2000 Ford Puma vs. 2009 Volvo V50
To start off, 2009 Volvo V50 is newer by 9 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 1,560 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Volvo V50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Volvo V50 (108 HP @ 4000 RPM) has 19 more horse power than 2000 Ford Puma. (89 HP @ 5600 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2009 Volvo V50 should accelerate faster than 2000 Ford Puma.
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, 2009 Volvo V50 (240 Nm @ 3200 RPM) has 115 more torque (in Nm) than 2000 Ford Puma. (125 Nm @ 4500 RPM). This means 2009 Volvo V50 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2000 Ford Puma.
Compare all specifications:
2000 Ford Puma | 2009 Volvo V50 | |
Make | Ford | Volvo |
Model | Puma | V50 |
Year Released | 2000 | 2009 |
Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1387 cc | 1560 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 89 HP | 108 HP |
Engine RPM | 5600 RPM | 4000 RPM |
Torque | 125 Nm | 240 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4500 RPM | 3200 RPM |
Engine Bore Size | 76 mm | 81 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 76.5 mm | 93.2 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Diesel |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 4530 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1810 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1450 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2650 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 42 L | 70 L |