Ford Escape vs Renault Kadjar

What's the difference?

The Ford Escape PHEV is a good option for a customer who knows they’ll live within the parameters set by the car. That’s the case with any plug-in hybrid, really, so in that regard, this new model is hardly a standout.

And it isn’t particularly outstanding in any other way either. I personally would have appreciated it if Ford had decided to add the plug-in powertrain to the Vignale flagship model instead - that model is more about luxury than sportiness, and would better fit the character of this powertrain in my opinion.

It’s a decent addition to the brand’s SUV range, and a welcome one to the segment, though it won’t be on its own for long.

The Renault Kadjar Intens ticks a lot of the urban boxes. It’s small, which is good for navigating narrow city streets and parking in tight spaces, but it’s also spacious and practical. The Kadjar is fuel efficient for a four-cylinder petrol engine and it has that sophisticated French styling.

The Intens is expensive, though, and unless you absolutely have to have leather seats, a glass roof, and the Bose stereo I’d go for the mid-range Zen grade and save yourself $5K but still have all the same safety tech. That said the Intens has auto parking as standard which is a nice convenience for the city.

Safety could be better. The AEB system doesn’t have pedestrian and cyclist detection, rear cross traffic alert, or reverse emergency braking.

Finally, the dual-clutch automatic and 1.3-litre turbo-petrol engine while a fuel efficient combination, isn’t all that easy to live with and can make driving a less-than-smooth experience. The Nissan Qashqai’s combination of CVT auto and four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine is better suited to the urban jungle - something to think about there. 

Now the scores, the Kadjar Intens gets the same mark for daily driving and its urban talents – it could be smoother to drive, but there’s still lots to like. 

I haven’t really warmed to the “I wish I was a hatchback” styling of the Escape, which has a softer-edged look to it than most of its rivals. I mean, compared to a Hyundai Tucson or Toyota RAV4, the Escape looks like a blob.

That mightn’t be an issue for you, and it’s hardly a reason not to buy the car, but I was also a bit disappointed that there’s no real specific highlights to make you realise you’re buying the PHEV model, which - at $15,000 more than the equivalent petrol version - should have something to differentiate it other than the addition of a small badge and the additional filler cap on the front quarter panel for the plug.

Even a different set of wheels would have sufficed. Alas, it’s an identical looking Escape to the petrol. That means the ST-Line trimmings, such as black highlights on the grille and bumper, side skirts, a rear spoiler, and those 18-inch wheels and lowered sports suspension.

The interior, as mentioned in the pricing section, does have a few changes over the petrol version, but they’re hardly game-changing additions.

People talk about French design being good. Well if you want to see just how good take a look at the Nissan Qashqai, because the Kadjar is fundamentally the same SUV with Renault’s design spin applied.

Yep, as I mentioned about 15 seconds ago, Renault and Nissan are part of an alliance that allows them to share the same cars, but each brand has room to ‘make it their own’ with styling that delivers a very different look, inside and out.

Now, the Qashqai is not an ugly car, but I think the Kadjar is more stylish and premium looking in the same way the larger Renault Koleos SUV is gorgeous compared to the relatively straight-laced Nissan X-Trail it’s based on.

There’s no doubt the Kadjar is a Renault thanks to the giant diamond logo on the plunging grille. I like the way the front bumper rises up into the bonnet like it’s all one piece, but I’m not completely sold on the rear of the car which looks a bit like its shirt is tucked into the back of its pants, which makes no sense unless you look at the images.

Still, the tail-lights have a prestige feel and the Kadjar model name spelled out across the tailgate is a confident statement, also adopted recently by other brands such as Volkswagen (T-Cross) and Ford (Puma).  

Telling the Intens apart from the other two grades is fairly easy, it has 19-inch wheels (the others have 17-inch rims), there’s the enormous glass roof, and it also has a chrome effect on the front and rear bumpers, side skirts, and around the fog lights. It’s a more premium look.

That higher-end feel goes into the cabin as well with the Intens’ black leather upholstery and colourful ambient lighting. The touchscreen is tiny, though, and there isn’t a great deal inside that you don’t get in the entry-grade Kadjar’s cabin, which is also almost as stylish.

The Kadjar is classified as a small SUV, which means nothing really when it comes to wondering if it’s going to fit in your garage or in the tiny parking spaces we’re faced with in the city.

So, I’ve mapped it out for you. The Kadjar’s dimensions are, 4449mm long, 2058 mm across (including the wing mirrors), and 1612mm tall. 

