2002 Ford Puma vs. 2008 Mazda 6
To start off, 2008 Mazda 6 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2002 Ford Puma. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2002 Ford Puma would be higher. At 1,596 cc (4 cylinders), 2008 Mazda 6 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2008 Mazda 6 (104 HP) has 4 more horse power than 2002 Ford Puma. (100 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2008 Mazda 6 should accelerate faster than 2002 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, 2002 Ford Puma (146 Nm) has 1 more torque (in Nm) than 2008 Mazda 6. (145 Nm). This means 2002 Ford Puma will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2008 Mazda 6.
Compare all specifications:
2002 Ford Puma | 2008 Mazda 6 | |
Make | Ford | Mazda |
Model | Puma | 6 |
Year Released | 2002 | 2008 |
Body Type | Coupe | Sedan |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1560 cc | 1596 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 100 HP | 104 HP |
Torque | 146 Nm | 145 Nm |
Engine Bore Size | 79 mm | 78 mm |
Engine Stroke Size | 81.4 mm | 83.6 mm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 2 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Length | 4020 mm | 4500 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1760 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2610 mm |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 45 L | 55 L |