2000 Ford Puma vs. 2006 Mazda 6
To start off, 2006 Mazda 6 is newer by 6 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 2,964 cc, 2006 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2006 Mazda 6 (215 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 62 more horse power than 2000 Ford Puma. (153 HP @ 7000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2006 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Puma. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Ford Puma weights approximately 155 kg more than 2006 Mazda 6.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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. Let's talk about torque, 2006 Mazda 6 (270 Nm @ 5000 RPM) has 100 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Puma. (170 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2006 Mazda 6 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Puma.
Compare all specifications:
| 2000 Ford Puma | 2006 Mazda 6 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Puma | 6 |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2006 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1679 cc | 2964 cc |
| Horse Power | 153 HP | 215 HP |
| Engine RPM | 7000 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 170 Nm | 270 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1275 kg | 1120 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 4750 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1780 mm | 1790 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1450 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2680 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 42 L | 68 L |
