Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
Česko
EspañaVS
Ford Puma vs Renault Kangoo Compact Van comparison
Compare performance (168 HP vs 122 HP), boot space and price (23,900 £ vs 25,200 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Ford Puma or Renault Kangoo Compact Van?
Ford Puma vs Renault Kangoo Compact Van: Key differences
All details on performance, efficiency, range and trunk space can be found in the technical comparison below – including user reviews for both models.
Puma
Costs and Efficiency:
When it comes to price and running costs, the biggest differences usually appear. This is often where you see which car fits your budget better in the long run.
Ford Puma is marginally cheaper – starting at 23,900 £ , while the Renault Kangoo Compact Van costs 25,200 £ . That’s a price difference of around 1,259 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: the Renault Kangoo Compact Van uses 5.3 L/100km and is very slightly more efficient than the Ford Puma with 5.4 L/100km. The difference is about 0.1 L/100km.
In terms of energy consumption, the Ford Puma is substantially more efficient: consuming 13 kWh/100km compared to 20.5 kWh/100km for the Renault Kangoo Compact Van. That’s a difference of about 7.5 kWh/100km.
As for electric range, the Ford Puma offers visibly more range – reaching up to 417 km, about 133 km more than the Renault Kangoo Compact Van.
Kangoo Compact Van
Engine and Performance:
Power, torque and acceleration are the classic benchmarks for car enthusiasts – and here, some clear differences start to show.
When it comes to engine power, the Ford Puma offers noticeably more power – delivering 168 HP compared to 122 HP. That’s roughly 46 HP more horsepower.
When accelerating from 0 to 100 km/h, the Ford Puma is significantly quicker – completing the sprint in 7.4 s, while the Renault Kangoo Compact Van takes 12.3 s. That’s about 4.9 s quicker.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Ford Puma delivers only slightly more torque with 290 Nm compared to 270 Nm. That’s about 20 Nm more.
Puma
Space and Everyday Use:
Cabin size, boot volume and payload all play a role in everyday practicality. Here, comfort and flexibility make the difference.
Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.
In terms of curb weight, Ford Puma is clearly lighter – 1,316 kg compared to 1,639 kg. The difference is around 323 kg.
When it comes to payload, the Renault Kangoo Compact Van carries clearly more – 901 kg compared to 469 kg. That’s a difference of about 432 kg.
Who wins the race in the data check?
The Ford Puma stands well ahead of its rival in the objective data comparison.
This result only shows which model scores more points on paper – not which of the two cars feels right for you.
from £23,900
Ford Puma
Ford Puma
Renault Kangoo Compact Van
Costs and Consumption
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Engine and Performance
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Dimensions and Body
View detailed analysis
View detailed analysis
Ford Puma
The Ford Puma blends sporty styling with practical everyday usability, making it a smart choice for drivers who want flair without sacrificing versatility. Its engaging driving character and clever interior packaging give it a more dynamic and useful feel than many rivals.
details
Renault Kangoo Compact Van
The Renault Kangoo is a practical, no-nonsense compact van that turns urban deliveries and weekend DIY runs into a surprisingly easy chore. Roomy for its size, comfortable to drive and brimming with smart storage solutions, it’s a sensible pick for anyone who needs honest utility without drama.
details
Ford Puma
Renault Kangoo Compact Van
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
23,900 - 36,300 £
|
Price
25,200 - 37,000 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
5.4 - 5.9 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
5.3 - 5.5 L/100km
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
13 - 13.9 kWh/100km
|
Consumption kWh/100km
20.5 - 20.6 kWh/100km
|
|
Electric Range
404 - 417 km
|
Electric Range
279 - 284 km
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
0 - 135 g/km
|
co2
0 - 151 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
Cargo Van
|
|
Seats
5
|
Seats
2 - 5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
1,316 - 1,563 kg
|
Curb weight
1,639 - 1,910 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
456 - 523 L
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
1,805 mm
|
Width
1,860 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
367 - 469 kg
|
Payload
670 - 901 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Electric
|
Engine Type
Diesel, Electric
|
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Dual-Clutch Automatic, Reduction Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Dual-Clutch Automatic, Reduction Gearbox
|
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
125 - 168 HP
|
Power HP
95 - 122 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
7.4 - 9.8 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
12.3 - 14.4 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
Torque
170 - 290 Nm
|
Torque
245 - 270 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
3
|
Number of Cylinders
4
|
|
Power kW
92 - 124 kW
|
Power kW
70 - 90 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
999 cm3
|
Engine capacity
1,461 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2,025 - 2,026
|
Model Year
2024
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
D, A
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
E, A
|
|
Brand
Ford
|
Brand
Renault
|
DriveDuel uses data analysis and artificial intelligence to evaluate vehicle data and create content. Content is regularly reviewed and improved.
The displayed prices are estimates based on German list prices, adjusted to the respective country’s VAT. Country-specific registration taxes are not included. This information is not legally binding.