Another interesting thing – each B-pillar is adorned with a little French flag. I’m not sure if they're a sign of Gallic national pride or to remind everybody that meets the Kadjar that Renaults are French.

Either way, you don’t see this type of thing on other cars and for many buyers the appeal of a Renault is having a car that’s not like everybody else’s.

The Ford Escape looks like it has all the bits to make a midsize SUV buyer happy. And while a fair few of the boxes are ticked, there are some elements that could be better. 

The big party trick is that the second row is on rails, so you can slide it forwards or backwards to improve the space for receipt occupants or improve your boot space. The maximised cargo area is 556 litres to the ceiling, while if prioritise second-row occupant space there is easily enough room for a 182cm / 6’0” adult to fit behind someone of a similar size.

In the boot there are remote levers for the second row seats to fold down, a 12 V outlet, and a soft parcel shelf which is easy to remove, too.

During my time with the car I had the seats slid back as far as they go to maximise cabin space, though I did test out whether it was worth having them forward and the boot space was appreciably better especially for a pram and some baby stuff.

The second-row is a 60:40 split for the backrest, with the smaller portion on the driver’s side. That may sound trivial, but we had our baby seat set up behind the passenger, and had to move it to the driver’s side when we picked up a large parcel as it wouldn’t fit with the smaller portion folded down. There are dual ISOFIX child seat anchor points for the outboard positions, and three top-tether hooks.

The boot space is good too, considering it has some extra hardware to contend with under the body, there is also a space-saver spare wheel under there which is nice. However, there is no dedicated hidey hole for the charge cable, and it doesn’t come in a nice stowable bag either - just a plastic ziplock thing. 

Perhaps the biggest letdown of the interior is the fact that you still get the tiny little tablet-style 8.0-inch touchscreen media display, despite there being a big 12.3-inch digital instrument cluster. The two screens almost look at odds with one another, and what’s even more frustrating is that the driver information screen cannot be configured to include the energy flow screen that you see on the smaller tablet style unit. 

That means you can’t watch what’s happening between engine, electric motor and battery, or a combination where you might expect to see that - instead it can only be seen in illustrative form on the smaller central screen. Big issue? Maybe not, but if you’re an eco-conscious customer who wants to know what their car’s high-tech powertrain is doing, while also wanting to use sat nav, or Apple CarPlay or Android Auto, or change the radio station… Well, you’re out of luck.

There is a much more basic and rudimentary display on the driver info screen that shows a small icon of an engine and battery and illuminates them when each part is in use, but really, Ford should have used the real-estate of the big driver info screen better. Toyota, Kia and Hyundai know how to do it better.

The material quality is okay, but it certainly doesn’t feel like a very special environment.There are rubberised liners on the doors which don’t look terrific or feel fantastic, and why there are soft plastic elbow pads, and up high on the dashboard, it is not of the most pristine quality. 

Storage is pretty good. There are bottle holders in the doors and two cupholders in the centre console, and the storage nook in front of the shift dial houses a wireless phone charger and two USB ports, plus a 12-volt plug. There is a strange little shelf section in front of the centre console bin, which is not fantastic in terms of size. There are rear bottle holders in the doors, map pockets and a flip-down arm-rest with cup holders.

That rotary dial shifter which does take a little bit of getting used to. Unlike some others, there is no ‘P’ for park button - instead you have to dial it all the way left. 

The Kadjar is a big-small SUV, in that it’s longer than many in the same segment at 4.4m with a wheelbase of more than 2.6m, which means more space inside for people and their stuff.

That said, don’t expect limousine legroom, but at 191cm (6'3") tall, I can sit behind my driving position with my knees only just touching the front seat back, which is pretty darn good for a small SUV.

Making life a bit more comfortable back there, too, are directional air vents, two USB charging ports and a 12V power outlet. There are another two USB ports and a 12V up front, too.

Cabin storage is okay. The door pockets in the back are big enough for a 500ml bottle, while there are larger ones in the front, along with two cupholders and another circular hole, which looks like it’s for coins, if anybody still uses those?

The centre console bin is pretty decent in size and so too is the boot which has a cargo capacity of 408 litres with all seats up and 1478 litres with the second row folded flat.

The Intens is the highest grade of Kadjar you can buy and has a list price of $37,990. As a point of reference, the entry-grade Kadjar with an automatic transmission is $29,990. So, what are you getting for an extra $8K?

Well, the entry-level Kadjar comes with a 7.0-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, cloth seats, dual-zone climate control, privacy glass and 17-inch alloy wheels. The Intens gets 19-inch alloys, leather seats (heated up front), a seven-speaker Bose sound system, leather steering wheel, panoramic sunroof, as well as LED headlights and fog lights.

