Car comparison

AUDI Q2 35 TFSIvsFord Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

AUDI Q2

35 TFSI

150 hp1498 ccGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedSUV2018-2020
VS

Ford Puma

1.0 EcoBoost

155 hpGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedSUV2019-2020

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

  • Most powerful
    155 hp
    116 kW
  • Lightest
    1,205 kg
    2,657 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    129 hp/t
    96 kW/t
    7.8 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    4.5 L/100 km
    52.3 mpg US
    62.8 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    5.1 L/100 km
    46.1 mpg US
    55.4 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    4.1 L/100 km
    57.4 mpg US
    68.9 mpg UK
  • Lowest CO2 emissions
    101 g/km
  • Best estimated range
    933 km
    580 mi
  • Largest trunk
    468 L
  • Best economy score
    95/100
  • Best practicality score
    82/100

AUDI Q2 35 TFSI

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    8.5 s
  • Fastest top speed
    212 km/h
    132 mph
  • Highest torque
    250 Nm
    184 lb-ft
  • Best overall score
    55/100
  • Best performance score
    43/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelAUDIQ235 TFSIFordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
150hp112kW
155hp116kW
Torque
250Nm184lb-ft
240Nm177lb-ft
Curb weight
1,265kg2,789lb
1,205kg2,657lb
Gross weight
1,860kg4,101lb
1,765kg3,891lb
Top speed
212 km/h
132 mph
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Calculated
To 99% top speed
80.1s99% target: 210 km/h / 130 mph
Calculated
82.3s99% target: 208 km/h / 129 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
8.5s
9.0s
0-200 km/h
46.9s
Calculated
51.6s
Calculated
0-60 mph
8.0s
Calculated
8.5s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
5.9L/100 km39.9mpg US47.9mpg UK
4.5L/100 km52.3mpg US62.8mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
7.3L/100 km32.2mpg US38.7mpg UK
5.1L/100 km46.1mpg US55.4mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
5L/100 km47mpg US56.5mpg UK
4.1L/100 km57.4mpg US68.9mpg UK
Quarter mile
16.2s
Calculated
16.5s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
119hp/t88kW/t54hp/1000 lb
Calculated
129hp/t96kW/t58hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
198Nm/t132lb-ft/ton
Calculated
199Nm/t133lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
847km527mi
Calculated
933km580mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,498cc91cu in
-
Length
4,191mm165in
4,207mm166in
Width
1,794mm71in
1,805mm71in
Height
1,508mm59in
1,538mm61in
Wheelbase
2,601mm102in
2,588mm102in
Front track
1,547mm61in
-
Rear track
1,541mm61in
-
Trunk volume
405L
468L
Max trunk volume
1,050L
1,161L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank
50L
42L
CO2 emissions
133g/km
101g/km

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

AUDI Q2 35 TFSIFord Puma 1.0 EcoBoostPowerTorque
  • AUDI Q2 35 TFSI: Power / Torque
  • Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
AUDIQ235 TFSI5,000-6,000 rpm1,500-3,500 rpm6,250 rpm
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost6,000 rpm1,750 rpm6,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricAUDIQ235 TFSIFordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
8.0 s
8.5 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
8.5 s
9.0 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
46.9 s
51.6 s
Top speed
212 km/h
132 mph
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Likely limited
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.7 s
2.8 s
330 ft
101 m
7.1 s
7.3 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.6 s
10.9 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.6 s
14.0 s
1/4 mile
402 m
16.2 s
16.5 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
143 km/h
89 mph
141 km/h
87 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI
150 hp
112 kW
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
155 hp
116 kW

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost has 5 hp more than AUDI Q2 35 TFSI.

