Ford Puma 1997 vs Mazda MX-3 1994
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.7 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 NM | 137 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Ford Puma is more dynamic to drive. Ford Puma engine produces 15 HP more power than Mazda MX-3, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Mazda MX-3. Thanks to more power Ford Puma reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 6.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford Puma consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Puma could require 75 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Ford Puma consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda MX-3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 540 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km on highway | 830 km on highway | ||
| 510 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda MX-3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda MX-3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 3, Mazda Xedos 6 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda MX-3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda MX-3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
| Mazda MX-3 1994 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ... More about Mazda MX-3 1994 1.6 engine | |||
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 | 135 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`430 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Puma has
|
Mazda MX-3 has
| |