Seat Cordoba 1999 vs Ford Puma 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.7 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 125 HP | |
| Torque: | 235 NM | 157 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.2 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
Ford Puma is a more dynamic driving. Seat Cordoba engine produces 15 HP less power than Ford Puma, but torque is 78 NM more than Ford Puma. Due to the lower power, Seat Cordoba reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.8 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.7 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Seat Cordoba is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Seat Cordoba consumes 2.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma, which means that by driving the Seat Cordoba over 15,000 km in a year you can save 390 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Seat Cordoba consumes 2.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Ford Puma. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 40 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 540 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 650 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 510 km with real consumption | ||
| Seat Cordoba gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
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
| |