Volkswagen Amarok vs Ford Puma

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

Volkswagen Amarok in South Africa

Volkswagen Amarok

3.0 V6 TDI Double Cab Aventura 4Motion AT Diesel Automatic
ZAR 1,252,200 ex-showroom
⚡ 125 kW (168 hp)
🔧 400 Nm
⛽ 12.8 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 Amarok
Mileage Puma
🔑 Ownership Tie

Overall Comparison Score

🏆 Winner
#1

Puma

61
/ 100
+4
pts
#2

Amarok

57
/ 100

Very close match. Final decision depends on buyer preference.

Executive Summary

Both Amarok and Puma are extremely closely matched, making the final choice dependent on buyer preference.

Key Differences At A Glance

Performance Amarok +5 pts
Efficiency Puma +2 pts
Safety Puma +2 pts
Practicality Puma +5 pts
Ownership Equal

Category Score Breakdown

🏆 Overall Winner

Puma

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

Amarok

Performance 13/20
Efficiency 7/20
Safety 18/20
Practicality 7/20
Ownership 12/20

Pros & Cons

Amarok

Pros
  • More powerful engine output
Cons
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Less comprehensive safety features
  • Less practical in daily usage
Best For: Highway Driving
🏆 Overall Winner

Puma

Pros
  • Better fuel efficiency
  • Stronger safety package
  • More practical for daily use
Cons
  • Less powerful engine setup
Best For: Fuel Efficiency Family Usage

Who Should Buy Which?

Amarok

  • Drivers who prioritise strong highway performance and overtaking power

Puma

  • Buyers looking for better fuel efficiency
  • Families prioritising stronger safety equipment
  • Large families needing more practicality and usability

Full Specification Comparison

Specification Amarok Puma
Ground Clearance 192 170
Wheelbase 3097 2594
Length 5254 4186
Width 1944 1805
Height 1834 1531
Kerb Weight 2095 1325
Gross Vehicle Weight 3150 1775
Seating Capacity 5 5
Boot Space 0 456
Towing Capacity 3500 1200
Front Track Width - 1541
Rear Track Width - 1534
Turning Radius - 5.4
Specification Amarok Puma
Engine 2.0L TDI Turbo Diesel 1.0L EcoBoost Mild Hybrid
Engine Type Inline 4 Turbocharged Intercooled Inline 3 Cylinder Turbo Mild Hybrid
Displacement 1968 999
Cylinders 4 3
Valves per Cylinder 4 4
Power 125 92
Torque 400 170
Fuel System Common Rail Direct Injection Direct Injection
Turbocharger Twin Turbo Single Turbo
Top Speed 180 185
0-100 km/h 10.5 10.5
Power @ RPM - 6000 rpm
Torque @ RPM - 2000-4500 rpm
Compression Ratio - 10.5:1
Engine Position - Front Transverse

Final Verdict

🏆 Ford Puma wins with 61 pts vs 57 pts for Amarok

In structured scoring, Puma emerges as the stronger overall package. However, Amarok 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.

Amarok scores 7 while Puma scores 9 in efficiency. Real-world mileage may vary based on driving conditions.

In safety scoring, Amarok scores 18 and Puma scores 20. Both offer competitive safety packages in this segment.

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

Practicality scoring gives Amarok 7 and Puma 12, reflecting cabin space and usability.

Performance category shows Amarok scoring 13 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 Amarok and Puma in South Africa evaluates performance, efficiency, safety, practicality and long-term ownership value.

Performance: Amarok scores 13 vs 8.

Efficiency: Amarok scores 7 vs 9.

Safety: Amarok scores 18 vs 20.

Practicality: Amarok scores 7 vs 12.

Ownership: Amarok scores 12 vs 12.

Final structured scoring gives Puma the advantage in this comparison.