Renault Megane 2001 vs Ford Puma 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.7 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 147 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 188 NM | 157 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.7 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 22 HP more power than Ford Puma, whereas torque is 31 NM more than Ford Puma. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 7.4 | |
| Renault Megane consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 15 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 540 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 650 km on highway | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 30 years | 4 years | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
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: | 11.3 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 1.3 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`555 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Ford Puma has
| |