Ford Puma, undervalued and bloody brilliant.
Discussion
TooMany2cvs said:
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...
It's nothing to do with rose tints either - they were very well thought of at the time, and I believe you are mistaken by the image, as a I recall a very clear divide between the Tigra and the Puma. Many examples can be had for mere hundreds so they are a long way from typical classic Ford money. I said it earlier, Ford judged everything just right (suspension, ride, steering, power, handling, price, looks) and as a result the car became better than the sum of its parts.
You may not want to hear it, but if you want a more in depth answer to your question I'm afraid you're going to have to find one to drive! Probably the quickest way to get an idea of what (if indeed anything) makes them special. Although it does sound like you've already made up your mind!
Never had a Puma, but not surprised by those that love it. Having ridden in the back of my mates a few times the only problem I ever noticed was not much head room in the back, in fact at 6'0" it touched.
I have always liked Fords, dare I admit I had a SportKA, until the wife pinched it, it was the replacement for my Mondeo ST24 has we had two big cars so wanted something smaller, reminded me of the three XR2's I owner throughout my youth.
As with most cars its not always how fast they are, well they handle or cheap to buy, its how they make you feel. When they they cost nothing, handle well, sound nice and throaty with enough power to feel like good fun your going love it. Thanks for the write up.
TooMany2cvs said:
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...
No-one is denying the fact it's a go faster Fiesta in a frock. But the engine and gearbox make the car.
It isn't hugely fast, but the 1.7 engine made 10bhp more than the 1.8 and 5bhp less than the 2.0 Zetec units of the time.
It's a revvy unit, that still pulls high in the rev range. Coupled with the close ratio box with a very slick gear change, it's huge fun and very pleasing to drive.
Handling wise, it lacks the refinement of, for example, the MK1 Focus. Due to its lack of independent rear suspension. But it's incredibly nimble and predictable on the limit. You can be extremely ham fisted with it and it will still behave brilliantly.
The brakes are the biggest let down and a reminder of it's Fiesta roots. The lack of power becomes apparent on wide open roads too, but a twisty b-road is huge fun.
I loved mine and it's the only car I regret selling.
I really miss mine. I spent a fortune keeping it on the road but it was easily the best car I have owned.
Since then I have had a Subaru Legacy Spec B and an Audi A8 - neither of which has every put anywhere near as broad a smile on my face. I'm now moving into an E46 M3 - which I'm hoping can live up the amount of smiles per mile that the Puma delivered.
Since then I have had a Subaru Legacy Spec B and an Audi A8 - neither of which has every put anywhere near as broad a smile on my face. I'm now moving into an E46 M3 - which I'm hoping can live up the amount of smiles per mile that the Puma delivered.
TooMany2cvs - you are one weapons-grade argumentative sod.
Arguing over a car you haven't even bloody driven.
Edit: I rarely resort to any sort of insult on here, but my god you're an insufferable twit.
To everyone else - as to the Puma, I wholeheartedly agree; brilliant things, especially with the bushes refreshed
Arguing over a car you haven't even bloody driven.
Edit: I rarely resort to any sort of insult on here, but my god you're an insufferable twit.
To everyone else - as to the Puma, I wholeheartedly agree; brilliant things, especially with the bushes refreshed
Edited by TheJimi on Tuesday 9th February 20:52
TheJimi said:
TooMany2cvs - you are one weapons-grade argumentative sod.
Arguing over a car you haven't even bloody driven.
Edit: I rarely resort to any sort of insult on here, but my god you're an insufferable twit.
To everyone else - as to the Puma, I wholeheartedly agree; brilliant things, especially with the bushes refreshed
Lol Was waiting for a comment like that, maybe I'm being too polite.Arguing over a car you haven't even bloody driven.
Edit: I rarely resort to any sort of insult on here, but my god you're an insufferable twit.
To everyone else - as to the Puma, I wholeheartedly agree; brilliant things, especially with the bushes refreshed
Edited by TheJimi on Tuesday 9th February 20:52
Maybe he will buy one, then another and change his username to suit.
