Ford Puma
Car comparison
Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoostvsFord Puma · Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonFord Puma · Facelift 2024
ST 1.0 EcoBoost
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost
- Quickest 0-100 km/h6.7 s
- Fastest top speed230 km/h143 mph Unrestricted220 km/h137 mph Restricted
- Most powerful200 hp149 kW
- Highest torque320 Nm236 lb-ft
- Best power-to-weight147 hp/t110 kW/t6.8 kg/hp
- Lowest combined fuel consumption6.0 L/100 km39.2 mpg US47.1 mpg UK
- Largest trunk456 L
- Best overall score63/100
- Best performance score54/100
- Best economy score91/100
- Best practicality score81/100
Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost
- Lightest1,315 kg2,899 lb
Specification comparison
| Model | FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 200hp149kW | 170hp127kW |
| Torque | 320Nm236lb-ft | 248Nm183lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,358kg2,994lb | 1,315kg2,899lb |
| Gross weight | 1,815kg4,001lb | 1,850kg4,079lb |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph Calculated | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Calculated |
| To 99% top speed | 68.1s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph Calculated | 72.5s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 6.7s | 7.4s |
| 0-200 km/h | 27.5s Calculated | 34.8s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 6.4s Calculated | 7.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | 6L/100 km39.2mpg US47.1mpg UK | 6.5L/100 km36.2mpg US43.5mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 7.6L/100 km30.9mpg US37.2mpg UK | - |
| Fuel consumption highway | 5L/100 km47mpg US56.5mpg UK | - |
| Quarter mile | 14.7s Calculated | 15.3s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 147hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb Calculated | 129hp/t96kW/t59hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 236Nm/t158lb-ft/ton Calculated | 189Nm/t126lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | - | 646km402mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,496cc91cu in | 999cc61cu in |
| Length | 4,226mm166in | 4,226mm166in |
| Width | 1,805mm71in | 1,805mm71in |
| Height | 1,520mm60in | 1,533mm60in |
| Wheelbase | 2,588mm102in | 2,588mm102in |
| Front track | - | 1,567mm62in |
| Rear track | - | 1,523mm60in |
| Ground clearance | 152mm6in | 152mm6in |
| Trunk volume | 456L | 456L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,216L | 1,216L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | - | 42L |
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 ST 1.5 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
- Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 6,000 rpm | 2,500-3,500 rpm | 6,250 rpm |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 5,750 rpm | 3,000 rpm | 6,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 6.4 s | 7.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 6.7 s | 7.4 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 27.5 s | 34.8 s |
| Top speed | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph Likely limited | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph Likely limited |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.5 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 6.5 s | 6.7 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 9.7 s | 10.1 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 12.4 s | 12.9 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 14.7 s | 15.3 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 158 km/h 98 mph | 151 km/h 94 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 200 hp 149 kW |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 170 hp 127 kW |
Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost has 30 hp more than Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost.
The biggest power difference is between Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost and Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost: 30 hp (22 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 248 Nm 183 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 1,358 kg 2,994 lb |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 1,315 kg 2,899 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 6.7 s |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 7.4 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost and Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost: 0.7 s.
Fuel consumption comparison
Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 6.5 L/100 km 36.2 mpg US 43.5 mpg UK |
The biggest fuel consumption difference is between Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost and Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost: 0.5 L/100 km.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 147 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 129 hp/t 96 kW/t 7.7 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 200 hp 149 kW | 6.7 s | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 170 hp 127 kW | 7.4 s | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 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 | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 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 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost |
| 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | ||||||
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost |
| 6.5 L/100 km 36.2 mpg US 43.5 mpg UK | ||||||
Ford Puma ST 1.5 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.
| Vehicle | Fuel consumption, L/100 km | 0-100 km/h, s |
|---|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | 6.7 s |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 6.5 L/100 km 36.2 mpg US 43.5 mpg UK | 7.4 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 |
|---|---|---|
| FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | 147 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK |
| FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | 129 hp/t 96 kW/t 7.7 kg/hp | 6.5 L/100 km 36.2 mpg US 43.5 mpg UK |
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost | FordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 200 hp 149 kW | 170 hp 127 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 320 Nm 236 lb-ft | 248 Nm 183 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 6.7 s | 7.4 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | Unrestricted 230 km/h143 mph Restricted 220 km/h137 mph | Unrestricted 220 km/h137 mph Restricted 210 km/h130 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,358 kg 2,994 lb | 1,315 kg 2,899 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | 6.0 L/100 km 39.2 mpg US 47.1 mpg UK | 6.5 L/100 km 36.2 mpg US 43.5 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | - | 646 km 402 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 456 L 16.1 cu ft | 456 L 16.1 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 147 hp/t 110 kW/t 6.8 kg/hp | 129 hp/t 96 kW/t 7.7 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 | Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost | Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost |
|---|---|---|
| Consumption | 6 L/100 km39.2 mpg US47.1 mpg UK | 6.5 L/100 km36.2 mpg US43.5 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 10.50 LC100 km | 11.38 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 16.90 LC100 mi | 18.31 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 900 L238 US gal198 UK gal | 975 L258 US gal214 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,575 LC/year | 1,706 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost
- Has 30 hp more
- Has 72 Nm more
- Is 0.7 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
- Has 10 km/h (6 mph) higher top speed
- Uses 0.5 L/100 km less fuel
- Has 18 hp/t better power-to-weight
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Highest top speed
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
- Lowest combined fuel consumption
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Heaviest
Ford Puma Facelift 2024 ST 1.0 EcoBoost
- Is 43 kg lighter
Pros
- Lightest
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
- Highest combined fuel consumption
- Lowest top speed
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























