2000 Ford Puma vs. 2004 Mazda AZ
To start off, 2004 Mazda AZ is newer by 4 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 1,679 cc (4 cylinders), 2000 Ford Puma is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Puma weights approximately 525 kg more than 2004 Mazda AZ.
Because 2004 Mazda AZ 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, 2004 Mazda AZ 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. 2004 Mazda AZ 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. 2004 Mazda AZ will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Ford Puma | 2004 Mazda AZ | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Puma | AZ |
Year Released | 2000 | 2004 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1679 cc | 657 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 3 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 153 HP | 0 HP |
Drive Type | Front | 4WD |
Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
Vehicle Weight | 1275 kg | 750 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 3400 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1480 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1700 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2370 mm |