Car comparison

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoostvsMazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G

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

New comparison

Ford Puma

1.0 EcoBoost

155 hpGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedSUV2019-2020

Mazda CX-30

2.0 e-Skyactiv G

150 hp1998 ccGasolineFWDManualNaturally aspiratedSUV2020-present

Comparison overview

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

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost

Fastest top speed
210 km/h
130 mph Unrestricted
200 km/h
124 mph Restricted
Most powerful
155 hp
116 kW
Highest torque
240 Nm
177 lb-ft
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
Largest trunk
468 L
Best overall score
55/100
Best performance score
42/100
Best economy score
95/100
Best practicality score
82/100

Mazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G

Quickest 0-100 km/h
8.8 s
Best estimated range
981 km
609 mi

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
Model	FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G
Power	155hp116kW	150hp112kW
Torque	240Nm177lb-ft	213Nm157lb-ft
Curb weight	1,205kg2,657lb	1,407kg3,102lb
Gross weight	1,765kg3,891lb	1,927kg4,248lb
Top speed	Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph Calculated	198 km/h 123 mph
To 99% top speed	82.3s99% target: 208 km/h / 129 mph Calculated	77.0s99% target: 196 km/h / 122 mph Calculated
0-100 km/h	9.0s	8.8s
0-200 km/h	51.6s Calculated	-
0-60 mph	8.5s Calculated	8.3s Calculated
Fuel consumption	4.5L/100 km52.3mpg US62.8mpg UK	5.2L/100 km45.2mpg US54.3mpg UK
Fuel consumption city	5.1L/100 km46.1mpg US55.4mpg UK	6.3L/100 km37.3mpg US44.8mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway	4.1L/100 km57.4mpg US68.9mpg UK	4.6L/100 km51.1mpg US61.4mpg UK
Quarter mile	16.5s Calculated	16.4s Calculated
Power-to-weight	129hp/t96kW/t58hp/1000 lb Calculated	107hp/t79kW/t48hp/1000 lb Calculated
Torque-to-weight	199Nm/t133lb-ft/ton Calculated	151Nm/t101lb-ft/ton Calculated
Estimated range	933km580mi Calculated	981km609mi Calculated
Displacement	-	1,998cc122cu in
Length	4,207mm166in	4,395mm173in
Width	1,805mm71in	1,795mm71in
Height	1,538mm61in	1,540mm61in
Wheelbase	2,588mm102in	2,655mm105in
Ground clearance	-	175mm7in
Trunk volume	468L	430L
Max trunk volume	1,161L	1,406L
Doors	5	5
Seats	5	5
Fuel tank	42L	51L
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.

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoostMazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv GPowerTorque

Dyno simulation data table
Vehicle	Peak power RPM	Peak torque RPM	Max engine speed
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	6,000 rpm	1,750 rpm	6,250 rpm
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	6,000 rpm	4,000 rpm	6,250 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
Metric	FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G
	Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h	8.5 s	8.3 s
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph	9.0 s	8.8 s
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph	51.6 s	-
Top speed	Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph Likely limited	198 km/h 123 mph
	Drag race simulation
60 ft 18 m	2.8 s	2.7 s
330 ft 101 m	7.3 s	7.1 s
1/8 mile 201 m	10.9 s	10.7 s
1000 ft 305 m	14.0 s	13.8 s
1/4 mile 402 m	16.5 s	16.4 s
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m	141 km/h 87 mph	139 km/h 86 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	155 hp 116 kW
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	150 hp 112 kW

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost has 5 hp more than Mazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G.

The biggest power difference is between Mazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G 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
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	240 Nm 177 lb-ft
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	213 Nm 157 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	1,205 kg 2,657 lb
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	1,407 kg 3,102 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	198 km/h 123 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	9.0 s
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	8.8 s

Although Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost has more power, Mazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Mazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G and Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost: 0.2 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK

The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost and Mazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G: 0.7 L/100 km.

Power-to-weight comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	129 hp/t 96 kW/t 7.8 kg/hp
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	107 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

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

Chart data table
Vehicle	Value
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	933 km 580 mi
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	981 km 609 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
Vehicle	Power	Acceleration	Top speed
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	155 hp 116 kW	9.0 s	Unrestricted 210 km/h130 mph Restricted 200 km/h124 mph
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	150 hp 112 kW	8.8 s	198 km/h 123 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

FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost

Power	155 hp 116 kW
0-100 km/h	9.0 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

MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G

Power	150 hp 112 kW
0-100 km/h	8.8 s
Top speed 198 km/h 123 mph

Doors/seats	5 doors 5 seats
Trunk	430 L 15.2 cu ft
Length	4,395 mm 173.0 in
Height	1,540 mm 60.6 in

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

FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost

Power	155 hp 116 kW
0-100 km/h	9.0 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

MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G

Power	150 hp 112 kW
0-100 km/h	8.8 s
Top speed 198 km/h 123 mph

5.2 L/100 km

45.2 mpg US

54.3 mpg UK

Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost 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
Vehicle	Fuel consumption, L/100 km	0-100 km/h, s
FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost	4.5 L/100 km 52.3 mpg US 62.8 mpg UK	9.0 s
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK	8.8 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
Vehicle	Power-to-weight, hp/t	Fuel consumption, L/100 km
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
MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G	107 hp/t 79 kW/t 9.4 kg/hp	5.2 L/100 km 45.2 mpg US 54.3 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Vehicle

FordPuma1.0 EcoBoost

MazdaCX-302.0 e-Skyactiv G

Power

155 hp

116 kW

150 hp

112 kW

Torque

240 Nm

177 lb-ft

213 Nm

157 lb-ft

Acceleration

9.0 s

8.8 s

Top speed

Unrestricted

210 km/h130 mph

Restricted

200 km/h124 mph

198 km/h

123 mph

Lightness

1,205 kg

2,657 lb

1,407 kg

3,102 lb

Fuel consumption

4.5 L/100 km

52.3 mpg US

62.8 mpg UK

5.2 L/100 km

45.2 mpg US

54.3 mpg UK

Practicality

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

Doors/seats	5 doors 5 seats
Trunk	430 L 15.2 cu ft
Length	4,395 mm 173.0 in
Height	1,540 mm 60.6 in

Range score

933 km

580 mi

981 km

609 mi

CO2 score

101 g/km

Trunk score

468 L

16.5 cu ft

430 L

15.2 cu ft

Power-to-weight score

129 hp/t

96 kW/t

7.8 kg/hp

107 hp/t

79 kW/t

9.4 kg/hp

Overall

Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

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

Average annual distanceDistance unitFuel price in your local currencyPrice unit

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
Vehicle	Ford Puma 1.0 EcoBoost	Mazda CX-30 2.0 e-Skyactiv G
Consumption	4.5 L/100 km52.3 mpg US62.8 mpg UK	5.2 L/100 km45.2 mpg US54.3 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km	7.88 LC100 km	9.10 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi	12.67 LC100 mi	14.65 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used	675 L178 US gal148 UK gal	780 L206 US gal172 UK gal
Annual fuel cost	1,181 LC/year	1,365 LC/year