AUDI Q2 · Facelift 2020
Car comparison
AUDI Q2 · Facelift 2020 35 TFSIvsFord Puma 1.0 EcoBoost
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonFord Puma
1.0 EcoBoost
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost
- Most powerful155 hp116 kW
- Lightest1,205 kg2,657 lb
- Best power-to-weight129 hp/t96 kW/t7.8 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK
- Lowest city consumption5.1 L/100 km46.1 mpg US55.4 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption4.1 L/100 km57.4 mpg US68.9 mpg UK
- Best estimated range933 km580 mi
- Largest trunk468 L
- Best economy score95/100
- Best practicality score82/100
AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.6 s
- Fastest top speed218 km/h135 mph
- Highest torque250 Nm184 lb-ft
- Best overall score55/100
- Best performance score43/100
Specification comparison
| Model | AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 150hp112kW | 155hp116kW |
| Torque | 250Nm184lb-ft | 240Nm177lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,290kg2,844lb | 1,205kg2,657lb |
| Gross weight | 1,855kg4,090lb | 1,765kg3,891lb |
| Top speed | 218 km/h 135 mph | Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 85.0s99% target: 216 km/h / 134 mph Calculated | 82.4s99% target: 208 km/h / 129 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.6s | 9.0s |
| 0-200 km/h | 42.4s Calculated | 51.7s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 8.1s Calculated | 8.5s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 5.4L/100 km43.6mpg US52.3mpg UK | 4.5L/100 km52.3mpg US62.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 6.3L/100 km37.3mpg US44.8mpg UK | 5.1L/100 km46.1mpg US55.4mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 4.9L/100 km48mpg US57.6mpg UK | 4.1L/100 km57.4mpg US68.9mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.2s Calculated | 16.5s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 116hp/t87kW/t53hp/1000 lb Calculated | 129hp/t96kW/t58hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 194Nm/t130lb-ft/ton Calculated | 199Nm/t133lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | 926km575mi Calculated | 933km580mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,498cc91cu in | - |
| Length | 4,208mm166in | 4,207mm166in |
| Width | 1,794mm71in | 1,805mm71in |
| Height | 1,508mm59in | 1,538mm61in |
| Wheelbase | 2,601mm102in | 2,588mm102in |
| Front track | 1,546mm61in | - |
| Rear track | 1,542mm61in | - |
| Trunk volume | 405L | 468L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,050L | 1,161L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 50L | 42L |
| CO2 emissions | - | 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 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI: Power / Torque
- Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 5,000-6,000 rpm | 1,500-3,500 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
| FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost | 6,000 rpm | 1,750 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 8.1 s | 8.5 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.6 s | 9.0 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 42.4 s | 51.7 s |
| Top speed | 218 km/h 135 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 | 10.7 s | 10.9 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.7 s | 14.0 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.2 s | 16.5 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 144 km/h 89 mph | 141 km/h 87 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 150 hp 112 kW |
| FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost | 155 hp 116 kW |
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost has 5 hp more than AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI.
The biggest power difference is between AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 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
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 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
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 1,290 kg 2,844 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
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 218 km/h 135 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
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 8.6 s |
| FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost | 9.0 s |
Although Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost has more power, AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI is quicker from 0-100 km/h.
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI and Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: 0.4 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 5.4 L/100 km 43.6 mpg US 52.3 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 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI: 0.9 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 116 hp/t 87 kW/t 8.6 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
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 926 km 575 mi |
| FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost | 933 km 580 mi |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 150 hp 112 kW | 8.6 s | 218 km/h 135 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.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Performance vs fuel economy
Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Fuel economy score | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI |
| 5.4 L/100 km 43.6 mpg US 52.3 mpg UK | ||||||
| FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost |
| 4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK | ||||||
AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 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.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 5.4 L/100 km 43.6 mpg US 52.3 mpg UK | 8.6 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.
| Vehicle | Power-to-weight, hp/t | Fuel consumption, L/100 km |
|---|---|---|
| AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | 116 hp/t 87 kW/t 8.6 kg/hp | 5.4 L/100 km 43.6 mpg US 52.3 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
| Vehicle | AUDIQ2Facelift 202035 TFSI | FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 150 hp 112 kW | 155 hp 116 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 250 Nm 184 lb-ft | 240 Nm 177 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.6 s | 9.0 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 218 km/h 135 mph | Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,290 kg 2,844 lb | 1,205 kg 2,657 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 5.4 L/100 km 43.6 mpg US 52.3 mpg UK | 4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | 926 km 575 mi | 933 km 580 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| CO2 score | - | 101 g/km | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 405 L 14.3 cu ft | 468 L 16.5 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 116 hp/t 87 kW/t 8.6 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
| Vehicle | AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI | Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 5.4 L/100 km43.6 mpg US52.3 mpg UK | 4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 9.45 LC100 km | 7.88 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 15.21 LC100 mi | 12.67 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 810 L214 US gal178 UK gal | 675 L178 US gal148 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,418 LC/year | 1,181 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
AUDI Q2 Facelift 2020 35 TFSI
- Has 10 Nm more
- Is 0.4 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 8 km/h (5 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
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost
- Has 5 hp more
- Is 85 kg lighter
- Uses 0.9 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 12 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 7 km (5 mi) more estimated range
- Has 63 L more trunk volume
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
Popular comparisons