The Intens also comes standard with auto parking, and even the most determined DIY parkers will appreciate that in the city.

The Intens also has more advanced safety equipment than the entry-grade, although the same tech also comes on the mid-spec Zen for $32,990.

You may already know this, but the Kadjar and the Nissan Qashqai are essentially the same car. Renault and Nissan have an alliance which lets them share technology and as well as entire models.

So, you might want to compare the Kadjar Intens to a Qashqai Ti which lists for $38,790. Other models to check are the Mitsubishi ASX and Toyota C-HR.

The Escape PHEV is the only model in the range to get a 2.5-litre petrol engine, which runs on the more efficient Atkinson cycle, and has a continuously variable transmission feeding power to the front wheels - that’s right, this Escape is 2WD/FWD.

The tricky bit is that it also houses a clever electric motor and generator, which is teamed to a 14.4kWh battery pack - which is big for a plug-in hybrid car. 

The electric motor is capable of 96kW of power, while the petrol engine can produce up to 112kW. All told, the combined system output is pegged at 167kW, though there is no peak torque output figure. Even so, that amount of power is a sizeable number for any midsize SUV, even if this particular one weighs in at more than 1800kg.

Speaking of weight, the PHEV is the least capable towing vehicle in the Escape range. It has a maximum braked towing capacity of 1200kg, where all the others can tow up to 1800kg. Unbraked capacity is unchanged, at 750kg.

While the Renault Kadjar and Nissan Qashqai are essentially the same car, they don’t share the same powertrain. The Kadjar has a smaller but more powerful engine – a 1.3-litre turbo-petrol four-cylinder making 117kW/260Nm.

Shifting gears is a seven-speed dual-clutch auto. There’s no manual available, and all Kadjars are front-wheel drive.

Frankly, the Qashqai four cylinder with less grunt and CVT are a smoother combination. The dual-clutch auto and turbo lag means power delivery and acceleration are delayed, while low-speed gear shifts can be jerky.

Beware the PHEV fuel consumption figure. That’s a great thing to keep in mind if you’re shopping for one of these cars.

That’s because the combined cycle official figure only takes into account a mix of conditions across 100km of driving. That’s right - only the first 100km. So the best case scenario, for a car that is designed to use its battery to run emissions free until it runs out, before sparingly using the petrol engine to keep going.

As such, it is no surprise that the official combined cycle fuel consumption is just 1.5 litres per 100 kilometres, with CO2 emissions claimed at just 33g/km. That takes into account the WLTP battery range of 56 kilometres stated on Ford’s website.

For reference, I completed my test of the car with a total of 462.7 kilometres travelled, of which, the trip computer stated 292.3km was fully electric. Meaning the remaining 170.4km was driving using petrol.

The indicated energy efficiency was 20.0kWh/100km, which isn’t great against a claimed EV driving efficiency figure supplied by Ford, of 14.8kWh/100km to 15.6kWh/100km. 

While the indicated fuel consumption average was 3.1L/100km, so more than double the windscreen sticker’s indicated economy. 

However, when I did the maths, I used a real-world average of 3.9L/100km of petrol ($36.15 worth of petrol) and 43.2kWh of electricity (meaning a cost of $9.82 based on the NSW average energy price of $0.2274c/kWh).

So, to do 462.7km I paid $45.97. I think that’s okay, but bear in mind I included several longer trips (Sydney to Glenbrook, Glenbrook to the Southern Highlands and back, and Glenbrook to Sydney and back). 

As is always the case, if your intended operation for a PHEV is to use it primarily for urban running within its EV range capabilities, you will be better off than if you push it beyond and use the petrol engine excessively.

For reference, the fuel tank size is 45 litres, which is 12L less than the petrol-only versions. It can run on E10, but only if you can find E10 that is also 95RON premium unleaded.

If you wish, there’s also an app called Ford Pass Connect, which allows you to monitor your car’s state of charge, adjust its start and finish times for recharging and even works as a key for the car to allow remote access, too.

Worth noting the maximum charge rate on a 10-amp plug at home is 2.3kW, while on public charging (which typically runs a higher amperage rate) the max rate is 3.7kW.

Renault says after a combination of open and urban roads the Kadjar will have used 6.3L/100km. In my own testing I measured 6.5L/100km at the fuel pump. That’s outstanding.

Being the ST-Line grade, you - like it or not - have to deal with the lowered ride and sportier suspension, which makes this car ride a bit more firmly than you might want.

