Car comparison

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoostvsMitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo

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

New comparison

Ford Puma

1.0 EcoBoost

155 hp999 ccGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedSUV2020-2024
VS

Mitsubishi ASX II

1.3 Turbo

158 hp1333 ccGasolineFWDDual-clutchTurbochargedSUV2023-2024

Comparison overview

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

Best choices

Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h
    8.5 s
  • Most powerful
    158 hp
    118 kW
  • Highest torque
    270 Nm
    199 lb-ft
  • Largest trunk
    536 L
  • Best overall score
    56/100
  • Best performance score
    43/100
  • Best practicality score
    85/100

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

  • Fastest top speed
    205 km/h
    127 mph
  • Lightest
    1,280 kg
    2,822 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    121 hp/t
    90 kW/t
    8.3 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    4.5 L/100 km
    52.3 mpg US
    62.8 mpg UK
  • Best economy score
    95/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelFordPuma1.0 EcoBoostMitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
Power
155hp116kW
158hp118kW
Torque
240Nm177lb-ft
270Nm199lb-ft
Curb weight
1,280kg2,822lb
1,345kg2,965lb
Gross weight
1,765kg3,891lb
1,834kg4,043lb
Top speed
205 km/h
127 mph
204 km/h
127 mph
To 99% top speed
86.6s99% target: 203 km/h / 126 mph
Calculated
76.7s99% target: 202 km/h / 125 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
9.0s
8.5s
0-200 km/h
67.3s
Calculated
64.0s
Calculated
0-60 mph
8.5s
Calculated
8.0s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
4.5L/100 km52.3mpg US62.8mpg UK
5.9L/100 km39.9mpg US47.9mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
5.3L/100 km44.4mpg US53.3mpg UK
-
Fuel consumption highway
4L/100 km58.8mpg US70.6mpg UK
-
Quarter mile
16.5s
Calculated
16.2s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
121hp/t90kW/t55hp/1000 lb
Calculated
117hp/t88kW/t53hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
188Nm/t125lb-ft/ton
Calculated
201Nm/t134lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range-
814km506mi
Calculated
Displacement
999cc61cu in
1,333cc81cu in
Length
4,207mm166in
4,227mm166in
Width-
1,797mm71in
Height
1,536mm60in
1,585mm62in
Wheelbase
2,588mm102in
2,639mm104in
Front track-
1,560mm61in
Rear track-
1,547mm61in
Ground clearance
166mm7in
174mm7in
Trunk volume
456L
536L
Max trunk volume
1,216L
1,275L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank-
48L

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.

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoostMitsubishi ASX II 1.3 TurboPowerTorque
  • Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
  • Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost6,000 rpm2,500 rpm6,250 rpm
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo5,500 rpm1,800-3,750 rpm5,750 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricFordPuma1.0 EcoBoostMitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
8.5 s
8.0 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
9.0 s
8.5 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
67.3 s
64.0 s
Top speed
205 km/h
127 mph
204 km/h
127 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.7 s
2.7 s
330 ft
101 m
7.1 s
7.0 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.8 s
10.6 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.9 s
13.6 s
1/4 mile
402 m
16.5 s
16.2 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
138 km/h
86 mph
142 km/h
88 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
155 hp
116 kW
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
158 hp
118 kW

Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo has 3 hp more than Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost.

The biggest power difference is between Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost and Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo: 3 hp (2 kW).

Torque comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
240 Nm
177 lb-ft
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
270 Nm
199 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
1,280 kg
2,822 lb
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
1,345 kg
2,965 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
205 km/h
127 mph
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
204 km/h
127 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost9.0 s
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo8.5 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo 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
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost and Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo: 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
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
121 hp/t
90 kW/t
8.3 kg/hp
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
117 hp/t
88 kW/t
8.5 kg/hp

