Ford Puma 1997 vs Renault Megane 1999
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ford Puma is available only with manual gearbox, whereas Renault Megane has both automatic and manual transmission options. | |||
| Engines: | 1.4 - 1.7 (petrol) | 1.4 - 2.0 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 - 125 HP | 95 - 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 122 - 157 NM | 127 - 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 - 11.9 seconds | 8.6 - 11.9 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 - 7.4 | 5.2 - 7.6 | |
|
Ford Puma petrol engines consumes on average 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than Renault Megane. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.98 m | 3.97 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.37 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Puma is 1 cm longer than the Renault Megane, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Puma is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 288 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Puma is 1.3 metres less than that of the Renault Megane, which means Ford Puma can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | ~ 1`543 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Puma has
|
Renault Megane has
| |