Car comparison

Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoostvsKia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI

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

New comparison

Ford Puma

ST 1.5 EcoBoost

200 hp1496 ccGasolineFWDManualTurbochargedSUV2020-2024
VS

Kia XCeed

1.6 T-GDI

204 hp1591 ccGasolineFWDDual-clutchTwin-turboSUV2021-2022

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/h
    6.7 s
  • Fastest top speed
    230 km/h
    143 mph Unrestricted
    220 km/h
    137 mph Restricted
  • Highest torque
    320 Nm
    236 lb-ft
  • Lightest
    1,358 kg
    2,994 lb
  • Best power-to-weight
    147 hp/t
    110 kW/t
    6.8 kg/hp
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    6.0 L/100 km
    39.2 mpg US
    47.1 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    7.6 L/100 km
    30.9 mpg US
    37.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    5.0 L/100 km
    47.0 mpg US
    56.5 mpg UK
  • Largest trunk
    456 L
  • Best overall score
    63/100
  • Best performance score
    54/100
  • Best economy score
    91/100
  • Best practicality score
    81/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelFordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostKiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
Power
200hp149kW
204hp152kW
Torque
320Nm236lb-ft
265Nm195lb-ft
Curb weight
1,358kg2,994lb
1,456kg3,210lb
Gross weight
1,815kg4,001lb
1,880kg4,145lb
Top speed
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Calculated
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Calculated
To 99% top speed
68.1s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph
Calculated
77.6s99% target: 228 km/h / 141 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
6.7s
7.5s
0-200 km/h
27.5s
Calculated
31.2s
Calculated
0-60 mph
6.4s
Calculated
7.1s
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
7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
5L/100 km47mpg US56.5mpg UK
5.8L/100 km40.6mpg US48.7mpg UK
Quarter mile
14.7s
Calculated
15.4s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
147hp/t110kW/t67hp/1000 lb
Calculated
140hp/t104kW/t64hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
236Nm/t158lb-ft/ton
Calculated
182Nm/t122lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range-
769km478mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,496cc91cu in
1,591cc97cu in
Length
4,226mm166in
4,395mm173in
Width
1,805mm71in
1,826mm72in
Height
1,520mm60in
1,495mm59in
Wheelbase
2,588mm102in
2,650mm104in
Front track-
1,575mm62in
Rear track-
1,573mm62in
Ground clearance
152mm6in
-
Trunk volume
456L
426L
Max trunk volume
1,216L
1,378L
Doors
5
5
Seats
5
5
Fuel tank-
50L

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 EcoBoostKia XCeed 1.6 T-GDIPowerTorque
  • Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost: Power / Torque
  • Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost6,000 rpm2,500-3,500 rpm6,250 rpm
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI5,500 rpm1,500-4,500 rpm5,750 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricFordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostKiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
6.4 s
7.1 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
6.7 s
7.5 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
27.5 s
31.2 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Likely limited
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Likely limited
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.5 s
2.6 s
330 ft
101 m
6.5 s
6.8 s
1/8 mile
201 m
9.7 s
10.1 s
1000 ft
305 m
12.4 s
13.0 s
1/4 mile
402 m
14.7 s
15.4 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
158 km/h
98 mph
152 km/h
95 mph

Power comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
200 hp
149 kW
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
204 hp
152 kW

Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI has 4 hp more than Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost.

The biggest power difference is between Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost and Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI: 4 hp (3 kW).

Torque comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
320 Nm
236 lb-ft
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
265 Nm
195 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
1,358 kg
2,994 lb
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
1,456 kg
3,210 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost6.7 s
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI7.5 s

Although Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI has more power, Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost is quicker from 0-100 km/h.

