Seat Cordoba 1999 vs Ford Puma 1997
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.6 - 1.9 (petrol, diesel) | 1.4 - 1.7 (petrol) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 - 156 HP | 90 - 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 - 235 NM | 122 - 157 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.9 - 11 seconds | 9.2 - 11.9 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 - 7.8 | 7.2 - 7.4 | |
|
Seat Cordoba petrol engines consumes on average 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than Ford Puma. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.16 m | 3.98 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.67 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.34 m | |
| Seat Cordoba is 18 cm longer than the Ford Puma, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Seat Cordoba is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Cordoba is 0.9 metres more than that of the Ford Puma, which means Seat Cordoba can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`000 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Cordoba has
|
Ford Puma has
| |