2002 Bristol Blenheim vs. 2003 Ford Puma
To start off, 2003 Ford Puma is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Bristol Blenheim. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Bristol Blenheim would be higher. At 5,900 cc (8 cylinders), 2002 Bristol Blenheim is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2002 Bristol Blenheim weights approximately 357 kg more than 2003 Ford Puma.
Because 2002 Bristol Blenheim is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2002 Bristol Blenheim. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Ford Puma, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. 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. 2002 Bristol Blenheim has automatic transmission and 2003 Ford Puma has manual transmission. 2003 Ford Puma will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2002 Bristol Blenheim will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Bristol Blenheim | 2003 Ford Puma | |
Make | Bristol | Ford |
Model | Blenheim | Puma |
Year Released | 2002 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 5900 cc | 1796 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 0 HP | 99 HP |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 2 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 2 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1395 kg | 1038 kg |
Vehicle Length | 4680 mm | 3990 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1760 mm | 1680 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1120 mm | 1350 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2900 mm | 2450 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 105 L | 45 L |