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
155 hp
116 kW
9.0 s
205 km/h
127 mph
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
158 hp
118 kW
8.5 s
204 km/h
127 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
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
155 hp
116 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
205 km/h
127 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
456 L
16.1 cu ft
Length
4,207 mm
165.6 in
Height
1,536 mm
60.5 in
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
Power
158 hp
118 kW
0-100 km/h8.5 s
Top speed
204 km/h
127 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
536 L
18.9 cu ft
Length
4,227 mm
166.4 in
Height
1,585 mm
62.4 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
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
Power
155 hp
116 kW
0-100 km/h9.0 s
Top speed
205 km/h
127 mph
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
Power
158 hp
118 kW
0-100 km/h8.5 s
Top speed
204 km/h
127 mph
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK

Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo 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
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
9.0 s
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK
8.5 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
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost
121 hp/t
90 kW/t
8.3 kg/hp
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
MitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
117 hp/t
88 kW/t
8.5 kg/hp
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleFordPuma1.0 EcoBoostMitsubishiASX II1.3 Turbo
Power
155 hp
116 kW
158 hp
118 kW
Torque
240 Nm
177 lb-ft
270 Nm
199 lb-ft
Acceleration
9.0 s
8.5 s
Top speed
205 km/h
127 mph
204 km/h
127 mph
Lightness
1,280 kg
2,822 lb
1,345 kg
2,965 lb
Fuel consumption
4.5 L/100 km
52.3 mpg US
62.8 mpg UK
5.9 L/100 km
39.9 mpg US
47.9 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
456 L
16.1 cu ft
Length
4,207 mm
165.6 in
Height
1,536 mm
60.5 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
536 L
18.9 cu ft
Length
4,227 mm
166.4 in
Height
1,585 mm
62.4 in
Range score
-
814 km
506 mi
Trunk score
456 L
16.1 cu ft
536 L
18.9 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
121 hp/t
90 kW/t
8.3 kg/hp
117 hp/t
88 kW/t
8.5 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
VehicleFord Puma 1.0 EcoBoostMitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo
Consumption4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK5.9 L/100 km39.9 mpg US47.9 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km7.88 LC100 km10.33 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi12.67 LC100 mi16.62 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used675 L178 US gal148 UK gal885 L234 US gal195 UK gal
Annual fuel cost1,181 LC/year1,549 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

  • Is 65 kg lighter
  • Has 1 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 1.4 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 4 hp/t better power-to-weight

Pros

  • Highest top speed
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest power
  • Smallest trunk

Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo

  • Has 3 hp more
  • Has 30 Nm more
  • Is 0.5 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 80 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Most powerful
  • Highest torque
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest
  • Lowest top speed

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost
Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

1.0 EcoBoost
1.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsFordPumaFacelift 20241.0 EcoBoost
1.3 Turbo
1.5 TSI
VS
MitsubishiASX II1.3 TurbovsVolkswagenT-Roc IFacelift 20221.5 TSI
1.0 EcoBoost
1.5 TSI
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsCupraFormentor1.5 TSI
1.3 Turbo
1.5 VGT
VS
MitsubishiASX II1.3 TurbovsAlfa RomeoTonale1.5 VGT
1.0 EcoBoost
1.3 DIG-T
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsNissanQashqai III (J12)1.3 DIG-T
1.0 EcoBoost
35 TDI
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsAUDIQ5 II (FY)Facelift 202035 TDI
1.3 Turbo
1.5 TSI
VS
MitsubishiASX II1.3 TurbovsVolkswagenT-CrossFacelift 20231.5 TSI
1.0 EcoBoost
GLA 200d
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsMercedes-BenzGLA (H247)GLA 200d
1.3 Turbo
35 TFSI
VS
MitsubishiASX II1.3 TurbovsAUDIQ2LFacelift 202135 TFSI
1.0 EcoBoost
Cooper D 2.0
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsMiniCountryman (F60)Facelift 2020Cooper D 2.0
1.3 Turbo
C 1.5
VS
MitsubishiASX II1.3 TurbovsMiniCountryman (U25)C 1.5
1.0 EcoBoost
1.5 TSI
VS
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoostvsVolkswagenT-Cross1.5 TSI
Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost vs Mitsubishi ASX II 1.3 Turbo - car comparison - FastVsFaster