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost and Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI: 0.8 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

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

Chart data table
VehicleValue
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 mpg UK
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
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 Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI: 0.5 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
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
147 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 kg/hp
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
140 hp/t
104 kW/t
7.1 kg/hp

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
200 hp
149 kW
6.7 s
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
204 hp
152 kW
7.5 s
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 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
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
Power
200 hp
149 kW
0-100 km/h6.7 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
456 L
16.1 cu ft
Length
4,226 mm
166.4 in
Height
1,520 mm
59.8 in
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
Power
204 hp
152 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
426 L
15.0 cu ft
Length
4,395 mm
173.0 in
Height
1,495 mm
58.9 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
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
Power
200 hp
149 kW
0-100 km/h6.7 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 mpg UK
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
Power
204 hp
152 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
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.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoost
6.0 L/100 km
39.2 mpg US
47.1 mpg UK
6.7 s
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
6.5 L/100 km
36.2 mpg US
43.5 mpg UK
7.5 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
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
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
140 hp/t
104 kW/t
7.1 kg/hp
6.5 L/100 km
36.2 mpg US
43.5 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleFordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostKiaXCeed1.6 T-GDI
Power
200 hp
149 kW
204 hp
152 kW
Torque
320 Nm
236 lb-ft
265 Nm
195 lb-ft
Acceleration
6.7 s
7.5 s
Top speed
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Unrestricted
230 km/h143 mph
Restricted
220 km/h137 mph
Lightness
1,358 kg
2,994 lb
1,456 kg
3,210 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
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
456 L
16.1 cu ft
Length
4,226 mm
166.4 in
Height
1,520 mm
59.8 in
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
426 L
15.0 cu ft
Length
4,395 mm
173.0 in
Height
1,495 mm
58.9 in
Range score
-
769 km
478 mi
Trunk score
456 L
16.1 cu ft
426 L
15.0 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
147 hp/t
110 kW/t
6.8 kg/hp
140 hp/t
104 kW/t
7.1 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 ST 1.5 EcoBoostKia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI
Consumption6 L/100 km39.2 mpg US47.1 mpg UK6.5 L/100 km36.2 mpg US43.5 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km10.50 LC100 km11.38 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi16.90 LC100 mi18.31 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used900 L238 US gal198 UK gal975 L258 US gal214 UK gal
Annual fuel cost1,575 LC/year1,706 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost

  • Has 55 Nm more
  • Is 98 kg lighter
  • Is 0.8 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Uses 0.5 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 7 hp/t better power-to-weight
  • Has 30 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Highest top speed
  • Highest torque
  • Lightest
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best power-to-weight ratio
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Lowest power

Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI

  • Has 4 hp more

Pros

  • Most powerful

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Heaviest
  • Smallest trunk

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost
Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

ST 1.5 EcoBoost
ST 1.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostvsFordPumaFacelift 2024ST 1.0 EcoBoost
1.6 T-GDI
2.0 TDI
VS
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDIvsVolkswagenTiguan IIFacelift 20202.0 TDI
ST 1.5 EcoBoost
2.0 EcoBoost
VS
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostvsFordEvos2.0 EcoBoost
1.6 T-GDI
40 TDI
VS
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDIvsAUDIQ5 II (FY)Facelift 202040 TDI
ST 1.5 EcoBoost
40 TDI
VS
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostvsAUDIQ3 II (F3)40 TDI
1.6 T-GDI
2.0 TDI
VS
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDIvsSeatTarraco2.0 TDI
ST 1.5 EcoBoost
2.0 TSI
VS
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostvsCupraFormentor2.0 TSI
ST 1.5 EcoBoost
2.2 MultiJet II
VS
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostvsAlfa RomeoStelvio (949)Facelift 20222.2 MultiJet II
1.6 T-GDI
GLA 220d
VS
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDIvsMercedes-BenzGLA (H247)GLA 220d
1.6 T-GDI
Cooper SD 2.0
VS
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDIvsMiniCountryman (F60)Facelift 2020Cooper SD 2.0
ST 1.5 EcoBoost
1.5i P300e
VS
FordPumaST 1.5 EcoBoostvsJaguarE-PaceFacelift 20201.5i P300e
1.6 T-GDI
GLB 220d
VS
KiaXCeed1.6 T-GDIvsMercedes-BenzGLB (X247)GLB 220d
Ford Puma ST 1.5 EcoBoost vs Kia XCeed 1.6 T-GDI - car comparison - FastVsFaster