The biggest power difference is between AUDI Q2 35 TFSI and Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: 5 hp (4 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI
250 Nm
184 lb-ft
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
240 Nm
177 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI
1,265 kg
2,789 lb
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
1,205 kg
2,657 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI
212 km/h
132 mph
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI8.5 s
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost9.0 s

Although Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost has more power, AUDI Q2 35 TFSI is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between AUDI Q2 35 TFSI and Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: 0.5 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost and AUDI Q2 35 TFSI: 1.4 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI
119 hp/t
88 kW/t
8.4 kg/hp
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
129 hp/t
96 kW/t
7.8 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
AUDIQ235 TFSI
847 km
527 mi
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
933 km
580 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
AUDIQ235 TFSI
150 hp
112 kW
8.5 s
212 km/h
132 mph
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
155 hp
116 kW
9.0 s
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
AUDIQ235 TFSI
Power
150 hp
112 kW
0-100 km/h8.5 s
Top speed
212 km/h
132 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
405 L
14.3 cu ft
Length
4,191 mm
165.0 in
Height
1,508 mm
59.4 in
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
155 hp
116 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
468 L
16.5 cu ft
Length
4,207 mm
165.6 in
Height
1,538 mm
60.6 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
AUDIQ235 TFSI
Power
150 hp
112 kW
0-100 km/h8.5 s
Top speed
212 km/h
132 mph
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
155 hp
116 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK

AUDI Q2 35 TFSI is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
AUDIQ235 TFSI
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK
8.5 s
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
9.0 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
AUDIQ235 TFSI
119 hp/t
88 kW/t
8.4 kg/hp
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
129 hp/t
96 kW/t
7.8 kg/hp
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleAUDIQ235 TFSIFordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
150 hp
112 kW
155 hp
116 kW
Torque
250 Nm
184 lb-ft
240 Nm
177 lb-ft
Acceleration
8.5 s
9.0 s
Top speed
212 km/h
132 mph
Unrestricted
210 km/h130 mph
Restricted
200 km/h124 mph
Lightness
1,265 kg
2,789 lb
1,205 kg
2,657 lb
Fuel consumption
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
405 L
14.3 cu ft
Length
4,191 mm
165.0 in
Height
1,508 mm
59.4 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
468 L
16.5 cu ft
Length
4,207 mm
165.6 in
Height
1,538 mm
60.6 in
Range score
847 km
527 mi
933 km
580 mi
CO2 score
133 g/km
101 g/km
Trunk score
405 L
14.3 cu ft
468 L
16.5 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
119 hp/t
88 kW/t
8.4 kg/hp
129 hp/t
96 kW/t
7.8 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleAUDI Q2 35 TFSIFord Puma 1.0 EcoBoost
Consumption5.9 L/100 km39.9 mpg US47.9 mpg UK4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km10.33 LC100 km7.88 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi16.62 LC100 mi12.67 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used885 L234 US gal195 UK gal675 L178 US gal148 UK gal
Annual fuel cost1,549 LC/year1,181 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

AUDI Q2 35 TFSI

  • Has 10 Nm more
  • Is 0.5 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 2 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Highest torque

Cons

  • Lowest power
  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest
  • Smallest trunk
  • Highest CO2 emissions

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

  • Has 5 hp more
  • Is 60 kg lighter
  • Uses 1.4 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 10 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 86 km (53 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 63 L more trunk volume
  • Emits 32 g/km less CO2

Pros

  • Most powerful
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
AUDI Q2 35 TFSI
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

35 TFSI
35 TFSI
VS
AUDIQ235 TFSIvsAUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI
1.0 EcoBoost
1.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsFordPumaFacelift 20241.0 EcoBoost
35 TFSI
35 TFSI
VS
AUDIQ235 TFSIvsAUDIQ2L35 TFSI
1.0 EcoBoost
1.5 TSI
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenT-Cross1.5 TSI
35 TFSI
35 TFSI
VS
AUDIQ235 TFSIvsAUDIQ2LFacelift 202135 TFSI
35 TFSI
1.4 TFSI
VS
AUDIQ235 TFSIvsAUDIQ3 I (8U)Facelift 20141.4 TFSI
1.0 EcoBoost
2.0 e-Skyactiv G
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsMazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G
35 TFSI
40 TDI
VS
AUDIQ235 TFSIvsAUDIQ3 II (F3)40 TDI
1.0 EcoBoost
Cooper D 2.0
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsMiniCountryman (F60)Cooper D 2.0
35 TFSI
40 TDI
VS
AUDIQ235 TFSIvsAUDIQ5 II (FY)40 TDI
1.0 EcoBoost
1.2 PureTech
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsPeugeot2008 II1.2 PureTech
35 TFSI
35 TDI
VS
AUDIQ235 TFSIvsAUDIQ5 II (FY)Facelift 202035 TDI
AUDI Q2 35 TFSI vs Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost - car comparison - FastVsFaster