2004 Ford Puma vs. 1996 Mazda 626
To start off, 2004 Ford Puma is newer by 8 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Mazda 626. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Mazda 626 would be higher. At 1,996 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Mazda 626 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2004 Ford Puma (104 HP @ 6250 RPM) has 15 more horse power than 1996 Mazda 626. (89 HP @ 5000 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2004 Ford Puma should accelerate faster than 1996 Mazda 626. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Mazda 626 weights approximately 170 kg more than 2004 Ford Puma.
Let's talk about torque, 1996 Mazda 626 (150 Nm @ 2500 RPM) has 1 more torque (in Nm) than 2004 Ford Puma. (149 Nm @ 4000 RPM). This means 1996 Mazda 626 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2004 Ford Puma.
Compare all specifications:
| 2004 Ford Puma | 1996 Mazda 626 | |
| Make | Ford | Mazda |
| Model | Puma | 626 |
| Year Released | 2004 | 1996 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Station Wagon |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1678 cc | 1996 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 104 HP | 89 HP |
| Engine RPM | 6250 RPM | 5000 RPM |
| Torque | 149 Nm | 150 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 4000 RPM | 2500 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1035 kg | 1205 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 4600 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1680 mm | 1700 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1350 mm | 1440 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2450 mm | 2620 mm |
