Ford Puma 1997 vs Renault Megane 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.7 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 125 HP | 138 HP | |
| Torque: | 157 NM | 191 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.2 seconds | 8.6 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is a more dynamic driving. Ford Puma engine produces 13 HP less power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 34 NM less than Renault Megane. Due to the lower power, Ford Puma reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 7.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 8.1 l/100km | |
|
By specification Ford Puma consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that by driving the Ford Puma over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Puma consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 40 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 540 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 650 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 510 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane 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 | 370'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Espace | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Renault Megane 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. | |||
| Renault Megane 2001 2.0 engine: The F4R 2.0 engine is a relatively simple and reliable unit, capable of lasting up to 400,000 km with proper maintenance. Its design is straightforward, and service is generally accessible. However, several recurring issues ... More about Renault Megane 2001 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.98 m | 3.97 m | |
| Width: | 1.67 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.34 m | 1.37 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Ford Puma is 1 cm longer than the Renault Megane, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Ford Puma is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Puma is 0.5 metres less than that of the Renault Megane, which means Ford Puma can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
|
Renault Megane has
| |