Ford Puma 1998 vs Mazda MX-3 1991
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 122 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-3 is a more dynamic driving. Ford Puma and Mazda MX-3 have the same engine power, but Ford Puma torque is 13 NM less than Mazda MX-3. Ford Puma reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
The Ford Puma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Puma consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-3, which means that by driving the Ford Puma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Puma consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 550 km in combined cycle | 670 km in combined cycle | |
| 670 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
| 560 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda MX-3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.98 m | 4.22 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.31 m | |
|
Ford Puma is smaller, but slightly higher. Ford Puma is 24 cm shorter than the Mazda MX-3, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Puma is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 289 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Puma is 0.2 metres more than that of the Mazda MX-3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`475 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Puma has
|
Mazda MX-3 has
| |