I never liked the Citroen, strange people tend to buy them around my neck of the woods.
) of money on them and they can be fairly rapid.... (at 8,500 rpm 
)
NiceCupOfTea said:
That's a hell of a power hike without forced induction!
No forced induction, just a 9k redline. Originally built by somebody with far more talent than me for hill climbing, but wound down to 7500 so around 210bhp to make it a little more friendly. Only up at around 170bhp at 6k, which for most of the time is fine, however for that moment when you need to overtake/exit a corner, the extra 40bhp in the next 1500rpm makes for an exciting experience 
I'm suitable to answer this having owner one for a bit.
Joyous to drive with a lovely gearbox but as with all Ford's I've owned it was riddled with rust and its what eventually killed it, sold to a man who wanted it welded more than I did.
Down sides to ownership were gear ratios(at the time I was doing moon mileage to see an ex who lived in bicester) quite small inside. Terrible headache lights and biggest issue with mine was that the gearbox broke, so it ended up a four speed. What was weird is it literally just stopped selecting it. I suspected selector fork snappage, however there was no noise or anything like that.
Overall I'd never own another one again. Only reason to get one is cheapness but Renaultsport clios are almost as cheap nowadays and is a better car in 90% of areas
Joyous to drive with a lovely gearbox but as with all Ford's I've owned it was riddled with rust and its what eventually killed it, sold to a man who wanted it welded more than I did.
Down sides to ownership were gear ratios(at the time I was doing moon mileage to see an ex who lived in bicester) quite small inside. Terrible headache lights and biggest issue with mine was that the gearbox broke, so it ended up a four speed. What was weird is it literally just stopped selecting it. I suspected selector fork snappage, however there was no noise or anything like that.
Overall I'd never own another one again. Only reason to get one is cheapness but Renaultsport clios are almost as cheap nowadays and is a better car in 90% of areas
TooMany2cvs said:
Funny, isn't it?
Take a cramped and rot-prone late '90s car on the Mk4 Fester platform, and it's a standing joke if it's a Ka, but some kind of petrolhead nirvana if it's a Puma.
This must be a comment from someone who's never been in, driven or owned a Mk1 Ka. Those engines are notoriously terrible.Take a cramped and rot-prone late '90s car on the Mk4 Fester platform, and it's a standing joke if it's a Ka, but some kind of petrolhead nirvana if it's a Puma.
The Puma however, is a nice little surprise... for a rot box!
TooMany2cvs said:
Funny, isn't it?
Take a cramped and rot-prone late '90s car on the Mk4 Fester platform, and it's a standing joke if it's a Ka, but some kind of petrolhead nirvana if it's a Puma.
Firstly, take the old Ka- it wasn't that bad a car to drive. Just had an ancient wheezing engine. I couldn't fault it. If they had re-released it with the 1.0 ecotech engine and galvanized would you complain? Take a cramped and rot-prone late '90s car on the Mk4 Fester platform, and it's a standing joke if it's a Ka, but some kind of petrolhead nirvana if it's a Puma.
As for the Puma- I bought a T reg 1.7 one for £900. I told my missus that I'd always wanted one- she remembers me saying the samething when they were first released. So I bought one- it was a great 12month relationship- fantastic. Yes it wasn't perfect but it was fantastic fun. I could also get my mountain bike in the back, seats down and apart from the heater being very hot, a strange water noise from the matrix(?) it never let me down and did I drive it carefully? NO.
NiceCupOfTea said:
TooMany2cvs said:
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...
It's nothing to do with rose tints either - they were very well thought of at the time, and I believe you are mistaken by the image, as a I recall a very clear divide between the Tigra and the Puma. Many examples can be had for mere hundreds so they are a long way from typical classic Ford money. I said it earlier, Ford judged everything just right (suspension, ride, steering, power, handling, price, looks) and as a result the car became better than the sum of its parts.
You may not want to hear it, but if you want a more in depth answer to your question I'm afraid you're going to have to find one to drive! Probably the quickest way to get an idea of what (if indeed anything) makes them special. Although it does sound like you've already made up your mind!
Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff