Honda Civic 1996 vs Ford Puma 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.7 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 140 NM | 157 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Ford Puma is a more dynamic driving. Honda Civic engine produces 20 HP less power than Ford Puma, whereas torque is 17 NM less than Ford Puma. Due to the lower power, Honda Civic reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.5 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Honda Civic is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Honda Civic consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma, which means that by driving the Honda Civic over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Honda Civic consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 540 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 km on highway | 650 km on highway | ||
| 600 km with real consumption | 510 km with real consumption | ||
| Honda Civic gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.46 m | 3.98 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.34 m | |
|
Honda Civic is larger. Honda Civic is 48 cm longer than the Ford Puma, 3 cm wider, while the height of Honda Civic is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 405 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`550 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Honda Civic has
|
Ford Puma has
| |