Ford Puma, undervalued and bloody brilliant.
Discussion
JustinF said:
TooMany2cvs said:
JustinF said:
The 1.3 KA engine is a totally different kettle of fish
Yes, the engine's different. Woo.Turning Japanese said:
Good to hear all the positive comments regarding the Puma.
I'll be honest I never could see what the fuss was about until I drove one.
Can anyone recommend from personal some good tires for them?
I ran one for 5 years as a daily and can confirm that for truly hilarious handling traits some P6000's on the back and Toyo's up front is the way to go.I'll be honest I never could see what the fuss was about until I drove one.
Can anyone recommend from personal some good tires for them?
Great little cars, I had use of one for a few months after my car was written off. My only grumble was that the drivers seat needed to be mounted lower. A really fun event everytime I drove it. I even liked the interior. The only reason that I didn't buy one for myself, is that almost all of my reasonably high mileage is done on the motorway and for that my BMW with a 6 cylinder engine is far more relaxing. I also manage to borrow the Puma from time to time.
TooMany2cvs said:
JustinF said:
The 1.3 KA engine is a totally different kettle of fish
Yes, the engine's different. Woo.But you'd probably know all of that if you spent less time pontificating on subjects you're utterly clueless on.
ManOpener said:
TooMany2cvs said:
JustinF said:
The 1.3 KA engine is a totally different kettle of fish
Yes, the engine's different. Woo.But I'm not sure it's an altogether correct one - a quick google suggests it was the ubiquitous IB5 box as the Mk4 Fiesta and Ka, a revision of the original Mk1 Fiesta box, and which still limps on in the current EcoSport. And was there really a big suspension difference other than the usual minor damper and spring rate tweaks?
Yes, a three-door coupe shell is likely to be stiffer than a five-door hatch - but that's a big ol' hole for the tailgate compared to the Ka, or even to the 3dr Fiesta. Do you have any torsional stiffness figures?
TooMany2cvs said:
ManOpener said:
TooMany2cvs said:
JustinF said:
The 1.3 KA engine is a totally different kettle of fish
Yes, the engine's different. Woo.But I'm not sure it's an altogether correct one - a quick google suggests it was the ubiquitous IB5 box as the Mk4 Fiesta and Ka, a revision of the original Mk1 Fiesta box, and which still limps on in the current EcoSport. And was there really a big suspension difference other than the usual minor damper and spring rate tweaks?
Yes, a three-door coupe shell is likely to be stiffer than a five-door hatch - but that's a big ol' hole for the tailgate compared to the Ka, or even to the 3dr Fiesta. Do you have any torsional stiffness figures?
Generally acknowledged to be one of the best, most involving, communicative and fun front drivers ever made and you are asking for comparative torsional stiffness figures vs the KA. Did you buy a KA and your wife leave you for a Puma driver or something?
Mr Gearchange said:
Generally acknowledged to be one of the best, most involving, communicative and fun front drivers ever made
That might be going a bit far...But, yes, maybe I am daring to question the orthodoxy here.
Kas are s
t. Pumas are ohmigawdfantastic. WHY?The difference seems to be some panels which may or may not make it a bit stiffer, some damper-and-spring tickling, and a slightly different parts-bin lump. Right. And...?
Let's face it, get down to basics and nobody can seriously deny that IS just a Mk4 Fester/Ka with different panels and a Fiesta Mk5/Focus Mk1 engine with another 80cc and then-fashionable vvt. Parts-bin-a-go-go. I seem to remember them being dismissed as just hairdressery Fester coupes back in the day, just as the contemporary Tigra was to the Corsa. How much of this rose-tinted-rear-view-mirror is just the usual blue oval fawning, especially since so many even vaguely desirable Fords seem to be fetching bloody silly money currently, and how much of it actually has a basis in reality? Don't just say "Well, drive one...". Explain...
They are brilliant to drive. The gear change is as slick as they come and the whole feel of the car is just right. I'm amazed at what they did with humble Fiesta underpinnings (although the Fiesta of that era was also a good handler.) I took one to the Lake District and I wasn't expecting much. It was not only better than expected, it was one of the most fun cars I've driven. Even the modest power suits the car and rewards you for putting in the effort.
TooMany2cvs said:
But I'm not sure it's an altogether correct one - a quick google suggests it was the ubiquitous IB5 box as the Mk4 Fiesta and Ka
Same series, unique ratios AFAIK, so not actually the same box as used in the Mk4 Fiesta or Ka.TooMany2cvs said:
And was there really a big suspension difference other than the usual minor damper and spring rate tweaks?
Stiffer and shorter springs, stiffer dampers, revised and stiffer rear beam, different front anti-roll bar, wider track according to the Ford Technical Training manual quoted on PumaPeople (http://www.pumapeople.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=109583). So the changes are fairly substantialTooMany2cvs said:
Do you have any torsional stiffness figures?
Can't find a number for the shell. There was one abandoned in my apartment car park for the last 18 months. Only got towed away a few weeks back. Cracking little cars.
As you say, brakes need upgrading really but a decent set of discs and pads and they can be just about acceptable. Only other thing was the tiny fuel tank which meant never long between petrol stations.
Other than that, a hoot to drive. Not the fastest thing by a long way but revvy engine and great handling meant you could wring its absolute neck within legal speeds and have a big grin at the end of the journey.
As you say, brakes need upgrading really but a decent set of discs and pads and they can be just about acceptable. Only other thing was the tiny fuel tank which meant never long between petrol stations.
Other than that, a hoot to drive. Not the fastest thing by a long way but revvy engine and great handling meant you could wring its absolute neck within legal speeds and have a big grin at the end of the journey.
Turning Japanese said:
Good to hear all the positive comments regarding the Puma.
I'll be honest I never could see what the fuss was about until I drove one.
Can anyone recommend from personal some good tires for them?
I put Michelin Pilot Exalto's on mine, good and grippy, but it was more fun to drive on the OEM P6000's, NLA now though. I'll be honest I never could see what the fuss was about until I drove one.
Can anyone recommend from personal some good tires for them?
If I still had it I'd be putting decent eco tyres on it, like Dunlop Sport BluResponse.
Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff