Omoda C5 SHS vs Ford Puma

A proper head-to-head in South Africa — compare price, performance, fuel economy or electric range, safety and the details that shape long-term ownership.

Includes a historical vehicle

Current, upcoming and historical vehicles can be compared side by side. Historical records keep their verified specifications, while price labels show last-listed context rather than current new-car availability.

Ford Puma Discontinued model
Omoda C5 SHS in South Africa

Omoda C5 SHS

C5 SHS Hybrid 1-Speed Automatic Current
ZAR 469,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 105 kW 🔧 215 Nm ⛽ 20.4 km/l
VS
Ford Puma in South Africa

Ford Puma

1.0T EcoBoost ST-Line Automatic Petrol 7-Speed DCT Discontinued model
ZAR 459,900 last listed
Discontinued model Verified historical specifications remain visible for owner and used-car comparisons.
⚡ 92 kW 🔧 170 Nm ⛽ 16.4 km/l
+ Add a 3rd car

Decision summary

Omoda C5 SHS vs Ford Puma: the short answer

C5 SHS has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Puma remains close.

Recorded price context C5 SHS: current from ZAR 469,900 · Puma: last listed from ZAR 389,900

Five key differences

Exact selected derivatives
Specification C5 SHS Puma
Maximum Power C5 SHS105 kW @ 5200 rpm Puma92 kW @ 6000 rpm
Maximum Torque C5 SHS215 Nm @ 2500-4000 rpm Puma170 Nm
Engine Size C5 SHS1500 cc Puma999 cc
Combined Fuel Economy C5 SHS20.4 km/l Puma16.4 km/l
Ground Clearance C5 SHS145 mm Puma170 mm

Strongest published figure in that row; no road-test winner is implied.

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Specification evidence leader

C5 SHS

Strengths
  • More powerful engine output
  • Better fuel efficiency
Weak Spots
  • Fewer listed safety features
  • Lower published practicality figures
Best suited to: Published Performance Published Efficiency

Puma

Strengths
  • Stronger listed safety equipment
  • Stronger published practicality figures
Weak Spots
  • Less powerful engine setup
  • Lower fuel efficiency
Best suited to: Published Practicality

Which One's Right for You?

C5 SHS

  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published powertrain figures
  • Buyers prioritising the lower published fuel or energy use

Puma

  • Buyers prioritising the more complete listed safety equipment
  • Buyers prioritising the stronger published space and capacity figures

Full Specs, Side by Side

Archived cars use verified historical spec records. Rows remain comparable; unavailable historical values are shown plainly rather than estimated.

Spec C5 SHS Puma
Model Introduced Year 2026 2023
Generation Current South Africa C5 SHS range First generation Puma in South Africa
Facelift History Current South Africa version listed by official source New model introduced in South Africa
Facelift Launched Since 2026 2021
Facelift Version Ending Current 2024
Body Style SUV SUV
Model Year 2026 2021
Production Status active discontinued
Segment SUV SUV
Tare Mass Kg 1546 kg 1325 kg
Vehicle Type SUV SUV
Spec C5 SHS Puma
Length 4400 mm 4186 mm
Width 1830 mm 1805 mm
Height 1590 mm 1531 mm
Wheelbase 2630 mm 2594 mm
Ground Clearance (Default) 145 mm 170 mm
Ground Clearance (With Full Seating Load) 125 mm 125 mm
Fuel Tank Capacity 51 l 42 l
Boot/Cargo Space 372 l 456 l
Kerb Weight 1546 kg 1325 kg
Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) 2052 kg 1775 kg
Payload Capacity 506 kg 450 kg
Towing Capacity 750 kg 1200 kg
Seating Capacity 5 seats 5 seats
Number of Rows 2 rows 2 rows
Doors 5 doors 5 doors
Minimum Turning Radius 5.1 m 5.4 m
Front Headroom 1000 mm 981 mm
Rear Headroom 970 mm 947 mm
Front Legroom 1050 mm 1047 mm
Rear Legroom 900 mm 898 mm

In depth: how these cars differ

This C5 SHS and Puma comparison uses the exact derivatives selected above for South Africa. The catalogue index covers performance, efficiency, safety equipment, practicality and ownership cover only where comparable source-backed fields are present.

Performance index: C5 SHS 51 vs Puma 40.

Efficiency index: C5 SHS 82 vs Puma 64.

Safety-equipment index: C5 SHS 94 vs Puma 98.

Practicality index: C5 SHS 52 vs Puma 59.

Ownership-cover index: C5 SHS not separately scored vs Puma 43.

These figures are Hagalu catalogue-comparison indicators, not customer ratings, crash-test scores, resale guarantees or a substitute for a road test. Each page shows its weighted source coverage beside the result.

Specification Evidence Index

A transparent comparison of published catalogue fields. This is not a road-test score, owner rating or editorial review rating, and it appears only when every vehicle clears the same comparable-data threshold.

Evidence / 100
Evidence-index readout

C5 SHS leads by 8 points

C5 SHS has a modest catalogue-index lead, while Puma remains close.

Evidence leader 69 /100
Lead 8 points
Data 72% source coverage
69
#1 Evidence leader

C5 SHS

72% source coverage 2 strong categories
Best at Safety 94 Check Performance 51
Performance 51
Efficiency 82
Safety 94
Practicality 52
Leads by 8 points
61
#2

Puma

91% source coverage 1 strong categories
Best at Safety 98 Check Performance 40
Performance 40
Efficiency 64
Safety 98
Practicality 59
Ownership 43
Performance 24% Safety 22% Practicality 22% Efficiency 17% Ownership 15%
Category leaders What moves the verdict
Performance C5 SHS +11 Efficiency C5 SHS +18 Safety Puma +4 Practicality Puma +7

Close catalogue match. Buyer priorities should decide the outcome.

Why this score View full breakdown
Evidence-index leader

C5 SHS

Performance 51/100
Efficiency 82/100
Safety 94/100
Practicality 52/100

Puma

Performance 40/100
Efficiency 64/100
Safety 98/100
Practicality 59/100
Ownership 43/100

What the evidence means

Evidence index Omoda C5 SHS leads the specification evidence index with 69 pts vs 61 pts for Puma

In Hagalu's specification evidence index, C5 SHS leads. However, Puma may suit buyers prioritising different confirmed fields. Ultimately, the right choice depends on your driving priorities in South Africa.

C5 SHS vs Puma questions

There is no universal winner. Use the comparison table to match the models and available derivatives in South Africa on price, safety equipment, space, powertrain and ownership cover. The category indicators summarise published catalogue data; they are not a road test or customer rating.

Compare the published consumption or mileage rows for the exact derivatives using the same unit and test basis. A catalogue figure is useful for like-for-like comparison, but traffic, speed, load, weather and driving style can change actual fuel use.

Compare only equipment explicitly listed for each derivative, including airbags, stability control and driver-assistance systems. Confirm the exact trim with the manufacturer, and treat any independent crash-test result separately because equipment and ratings can differ by market.

A reliable five-year total cannot be calculated from catalogue data alone. Add the exact purchase and finance cost, fuel or electricity, insurance quotes, scheduled servicing, tyres and expected resale value. Check whether the selected derivative includes a service or maintenance plan.

Use the seating, boot or load-space, ISOFIX and safety rows as a first check. Then test the exact cars with your child seats, passengers and typical luggage, because published dimensions do not show every access or comfort difference.

Compare the published power, torque and 0–100 km/h rows when they are available for both exact derivatives. Vehicle weight, gearing and power delivery also matter, so catalogue outputs alone do not establish real-world overtaking or response.