Hyundai Kona vs Ford Puma

A proper head-to-head in South Africa — we cover price, performance, petrol economy, safety and what it'll actually cost you to own each one long term.

Hyundai Kona in South Africa

Hyundai Kona

1.0T DCT Executive Petrol Automatic
ZAR 565,900 ex-showroom
⚡ 88 kW 🔧 172 Nm ⛽ 15.5 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 🔧 170 Nm ⛽ 16.4 km/l
Add a 3rd car

At a Glance — Who Wins What

Performance Tie
Fuel Economy Puma
🛡 Safety Puma
📦 Practicality Tie
🔑 Ownership Kona
Puma starts ZAR 459900 cheaper Kona from ZAR 459,900 · Puma from ZAR 389,900

Key Specs Side by Side

The specs that matter most — highlighted where one car leads.

Spec Kona Puma
Engine Power 88 92
Torque 172 170
Engine Size 998 999
Claimed Mileage 15.5 16.4
Ground Clearance 165 170
Boot Space 466 456
Airbags 6 8
Kerb Weight 1460 1325
Seating Capacity 5 Available
Warranty 5 3

= leads in this spec

The Overall Score — Here's How They Stack Up

🏆 Winner
#1

Puma

61
/ 100
+3
pts
#2

Kona

58
/ 100

Very close match. Final decision depends on buyer preference.

The Bottom Line

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

Where They Actually Differ

Performance Equal
Efficiency Puma +9 pts
Safety Puma +2 pts
Practicality Equal
Ownership Kona +8 pts

Score Breakdown by Category

🏆 Overall Winner

Puma

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

Kona

Performance 8/20
Efficiency 0/20
Safety 18/20
Practicality 12/20
Ownership 20/20

What Each Car Gets Right (and Wrong)

Kona

Strengths
  • Better long-term ownership value
Weak Spots
  • Lower fuel efficiency
  • Less comprehensive safety features
Best suited to: General Use
🏆 Overall Winner

Puma

Strengths
  • Better fuel efficiency
  • Stronger safety package
Weak Spots
  • Shorter warranty coverage
Best suited to: Fuel Efficiency

Which One's Right for You?

Kona

  • Long-term owners valuing warranty and ownership peace of mind

Puma

  • Buyers looking for better fuel efficiency
  • Families prioritising stronger safety equipment

Full Specs, Side by Side

Spec Kona Puma
Length 4355 4186
Width 1825 1805
Height 1570 1531
Wheelbase 2660 2594
Ground Clearance 165 170
Kerb Weight 1460 1325
Seating Capacity 5 5
Boot Space 466 456
Rear Track Width 1556 mm 1534
Gross Vehicle Weight 1850 kg 1775
Front Track Width 1561 mm 1541
Turning Radius 5.5 m 5.4
Towing Capacity 1000 kg (Unbraked) 1200
Load Bed Length Not Applicable Available
Load Bed Width Not Applicable Available
Doors 5 Available
Seats 5 Available
Front Legroom Available Available
Rear Legroom Available Available
Front Headroom Available Available
Rear Headroom Available Available
Front Shoulder Room Available Available
Rear Shoulder Room Available Available
Boot Space Seats Folded Available 1500
Number of Doors Available 5
Max Payload Available Available
Boot Volume Available Available
Front Overhang Available Available
Fuel Tank Capacity Available Available
Rear Overhang Available Available
Spec Kona Puma
Engine 1.0 T-GDI Turbo 1.0L EcoBoost Mild Hybrid
Engine Type Petrol Inline 3 Cylinder Turbo Mild Hybrid
Displacement 998 999
Cylinders 3 3
Power 88 92
Torque 172 170
Fuel System Direct Injection Direct Injection
Turbocharger Yes Single Turbo
Top Speed 185 185
0-100 km/h 10.5 10.5
Power @ RPM 5500 6000 rpm
Torque @ RPM 1500 2000-4500 rpm
Valves per Cylinder 12 (4 per cylinder) 4
Compression Ratio 9.9:1 10.5:1
Engine Position Front Front Transverse
Fuel Grade Required Petrol Petrol
Engine Type Config Inline Available
Variable Valve Timing Yes Available
Cylinder Bore Available 82.0
Piston Stroke Available 92.0
Engine Code Available Standard
Engine Oil Capacity Available Available
Power 150 150
Cylinder Layout Available Inline 4 (I4)
Engine Aspiration Available Turbocharged
Maximum Engine RPM Available Available
0–100 km/h Available Available
Battery Capacity Available Available
Charging Port Available Available
AC Charging Time Available Available
Engine Displacement Available Available
EV Range Available Available

So, Which One Should You Buy?

🏆 Ford Puma wins with 61 pts vs 58 pts for Kona

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

Buyers Also Looked At These

Other comparisons that people in the same boat tend to check out.

Questions Buyers Usually Ask

On our scoring the Puma edges ahead overall. That said, the right choice depends on what you actually use the car for — the breakdown above shows exactly where each one wins and loses.

Efficiency scores: Kona 0 vs Puma 9. In the real world, diesel variants of either car will beat the claimed figure on long highways and fall short in Joburg traffic.

Safety scores: Kona 18, Puma 20. Check each model page for NCAP ratings and which trim levels include AEB and blind-spot monitoring — those features aren't always standard.

Long-term ownership scores: Kona 20, Puma 12. Service intervals, parts availability in SA, and whether a service plan is bundled all factor in — check the individual variant specs for that detail.

Practicality scores: Kona 12, Puma 12. This covers boot space, seat flexibility, and day-to-day usability — not just interior dimensions on paper.

Performance scores: Kona 8, Puma 8. This looks at real-world pace — 0–100 kph, highway flexibility, and how either car feels when you actually need to overtake on an N-road.

Resale varies with colour, spec, and market timing, but Japanese brands — and Toyota specifically — have a strong track record in SA. Check current used prices for both on AutoTrader to see the real gap right now.

Ground clearance and 4WD availability are what matter most here. Scroll to the spec table above to compare both side by side — if either model offers a 4WD variant, that's the version worth comparing.

Fuel, insurance, and service costs are the big three. Diesel variants of both models typically save R800–R1,500/month in fuel at current SA pump prices. The Puma edges the overall ownership score, but check whether either variant includes a service plan — that changes the monthly maths significantly.

The Puma scores better overall, but neither car is a bad buy here. It comes down to what features matter to you — check the full spec table above to see exactly what you gain and lose at each price point.

In Depth — Breaking It All Down

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

Performance: Kona scores 8 vs 8.

Efficiency: Kona scores 0 vs 9.

Safety: Kona scores 18 vs 20.

Practicality: Kona scores 12 vs 12.

Ownership: Kona scores 20 vs 12.

Final structured scoring gives Puma the advantage in this comparison.