Ford Puma 1997 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: | 1.7 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 NM | 155 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 10.7 seconds | |
|
Ford Puma is more dynamic to drive. Ford Puma engine produces 15 HP more power than Seat Arona, whereas torque is 2 NM more than Seat Arona. Thanks to more power Ford Puma reaches 100 km/h speed 1.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | no data | |
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 40 litres | |
| 510 km with real consumption | 670 km with real consumption | ||
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`680 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 16 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Puma has
|
| |