Seat Cordoba 1999 vs Ford Puma 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Ford Puma is a more dynamic driving. Seat Cordoba engine produces 3 HP less power than Ford Puma, the torque is the same for both cars. Due to the lower power, Seat Cordoba reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 7.3 | |
|
The Ford Puma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Seat Cordoba consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Seat Cordoba could require 75 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 570 km in combined cycle | 540 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km on highway | 660 km on highway | ||
| Seat Cordoba gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.16 m | 3.98 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.34 m | |
| Seat Cordoba is 18 cm longer than the Ford Puma, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Seat Cordoba is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Cordoba is 0.9 metres more than that of the Ford Puma, which means Seat Cordoba can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`000 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Cordoba has
|
Ford Puma has
| |