Ford Puma Gen-E vs Volvo EX30
Biggest differences: DC charging — Ford Puma Gen-E 100 kW, Volvo EX30 175 kW · Boot — Ford Puma Gen-E 523 l, Volvo EX30 318 l · Power — Ford Puma Gen-E 168 PS, Volvo EX30 272 PS.
Ford Puma Gen-E
The Ford Puma Gen-E is an all-electric subcompact crossover with a range of 419 kilometers and acceleration from 0 to 100 km/h in 8 seconds.
Volvo EX30
The Volvo EX30 is an all-electric SUV in the B segment, offering a wide range of powertrain configurations with varying ranges and performance levels.
Profile against the market: Ford Puma Gen-E vs Volvo EX30
Ford Puma Gen-EElectric
Volvo EX30P5 Long Range
Ford Puma Gen-E or Volvo EX30 — who wins where
Volvo EX30 leads 6 to 4
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmVolvo EX30 +56 km
- Battery kWhVolvo EX30 +22.2 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmFord Puma Gen-E −4 kWh/100 km
- Power PSVolvo EX30 +104 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sVolvo EX30 −2.7 s
- Top speed km/hVolvo EX30 +20 km/h
- DC charging kWVolvo EX30 +75 kW
- AC charging kWNo difference
- Charging ↓ minFord Puma Gen-E −1 min
- Weight ↓ kgFord Puma Gen-E −287 kg
- Boot lFord Puma Gen-E +205 l
Technical data: Ford Puma Gen-E vs Volvo EX30
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters | Ford Puma Gen-E Electric | Volvo EX30 P5 Long Range | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 419 km | 475 km | Volvo +56 km |
| Battery | 46.8 kWh | 69 kWh | Volvo +22.2 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 13 kWh/100 km | 17 kWh/100 km | Ford −4 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 100 kW | 175 kW | Volvo +75 kW |
| AC charging | 11 kW | 11 kW | No difference |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 26 min | 27 min | Ford −1 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 11.3 km/min | 12.3 km/min | Volvo +1 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 168 PS | 272 PS | Volvo +104 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 8 s | 5.3 s | Volvo −2.7 s |
| Top speed | 160 km/h | 180 km/h | Volvo +20 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | RWD | different type |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1488 kg | 1775 kg | Ford −287 kg |
| Boot | 523 l | 318 l | Ford +205 l |
| Length | 4214 mm | 4233 mm | Volvo +19 mm |
| Width | 1805 mm | 1837 mm | Volvo +32 mm |
| Height | 1555 mm | 1549 mm | Ford +6 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2588 mm | 2650 mm | Volvo +62 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Ford Puma Gen-E
Volvo EX30
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Ford Puma Gen-E
Volvo EX30
Other comparisons in this class: Crossover / SUV, segment B
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Ford Puma Gen-E or Volvo EX30?
The Volvo EX30 goes further: 475 km WLTP against the 419 km of the Ford Puma Gen-E. That is a difference of 56 km.
How do the drivetrains of the Ford Puma Gen-E and the Volvo EX30 differ?
The Ford Puma Gen-E has FWD and 168 PS. The Volvo EX30 has RWD and 272 PS.
Which is more powerful — Ford Puma Gen-E or Volvo EX30?
The Volvo EX30 is stronger: 272 PS against the 168 PS of the Ford Puma Gen-E. The gap is 104 PS.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Ford Puma Gen-E takes more: 523 l against 318 l in the Volvo EX30. The difference is 205 l.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.