Renault Megane 2000 vs Ford Puma 2000
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 107 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 4 HP more power than Ford Puma, whereas torque is 3 NM more than Ford Puma. Despite the higher power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 7.3 | |
| Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 45 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 540 km in combined cycle | |
| 1090 km on highway | 660 km on highway | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 3.98 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.34 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 1 cm shorter than the Ford Puma, 3 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 288 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.5 metres more than that of the Ford Puma, which means Renault Megane can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`540 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Ford Puma has
| |