Compare performance (168 HP vs 150 HP), boot space and price (23,900 £ vs 22,300 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Ford Puma or Skoda Kamiq?
All details on performance, efficiency, range and trunk space can be found in the technical comparison below – including user reviews for both models.
In the thriving automotive market, two compact SUVs are vying for attention: the Ford Puma and Skoda Kamiq. Both models boast an array of features and advancements, but how do they stack up against one another? This comparison will delve into their technical specifications, innovations, and overall appeal to potential buyers.
Starting with design, both the Ford Puma and the Skoda Kamiq exhibit a modern, SUV-inspired aesthetic. The Puma measures between 4186 mm to 4226 mm in length, 1805 mm in width, and 1550 to 1555 mm in height, offering a sporty look with versatile practicality.
On the other hand, the Skoda Kamiq is slightly larger, measuring 4241 mm in length, 1793 mm in width, and 1562 mm in height. The Kamiq’s design leans heavily on Skoda's signature sharp lines and bold front grille, emphasizing an assertive road presence.
When it comes to performance, both vehicles offer a range of engine options. The Ford Puma boasts several petrol MHEV (Mild Hybrid Electric Vehicle) and electric engines, ranging from 125 HP to a powerful 168 HP. Its efficient powertrains contribute to fuel consumption rates between 5.4 L/100km and 6 L/100km, along with an impressive electric range of up to 376 km.
In contrast, the Skoda Kamiq relies on conventional petrol engines with outputs ranging from 95 HP to a robust 150 HP. The Kamiq is slightly less fuel-efficient, with consumption figures generally between 5.4 L/100km and 5.7 L/100km. While the Kamiq may not have hybrid options, its performance remains commendable, especially with its 0-100 km/h acceleration timing as quick as 8.3 seconds.
Both models come equipped with front-wheel drive and offer a choice between manual and automatic transmissions. Ford Puma presents an automated dual-clutch transmission option, enhancing driving smoothness and responsiveness. Meanwhile, the Skoda Kamiq impresses with a reliable manual gearbox or a similarly efficient automatic variant, appealing to those who enjoy a more engaging driving experience.
The interiors of the Ford Puma and Skoda Kamiq are designed with a focus on driver comfort and technology integration. The Puma features a spacious trunk capacity ranging from 456 L to 523 L, accommodating lifestyle demands seamlessly. In addition, its cabin is adorned with modern infotainment systems that incorporate the latest connectivity options, such as smartphone integration and advanced driver assistance features.
Conversely, the Skoda Kamiq offers a slightly smaller trunk capacity at 400 L, but its design emphasizes practicality with clever storage solutions throughout the cabin. Skoda's infotainment systems are intuitive and feature-rich, providing a user-friendly interface that enhances the driving experience.
Safety is paramount in both vehicles. Ford equips the Puma with advanced driver assistance technologies, including adaptive cruise control, lane-keeping assistance, and automated emergency braking. These features enhance safety on the road, instilling confidence in the driver.
Similarly, the Skoda Kamiq does not fall short, offering a variety of safety features like pedestrian detection and a suite of airbags. Additionally, its robust construction and advanced stability systems ensure high safety ratings in crash tests.
In conclusion, the choice between the Ford Puma and Skoda Kamiq ultimately depends on individual preferences. The Puma may appeal to those seeking hybrid options and modern technology features, while the Kamiq stands strong with its conventional performance and practical interior. Both vehicles offer an enjoyable driving experience and cater to the growing demand for compact SUVs.
With their unique strengths and market appeal, the Ford Puma and Skoda Kamiq are certainly worthy contenders in the compact SUV segment, promising style, comfort, and innovation to their drivers.
Looking at overall running costs, both models reveal some interesting differences in everyday economy.
Skoda Kamiq is marginally cheaper – starting at 22,300 £ , while the Ford Puma costs 23,900 £ . That’s a price difference of around 1,646 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: the Skoda Kamiq uses 5.3 L/100km and is barely more efficient than the Ford Puma with 5.4 L/100km. The difference is about 0.1 L/100km.
Power, torque and acceleration say a lot about how a car feels on the road. This is where you see which model delivers more driving dynamics.
When it comes to engine power, the Ford Puma offers a bit more power – delivering 168 HP compared to 150 HP. That’s roughly 18 HP more horsepower.
When accelerating from 0 to 100 km/h, the Ford Puma is very slightly quicker – completing the sprint in 7.4 s, while the Skoda Kamiq takes 8.1 s. That’s about 0.7 s quicker.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Ford Puma delivers a bit more torque with 290 Nm compared to 250 Nm. That’s about 40 Nm more.
Beyond pure performance, interior space and usability matter most in daily life. This is where you see which car is more practical and versatile.
Both vehicles offer seating for 5 people.
In terms of curb weight, Skoda Kamiq is barely lighter – 1,231 kg compared to 1,316 kg. The difference is around 85 kg.
When it comes to payload, the Skoda Kamiq carries a bit more – 539 kg compared to 469 kg. That’s a difference of about 70 kg.
The Ford Puma stands out in the key areas 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.
The Ford Puma is a cheeky compact crossover that blends sporty styling with city-friendly practicality, giving drivers a surprisingly fun and composed ride. With clever storage tricks and a lively personality, it’s a smart pick for buyers who want enjoyment without fuss.
details
The Skoda Kamiq is a neatly packaged city crossover that pairs practical space with unshowy, thoughtful design. It’s easy to live with, economical to run and full of clever details that make daily driving feel intelligently sorted rather than flashy.
details
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
23,900 - 36,300 £
|
Price
22,300 - 32,700 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
5.4 - 5.9 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
5.3 - 5.7 L/100km
|
|
Consumption kWh/100km
13 - 13.7 kWh/100km
|
Consumption kWh/100km
-
|
|
Electric Range
404 - 417 km
|
Electric Range
-
|
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
Battery Capacity
-
|
|
co2
0 - 135 g/km
|
co2
121 - 128 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
50 L
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
SUV
|
|
Seats
5
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
5
|
|
Curb weight
1,316 - 1,563 kg
|
Curb weight
1,231 - 1,340 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
Trunk capacity
400 L
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
4,241 mm
|
|
Width
1,805 mm
|
Width
1,793 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
1,562 mm
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
1,395 L
|
|
Payload
367 - 469 kg
|
Payload
439 - 539 kg
|
Engine and Performance |
|
|---|---|
|
Engine Type
Petrol MHEV, Electric
|
Engine Type
Petrol
|
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
Transmission
Manuel, Automatic
|
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Dual-Clutch Automatic, Reduction Gearbox
|
Transmission Detail
Manual Gearbox, Dual-Clutch Automatic
|
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
Drive Type
Front-Wheel Drive
|
|
Power HP
125 - 168 HP
|
Power HP
95 - 150 HP
|
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
7.4 - 9.8 s
|
Acceleration 0-100km/h
8.1 - 11 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
183 - 216 km/h
|
|
Torque
170 - 290 Nm
|
Torque
175 - 250 Nm
|
|
Number of Cylinders
3
|
Number of Cylinders
3 - 4
|
|
Power kW
92 - 124 kW
|
Power kW
70 - 110 kW
|
|
Engine capacity
999 cm3
|
Engine capacity
999 - 1,498 cm3
|
General |
|
|---|---|
|
Model Year
2,025 - 2,026
|
Model Year
2,025
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
D, A
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
D
|
|
Brand
Ford
|
Brand
Skoda
|
Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
España