Toyota Agya vs Ford Puma

In-depth comparison in South Africa covering price, performance, fuel efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership costs.

Toyota Agya in South Africa

Toyota Agya

1.0 XR CVT Petrol Automatic
ZAR 229,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 51 kW (68 hp)
🔧 91 Nm
⛽ 18.0 km/l
VS
Ford Puma in South Africa

Ford Puma

1.0T EcoBoost ST-Line Automatic Petrol Automatic
ZAR 459,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 92 kW (123 hp)
🔧 170 Nm
⛽ 16.4 km/l
+

Add a 3rd car to compare

Quick Winners

Performance Puma
Mileage Agya
🔑 Ownership Tie

Overall Comparison Score

🏆 Winner
#1

Puma

61
/ 100
+13
pts
#2

Agya

48
/ 100

Moderate difference between the models.

Executive Summary

Puma has a slight advantage, but Agya remains highly competitive.

Key Differences At A Glance

Performance Puma +4 pts
Efficiency Agya +2 pts
Safety Puma +8 pts
Practicality Puma +3 pts
Ownership Equal

Category Score Breakdown

🏆 Overall Winner

Puma

Performance 8/20
Efficiency 9/20
Safety 20/20
Practicality 12/20
Ownership 12/20

Agya

Performance 4/20
Efficiency 11/20
Safety 12/20
Practicality 9/20
Ownership 12/20

Pros & Cons

Agya

Pros
  • Better fuel efficiency
Cons
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Less comprehensive safety features
  • Less practical in daily usage
Best For: Fuel Efficiency
🏆 Overall Winner

Puma

Pros
  • More powerful engine output
  • Stronger safety package
  • More practical for daily use
Cons
  • Lower fuel efficiency
Best For: Highway Driving Family Usage

Who Should Buy Which?

Agya

  • Buyers looking for better fuel efficiency

Puma

  • Drivers who prioritise strong highway performance and overtaking power
  • Families prioritising stronger safety equipment
  • Large families needing more practicality and usability

Full Specification Comparison

Specification Agya Puma
Ground Clearance 155 170
Wheelbase 2455 2594
Length 3760 4186
Width 1665 1805
Height 1520 1531
Kerb Weight 870 1325
Gross Vehicle Weight 1265 1775
Seating Capacity 5 5
Boot Space 235 456
Towing Capacity Not Rated 1200
Front Track Width 1445 1541
Rear Track Width 1430 1534
Turning Radius 4.7 5.4
Specification Agya Puma
Engine 1.0L Naturally Aspirated Petrol 1.0L EcoBoost Mild Hybrid
Engine Type Inline 3 Cylinder Inline 3 Cylinder Turbo Mild Hybrid
Displacement 998 999
Cylinders 3 3
Valves per Cylinder 4 4
Power 51 92
Power @ RPM 6000 rpm 6000 rpm
Torque 91 170
Torque @ RPM 3600 rpm 2000-4500 rpm
Fuel System Multi-Point Injection Direct Injection
Turbocharger Not Available Single Turbo
Top Speed 155 185
0-100 km/h 14.0 10.5
Compression Ratio 11.5:1 10.5:1
Engine Position Front Transverse Front Transverse

Final Verdict

🏆 Ford Puma wins with 61 pts vs 48 pts for Agya

In structured scoring, Puma emerges as the stronger overall package. However, Agya may appeal to buyers prioritising different factors. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

People Also Compare

Popular comparisons among buyers considering similar options.

Frequently Asked Questions

Based on structured category scoring, Puma performs better overall in South Africa. However, final choice depends on driving priorities.

Agya scores 11 while Puma scores 9 in efficiency. Real-world mileage may vary based on driving conditions.

In safety scoring, Agya scores 12 and Puma scores 20. Both offer competitive safety packages in this segment.

Agya scores 12 versus Puma scoring 12. Warranty coverage and ownership value influence this result.

Practicality scoring gives Agya 9 and Puma 12, reflecting cabin space and usability.

Performance category shows Agya scoring 4 compared to Puma scoring 8, indicating stronger overtaking capability.

While resale depends on market demand, ownership and brand positioning suggest Puma may hold stronger long-term value.

Off-road suitability depends on drivetrain and ground clearance. Refer to the full specification comparison for detailed technical differences.

Efficiency and ownership categories influence running costs. Puma performs slightly stronger overall in structured scoring.

Value depends on feature set, performance and ownership coverage. Structured comparison gives Puma the overall advantage.

Detailed Comparison Analysis

The comparison between Agya and Puma in South Africa evaluates performance, efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership value.

Performance: Agya scores 4 vs 8.

Efficiency: Agya scores 11 vs 9.

Safety: Agya scores 12 vs 20.

Practicality: Agya scores 9 vs 12.

Ownership: Agya scores 12 vs 12.

Final structured scoring gives Puma the advantage in this comparison.