Compare performance (168 HP vs 150 HP), boot space and price (23,900 £ vs 21,400 £ ) at a glance. Find out which car is the better choice for you – Ford Puma or Skoda Scala?
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 ever-evolving world of automotive excellence, compact cars remain an enduring favorite for city dwellers and small families. The Ford Puma and Skoda Scala are two standout offerings in this category, each bringing unique features and innovations to the table. Let's delve into a detailed comparison that weighs their technical aspects and what makes them stand out in the urban jungle.
The Ford Puma, characterized as an SUV, presents a bold and sporty profile with a height ranging between 1550 to 1555 mm and a width of 1805 mm. At lengths between 4186 to 4226 mm, the Puma offers a sleek yet spacious design.
On the other hand, the Skoda Scala flaunts a quintessential hatchback style. Measuring 4362 mm in length, 1793 mm in width, and 1514 mm in height, the Scala offers more of a classic, elongated silhouette ideal for both city maneuverability and longer drives.
Under the hood, the Ford Puma offers a choice between a Mild Hybrid Electric Vehicle (MHEV) and a fully electric variant, with power outputs from 125 to 168 HP. The engines are supported by either a manual gearbox, a dual-clutch automatic, or a reduction gearbox for the electric version. This setup offers drivers remarkable flexibility in how they want their driving experience to unfold, supplemented by a front-wheel-drive system.
The Skoda Scala's petrol engine options range from 95 to 150 HP and are available with either a manual or a dual-clutch automatic transmission. It remains firmly in the front-wheel drive camp as well, managing to balance efficiency and performance successfully.
Ford Puma's engines promise an impressive blend of performance and eco-conscious driving. It boasts a fuel consumption range between 5.4 to 6 L/100km, while the electric variant consumes 13.1 to 13.7 kWh/100km, with a capable electric range of up to 376 km.
Skoda Scala, meanwhile, promises economical petrol consumption between 5.1 to 5.6 L/100km. With its top speed reaching up to 221 km/h, the Scala caters well to those looking for a slightly racier feel in a compact package.
Both the Puma and the Scala accommodate five passengers comfortably. The Puma offers a trunk capacity between 456 to 523 liters, potentially making it more versatile for carrying equipment, groceries, or luggage. The Scala stands strong with a 467-liter trunk capacity, balancing utility and comfort effortlessly.
Ford has integrated its SUV with the latest infotainment systems, featuring seamless smartphone connectivity and advanced safety technologies. The Puma provides a connected and safe drive with various driver-assistance systems.
Skoda Scala does not lag behind in tech features. It offers a high-definition infotainment system with excellent connectivity, ensuring drivers and passengers have a modern motoring experience with all essential conveniences at their fingertips.
In this compact car comparison, both the Ford Puma and Skoda Scala bring a host of impressive features and capabilities to the table. Whether it’s the sporty, flexible drive offered by the Puma or the pragmatic and versatile Scala, potential buyers must weigh their city-driving needs, performance desires, and preference for body style when making a choice.
Ultimately, whether you're choosing the electrified and adventurous route with the Puma or a classic and efficient journey with the Scala, both cars promise to push the boundaries of what compact vehicles can achieve.
Price and efficiency are key factors when choosing a car – and this is often where the real differences emerge.
Skoda Scala is somewhat cheaper – starting at 21,400 £ , while the Ford Puma costs 23,900 £ . That’s a price difference of around 2,486 £.
Fuel consumption also shows a difference: the Skoda Scala uses 5 L/100km and is marginally more efficient than the Ford Puma with 5.4 L/100km. The difference is about 0.4 L/100km.
Under the bonnet, it becomes clear which model is tuned for sportiness and which one takes the lead when you hit the accelerator.
When it comes to engine power, the Ford Puma offers somewhat 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 a bit quicker – completing the sprint in 7.4 s, while the Skoda Scala takes 8.2 s. That’s about 0.8 s quicker.
There’s also a difference in torque: the Ford Puma delivers moderately more torque with 290 Nm compared to 250 Nm. That’s about 40 Nm more.
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, Skoda Scala is marginally lighter – 1,199 kg compared to 1,316 kg. The difference is around 117 kg.
When it comes to payload, the Ford Puma carries barely more – 469 kg compared to 431 kg. That’s a difference of about 38 kg.
The Ford Puma is far ahead overall 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 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
The Skoda Scala is a tidy, no-nonsense hatch that wraps clever packaging and composed manners into a compact, grown-up package. It’s the sensible choice for buyers who want everyday practicality with a dash of style and personality—no drama, just reliable charm.
details
Costs and Consumption |
|
|---|---|
|
Price
23,900 - 36,300 £
|
Price
21,400 - 31,500 £
|
|
Consumption L/100km
5.4 - 5.9 L/100km
|
Consumption L/100km
5 - 5.6 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
114 - 126 g/km
|
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Fuel tank capacity
-
|
Dimensions and Body |
|
|---|---|
|
Body Type
SUV
|
Body Type
Hatchback
|
|
Seats
5
|
Seats
5
|
|
Doors
-
|
Doors
-
|
|
Curb weight
1,316 - 1,563 kg
|
Curb weight
1,199 - 1,271 kg
|
|
Trunk capacity
-
|
Trunk capacity
467 L
|
|
Length
-
|
Length
-
|
|
Width
1,805 mm
|
Width
1,793 mm
|
|
Height
-
|
Height
-
|
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
Max trunk capacity
-
|
|
Payload
367 - 469 kg
|
Payload
403 - 431 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
8.2 - 10.8 s
|
|
Max Speed
-
|
Max Speed
-
|
|
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
2025
|
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
D, A
|
CO2 Efficiency Class
C, D
|
|
Brand
Ford
|
Brand
Skoda
|
Deutschland
France
Nederland
Great Britain
Sverige
Danmark
Suomi
Italia
Polska
Česko
España