2000 Ford Puma vs. 2003 Ford Ecosport
To start off, 2003 Ford Ecosport is newer by 3 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Ford Puma. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Ford Puma would be higher. At 2,000 cc (4 cylinders), 2003 Ford Ecosport is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Ford Puma (153 HP) has 10 more horse power than 2003 Ford Ecosport. (143 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2000 Ford Puma should accelerate faster than 2003 Ford Ecosport.
Because 2003 Ford Ecosport is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2000 Ford Puma. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Ecosport will offer significantly more control. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. 2003 Ford Ecosport has automatic transmission and 2000 Ford Puma has manual transmission. 2000 Ford Puma will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2003 Ford Ecosport will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Ford Puma | 2003 Ford Ecosport | |
Make | Ford | Ford |
Model | Puma | Ecosport |
Year Released | 2000 | 2003 |
Body Type | Coupe | SUV |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1679 cc | 2000 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 153 HP | 143 HP |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 4228 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1980 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1679 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2490 mm |