Toyota C-HR vs Ford Puma
Figures updated
The Toyota C-HR and Ford Puma are two of the UK's most popular small SUVs. We compare the Mk2 (2023–) C-HR and the Mk2 crossover (2019–) Puma on price, size, boot space, performance, safety and running costs, plus how reliable each has been across 122,066 real MOT tests.
The short answer
Pick the Toyota C-HR for lower fuel costs, or the Ford Puma for the lower price, the bigger boot and the better MOT record.
- The Ford Puma is the cheapest to buy new: from £27,145, £4,550 less than the Toyota C-HR.
- The Ford Puma has the biggest boot: 456 litres, 68 more than the Toyota C-HR.
- Euro NCAP safety: Toyota C-HR 5 stars (2024), Ford Puma 4 stars (2022). Ratings from different years aren't directly comparable, as the tests get tougher.
- The Ford Puma has the better MOT record. Like for like on age and mileage, the Toyota C-HR fails its MOT about 35% more often.
- The Toyota C-HR is the cheapest to fuel: comparing petrol versions, about £186 a year less than the Ford Puma at 7,500 miles a year.
- Watch the visibility on a Toyota C-HR: it fails on them 1.8 times as often as the average car.
| Figure | Toyota C-HRMk2 (2023–), 5-door SUV | Ford PumaMk2 crossover (2019–), 5-door crossover SUV |
|---|---|---|
| Price and practicality | ||
| Price newUK list prices, across the range | £31,695 to £44,095June 2026 price list | £27,145 to £35,500August 2026 price list (best) |
| Body | 5-door SUV | 5-door crossover SUV |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| BootSeats up / folded | 388 litres / 1,155 | 456 litres / 1,216 (best) |
| Length | 4,362mm | 4,226mm |
| WidthWithout mirrors | 1,832mm | – |
| Height | 1,558mm | 1,550mm |
| Performance | ||
| Power | 140–223 PS (best) | 125–170 PS |
| 0–62mph | 7.4–9.9 sec | 7.4–9.8 sec |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP ratingTests get tougher each year | ★★★★★ (2024) | ★★★★★ (2022) |
| Economy and emissions | ||
| Fuel types | Hybrid, Plug-in hybrid | Hybrid, Petrol |
| Official economyVersions of this generation | 56.5–60.1 mpg | 41.5–54.3 mpg |
| CO2 | 19–111 g/km | 119–155 g/km |
| Running costs at 7,500 miles a year | ||
| Petrol or hybrid171.7p a litre, today's UK average | £994 (58.9 mpg) (best) | £1,180 (49.6 mpg) |
| Cheapest version to fuelWhichever fuel costs least | £994 (petrol) | £1,180 (petrol) |
| Car tax a yearCars registered from April 2017 | £200£640 in years 2–6 for versions listed over £40,000 | £200 |
| Reliability from real MOT tests | ||
| Reliability score | 109Above average | 147Well above average (best) |
| Failed MOT first time (ages 3–20) | 14.7% | 8.1% (best) |
| Failed at 3 years old | 10.0% | 7.7% (best) |
| Failed at 5 years old | 16.1% | – |
| Failed at 10 years old | – | – |
| Most common MOT fault | Wipers (5.0% of tests) | Condition (1.3% of tests) |
| Fails more than average on | Visibility (1.8×), Lights and electrics (1.3×) | Nothing stands out |
| MOT tests analysed | 76,434 | 45,632 |
| About the cars | ||
| Type | Small SUV | Small SUV |
| Owners' average miles a year | 9,000 | 7,800 |
| On sale | 2023 on | 2019 on |
Green marks the better figure where the difference is more than 3%. Reliability figures cover every version of each model tested in the year. Running costs use the typical official economy of recent versions (WLTP where available); real-world economy is usually a little worse for every car.
More comparisons
Frequently asked questions
›Is the Toyota C-HR or the Ford Puma more reliable?
The Ford Puma. Like for like on age and mileage, the Toyota C-HR fails its MOT about 35% more often (reliability scores 147 and 109, where 100 is average). 8.1% of Ford Pumas and 14.7% of Toyota C-HRs failed first time in 2024.
›Which is bigger, the Toyota C-HR or the Ford Puma?
The Toyota C-HR is 136mm longer (4,362mm against 4,226mm). The Ford Puma has the bigger boot: 456 litres against 388.
›Which is cheaper to buy, the Toyota C-HR or the Ford Puma?
The Ford Puma: new prices start at £27,145, £4,550 less than the Toyota C-HR (from £31,695). These are manufacturer list prices; dealers and brokers often sell for less.
›Which is cheaper to run, the Toyota C-HR or the Ford Puma?
Comparing petrol versions, the Toyota C-HR costs about £186 a year less to fuel at 7,500 miles (£994 against £1,180), using typical official economy and current UK average fuel prices.
›Which is safer, the Toyota C-HR or the Ford Puma?
Euro NCAP gave the Toyota C-HR 5 stars (2024) and the Ford Puma 4 stars (2022). Euro NCAP makes its tests tougher every few years, so ratings from different years aren't directly comparable.
›Should I buy the Toyota C-HR or the Ford Puma?
Pick the Toyota C-HR for lower fuel costs, or the Ford Puma for the lower price, the bigger boot and the better MOT record. The comparison above sets out price, space, performance, safety, running costs and reliability side by side.
Sources: manufacturers' UK specifications and price lists and Euro NCAP (listed on each model's page); DVSA anonymised MOT tests 2024 (Open Government Licence v3.0); Vehicle Certification Agency car fuel data, © Crown copyright, VCA cannot accept liability for its accuracy; fuel prices from the GOV.UK Fuel Finder scheme. Photos from Wikimedia Commons, credited under each picture.