Ford Puma 1998 vs Seat Arona 2017
| Body: | Coupe | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.5 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 122 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 8 seconds | |
|
Seat Arona is a more dynamic driving. Ford Puma engine produces 60 HP less power than Seat Arona, whereas torque is 128 NM less than Seat Arona. Due to the lower power, Ford Puma reaches 100 km/h speed 3.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 5.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Seat Arona is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Puma consumes 2.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Arona, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Puma could require 315 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Puma consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Seat Arona. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 670 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Seat Arona gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.98 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Ford Puma is smaller. Ford Puma is 16 cm shorter than the Seat Arona, 11 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Puma is 20 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 400 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1280 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Puma is 1 metres less than that of the Seat Arona, which means Ford Puma can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`750 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 16 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Puma has
|
Seat Arona has
| |