Ford Puma 1997 vs Mitsubishi Eclipse 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.7 Petrol | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 147 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 NM | 214 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | n/a seconds | |
| Ford Puma engine produces 22 HP less power than Mitsubishi Eclipse, whereas torque is 57 NM less than Mitsubishi Eclipse. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 8.9 | |
|
The Ford Puma is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Ford Puma consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Eclipse, which means that by driving the Ford Puma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 225 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 540 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km on highway | 810 km on highway | ||
| Mitsubishi Eclipse gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 460'000 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 Mitsubishi Eclipse engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 41 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Space Wagon, Mitsubishi Galant, Mitsubishi Space Runner | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mitsubishi Eclipse might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mitsubishi Eclipse 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.98 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.31 m | |
|
Ford Puma is smaller, but slightly higher. Ford Puma is 48 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Eclipse, 8 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Puma is 3 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 480 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`918 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 3400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Puma has
|
Mitsubishi Eclipse has
| |