought the C4 Picasso to the editorial office? Who rushed to inspect the interior, touch the plastic, and admire the panoramic roof and dashboard? Don't say you didn't like it now — you yourself kept exclaiming, "Wow!" In my opinion, it's better to enjoy the car every day than to drive a comfortable but utterly bland vehicle about which there's nothing to say except that it drives well. And here your Ford C-MAX and Volkswagen Touran — both are out of the running.

Vlad Klepach: — Uh... design? Guys, what are you even talking about?

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — Yeah, the circus has left, but the C4 Picasso remains! I won't argue, the Citroen is a design masterpiece. Let it stand in a museum then, not drive on our roads. Because it's impossible to drive such a car! I spent about ten minutes trying to turn on the radio. The interface is completely confusing! And the instruments — by the time you figure out what speed you're going, you'll have time to stop, go home, have dinner, and go to bed.

Dima Abramov: — The button you were looking for was right in front of you. Of course, it takes some getting used to. But is it worth worrying about a couple of days to learn? Besides, such an interior will never get boring. And again, there will be something to do in traffic jams. And apart from the confusing interface, there's nothing bad about the C4. Visibility is wonderful, the seats are pure comfort. Five electric adjustments each, there are armrests and "winged" headrests. And look at the materials, all these "features," the equipment! It has everything: from suede seat upholstery and 18-inch chrome wheels to four-zone climate control. And the glass roof is a real salvation for those who stop at an intersection five meters before the stop line: you can still see the traffic light!

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — And I still prefer the Ford. It doesn't have thirty colorful screens and six thousand buttons, of course. But, damn it, it's so comfortable! You get used to the controls not in a week, but in five minutes. And while you're in the parking lot trying to remember which of the fifteen little boxes in the Citroen hides the CD changer, I'll have already left. Although your refrigerator is cool, of course. But I have excellent steering wheel and pedals, a precise gear lever, good visibility. All the necessary buttons are at hand, the instruments are easy to read. Try to find flaws — you won't! Well, yes, the design is bland, and for those "wood" inserts the designer should have his... pencil cut off. But if you set aside personal taste...

Vlad Klepach: — ...Then the Volkswagen will be out of competition! Yes, the C-MAX is good, but the Touran is even better. You get in it for the first time — and it's like you've driven it all your life. You don't need five minutes to get used to it — you don't need any time at all! The ergonomics are fantastically refined, and the adjustment ranges are the largest. Visibility is also wonderful. Everything you need is at hand, and there are enough compartments for small items. Every detail is thought out — from the quiet operation of the climate control and the "thermonuclear" seat heating to the headlight beam. The only drawback is the gear lever is a bit low. But since our Touran has DSG, it doesn't bother much. And the seats could be less flat, because the car handles just amazingly. You drive on the highway even at top speed — complete calm, the car is not afraid of crosswinds or ruts. And if you want to turn, the Touran will take the corner like not every sedan can. Amazing chassis! Except the rear suspension is significantly stiffer than the front, and the rebound stroke is a bit harsh. But that's typical for almost all Volkswagens. And what an engine with gearbox! The 1.4 TSI easily wipes the nose of any of your two-liter naturally aspirated engines, including in fuel economy, and the DSG gearbox is perhaps the best "automatic" today. It shifts smoothly and quickly, incredibly delicate in winter mode. Not like the Citroen's jerky SensoDrive.

Dima Abramov: — Yes, yes, of course, the Touran has the best chassis! The stiffest, the noisiest... Not like the Citroen — quiet, smooth (even on 18-inch wheels), perfectly suited for long trips. Why does a family car need all that, right? It's made for racing! And the SensoDrive, jokes aside, is not what it was on Citroens a few years ago. Yes, there are jerks and "dullness," but if you don't imagine yourself a racer, the gearbox works quite tolerably. And when starting uphill, the car doesn't roll back. It also doesn't "eat" engine power like a regular torque converter automatic. Although DSG is better, who would argue...

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — Colleagues, no quarrels, please. I'll have to disappoint you: my C-MAX will beat both. It's not as stiff and quiet as the Touran, and if you drive alone, you can even hooligan a bit. Yes, it's inferior to even the C4 in engine, but the manual gearbox almost levels that difference. It's, by the way, gorgeous: precise, with short throws. So my car is a compromise without flaws, and the victory is mine?

Dima Abramov: — A compromise, you say? Friends, you're both selfish: only talking about dynamics and handling. But what about those who'll ride in the back? Have you thought about them?

Vlad Klepach: — Oh, right! Let's see what we have here. So, so, so... Ah, now I see why you brought up this topic. The C4 Picasso is indeed interesting inside. Come on, tell us what you can boast about.

Dima Abramov: — Please. Space is abundant, three sunshades, illuminated tables — convenient. Legroom is plentiful. There's emptiness between the front seats — but that's not an invitation for kids to roam the cabin. That would've been cool only in the USSR, where a seatbelt was considered an attribute for traffic cops. So the little ones — sit buckled up (and the driver can keep an eye on them via a special mirror). But the center passenger in the back can stretch their legs — the floor in the C4 is flat. The only downside is tight headroom. And there's no center armrest — a pity.

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — Oh, come on, don't worry! In my C-MAX, everything is more modest. Among the conveniences — fold-down tables, but they're far from Citroen's: flimsy, springy under your fingers, scary to put anything on them. Less legroom, less headroom, and three in the back is already cramped. But there's a trick — fold down the middle seat, and slide the remaining two back and toward the center. Then the Ford is the king of space. True, at the expense of the trunk — it's already the smallest here.

Vlad Klepach: — And in my Touran, there aren't even tables — what a shame! Though, I remember as a kid I rode a couple of times on a tourist "Ikarus" with those. So, the most they're good for is an awkward shelf. Drawing or reading on them is unrealistic. Especially on our roads. And I already have plenty of cupholders.

The clever transformation of the rear row can also be done in the Touran, although in five-seat form, there's not much less space than in the C4 Picasso. And even though the Touran looks like a shoebox with a chrome "beard," the ceiling won't press down even on a two-meter hulk (about 14-15 years old).

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — And as for the trunk, your Touran is the champion. Its "hold" is noticeably deeper than the C4 and C-MAX, and wider than the Ford's. The latter also has the shallowest trunk — no deeper than the Citroen's and narrower. But the Citroen doesn't even have space under the floor for a spare! However, the rear window opens separately, and it comes with a picnic bag and a flashlight...

And if we talk about functionality, only in the C4 Picasso the rear seats don't come out at all. In the Ford, they can be removed, but it's hard — all operations require brute force and strong words. And only in the Touran is everything easy: pull a handle or press a button — done.

Vlad Klepach: — And do you know what else the Touran can do? Automatic parallel parking! It's simple: press a button near the gear lever, drive along a row of cars. When the electronics find a suitable spot, it'll signal — engage reverse, release the brake — and the steering wheel turns itself! Now I park about 30 times a day — the system works great!

Dima Abramov: — Yes, that's a good feature. The Citroen so far can only determine if there's enough space for parking. The French promise that it will soon learn to park itself.

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — Guys, I think you're too carried away with designs and parking, forgetting the main thing. Kids are expensive. And honestly, I don't see the point in overpaying 10-20 thousand for design or other nonsense, just so the kids have fun for those one and a half hours to the dacha. And will they even appreciate the texture of plastic or suede upholstery? Or trendy instruments? You can't show cartoons on them anyway. I'd rather install a TV with DVD — the saved money will be enough. And with the rest, I'll even renovate the apartment. The C-MAX may be simpler, but it's much more affordable!

Dima Abramov: — I won't argue: it would be great to get the Volkswagen's guts, the Citroen's design, and the Ford's price tag. But we'll have to choose the best...

Vlad Klepach: — We won't have to. Guys, this is a debate. So, each of us sticks to their opinion. There's no bad car in our trio, but there's no absolute leader either. So I'm sticking with the Volkswagen Touran: a tech-savvy engine, gearbox, excellent ergonomics, handling, and space. Yes, it's more expensive than the C-MAX — but if you have the money, the overpayment is justified. If not — get the C-MAX: it's a very balanced car, almost without flaws, and the price makes it the most attractive of the three. And for originals like Dima, there's always the luxurious and pricey C4 Picasso.

Vitaliy Kabyshev: — Yes, a car with a million flaws and two million virtues, the main ones being excellent comfort and stunning design.

Dima Abramov: — Seems I'm exactly that kind of original. By the way, guys, could you lend me a Ford or Volkswagen for a couple of days? I've been having insomnia lately.

Technical specifications

Equipment of tested cars

Safety

The Ford Focus C-MAX in its pre-restyling version showed a slightly more modest result — four stars. In the frontal crash test it earned 13 points, in the side test — 15. The main loss of points is associated with not the most reliable protection of the driver's knees. However, child safety in the C-MAX is rated four stars. But pedestrians, as in the case of the C4 Picasso, are protected only to two stars.