I found the suspension to be the biggest detracting element in terms of the drive experience – the suspension picked up a lot of the small inconsistencies in the road surface and transmitted them into the cabin. It was fidgety a lot of the time, and on road surfaces with very poor quality, it could be a bit uncomfortable.

The steering was also bit too tuned for sportiness for a car that doesn’t really need to be quite so aggressively angled that way. It took a bit of getting used to – it was somehow both twitchy on centre but not quite as responsive across the radius of lock to lock as I’d thought it might be, given the initial steering response.

Having said all that, I threw it through a couple of twisty corners and there was a nice handling balance from the chassis and decent grip from the tyres, but I did notice that - being front-wheel drive, with all that power going through the front tyres, there were some instances of it scrabbling for traction, notably on wet roads and looser surfaces but also out of offset driveways.

Other gripes included brake pedal response that was quite abrupt and very sensitive to stopping inputs.

Now, let’s consider the driving modes.

There are different drivetrain setups depending on what you plan to do. EV Auto does the thinking for you, dipping between EV, hybrid and petrol modes. EV Now prioritises electric driving. EV Later saves your battery charge for when you think you’ll need it. And EV Charge means you’ll use petrol power to drive, and also to replenish the battery pack.

The throttle response was decent in EV mode, and in hybrid mode it is nice and quiet, and it drives in a very smooth way unless you really plant your foot hard, then it can be a bit vocal - but less raucous than a RAV4 under full throttle. 

The transition between the different drive modes was relatively seamless, as it will readily go between petrol or electric as required, and the four-cylinder is mostly hushed enough so that you won’t hear it too much, especially if you’re driving at higher speeds when it does.

Indeed it was relatively quiet for the most part, though the tyre noise was quite excessive at higher speeds on very coarse-chip surfaces. And in those instances I noticed I could feel the road surface through the steering wheel and the suspension, as it was quite jittery at times.

There is a low speed warning sound that is omitted below about 25km/h and it was quite handy while driving in enclosed car parks - no more accusations of creeping around silently at the shops.

Further, there are multiple drive modes, including Normal, Eco, Sport, Slippery, and Snow/Sand Assist, all of which are designed to make different situations easier to deal with. They will adjust engine transmission and steering response as well as stability and traction control limitations. I kept it in Normal, though a dabble in Sport showed that you’re allowed a bit more aggression from the powertrain in terms of acceleration.

Renault’s Kadjar may be a better-looking version of Nissan’s Qashqai, but it doesn’t drive as well. This comes down to the engine and transmission Renault has gone with.

There’s turbo lag with that small four-cylinder and this delay is made more pronounced by a dual-clutch transmission that causes the vehicle to lurch during shifts.

This type of shemozzle is not uncommon, the Ford Puma and Nissan Juke behave in the same way with their similar powertrains.

There’s nothing wrong with them, it’s just that for a car that’s probably going to spend its life mainly in the city, the Kadjar won’t provide the smoothest driving experience.

The Qashqai has a CVT automatic and while these transmission aren’t as sporty feeling as a dual-clutch, they’re smooth and good for easy city driving.

The Kadjar does have a comfortable ride and good handling, so if you’re able to get used to the antics of the engine and transmission there’s more to like than not about the way this Renault drives.

The Kadjar hasn’t been given an ANCAP safety rating, but it did score the maximum five stars when tested by its European equivalent Euro NCAP in 2015.

But beware, the Kadjar isn’t equipped with much in the way of advanced safety equipment. Yes, there is AEB on all grades, while the mid-spec Zen and top-of-the-range Intens come with blind spot monitoring and lane departure warning. But that’s about it. No lane keeping assist, or rear cross traffic alert, or adaptive cruise.

There are front and rear parking sensors, which are almost vital in the city, and a reversing camera.

It’s for this reason the score here is so low – charging $38K and not having anywhere near the level of safety tech on a new car that costs much less is disappointing.

For child seats there are three top tether anchor points across the second row and two ISOFIX points.

Under the boot floor is a space saver spare wheel.

As with the rest of the Ford range, you get a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty on the car, while the battery pack has its own eight-year/160,000km warranty plan.

And just like most other models in Ford’s range, there is a lifetime capped-price servicing plan, with the first four maintenance visits (due every 12 months/15,000km, whichever occurs first) incurring a $299 fee, which is cheap for the class.

You also get up to seven years of roadside assist if you service your car with Ford’s dealers.

The Kadjar is covered by Renault’s five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 30,000km and capped at $399 for the first three services, followed by $789 for the fourth then back to $399.

There’s also up to five years roadside assistance, if you service your Kadjar with Renault.