Puma Vs MK 1 MR2

[whythem]

Puma 1.7 00 reg, long mot excellent condition Vs 89F MK1b MR2, long mot, excellent condition, both similary priced.

Looking for opinions of comparative performance and reliability between the two. The car is used everyday, but extra seats and luggage space are unimportant. What do you think?

[trickywoo]

They'll both likely have issues with tin worm.

Puma would be slightly easier to live with.

I'd go for the one you prefer as there wouldn't be much in it in terms of running costs.

[LuS1fer]

I think the MR2 was OK in it's day but it's no looker and on that basis, I'd have the Puma.

[Rawwr]

Personally, I'd plump for the Puma.

[Chris_w666]

Puma is probably a bit better to live with as a daily driver.

[IanMorewood]

Puma came out top of my list when looking for a useable cheap coupe, FIAT Coupe was 2nd choice, MR2 came in about 6th on the list, just too impractical for me.

[alfa pint]

I had a 1990 MR2 and it was an absolutely cracking car.

You'll learn about turn-in from it, which you won't with the puma. The MR2 has a better torque curve, so it's better for overtaking.

General faults

- the rear wheel arches have a tendency to rot, but you can buy repair sections
- check to make sure it doesn't slip out of 5th when you lift off
- check the electrics (for some stupid reason they used italian sourced parts!), so the leccy aerial, windows, demister are prone. On my car, the passenger window worked from my side, but not from the passenger side....
- check that the coolant hoses haven't split and that there's plenty of coolant.

Do it! It's a far more interesting car than the fiesta thing and you'll have more fun and chat about it. Besides, pop up headlights are fantastically cool from the cockpit.....

[Marf]

MR2 every time.

It's a sports car, not a Fiesta with a dress on.

[Agoogy]

I'd get a vtec CRX of the same period..... in fact I did

[thetapeworm]

I had a MK2 MR2 Turbo, when I wanted a £1000 fun car some years later the MK1 seemed to be a sensible plan... I ended up with a Puma and didn't regret it.

As mentioned above rust will be a potential issue on both but a Puma with the Lux pack or a few options ticked will be a nicer car to live with day to day. The MR2 would be more of a weekend project for me I think.

[RDE]

I haven't so much as sat in any Mk of MR2 i'm afraid, but I owned a Puma for five years. Don't forget that the Fiesta that it was based on was a good car to start with, so the Puma only made things better*. It will rot to pieces if you let it, but it's a great all-rounder. Superb fun, nippy enough, comfortable enough, pretty enough, frugal enough, practical enough...

I can't say it's better than a Mk1 MR2, as i've no experience of them. All I can say is that if you're disappointed with owning a Puma, i'd be really surprised.



* Apart from being heavier than the Fiesta, but we'll draw a discreet veil over that...

Edited by RDE on Wednesday 27th October 16:14

[varsas]

I'd rather have a nice Puma then a rough MR2 and vis versa.

If the puma is actually a good one (my brother tried to buy one 3 years ago; we looked at about 5, all were rough, most were rusting, the only decent one we found turned out to be a Cat C) go for it. They are pretty good to drive, if you wanted the MR2 you wouldn't be here so surely the newer/more common car will be more reliable and easier to maintain.

Edited by varsas on Wednesday 27th October 16:18

[RobM77]

I think most people would agree that the mk1 MR2 is a far better car to drive (I still miss mine now), but they're getting on a bit and it's a 21 year old car... I'd plump for the MR2 if you can find a really good one, but only because I adore them. If you don't mind FWD then I'd probably plump for the Puma, purely because it's a newer car. How about a 106 GTi/Rallye?

[Kateg28]

Mk1 MR2 all the way. Fun to drive and you get to avoid having to give everyone a lift

Yes they rot, a lot, but there are good ones out there. A 21 year old car has it's issues but it is a well loved car and one of the best driving cars. Admittedly it has no driving aids (ABS, airbags etc) but when I drive it I always start grinning. I actually feel I am in control of the car.

With the Mondeo, I don't actually have to take part in the driving experience.

And who notices a puma?

[whythem]

ooh decissions, decissions, the Puma is newer, less milage, fewer owners, but both are in similar condition, with the Puma just edging it. The brain says Puma, but the MR2 has "something" really cannot make up my mind, as I liked driving both on the test run.

What I really really want is 997 GT3

[Kit80]

MK1 MR2 without a doubt.

[Herman Toothrot]

If the MR2 really is in good condition grab it, great little car.

[sawman]

Having run both (89 mr2, 98 puma 1.7) the MR2 would be my pref - its a proper sports car, the only disadvantage is lack or rear seat. and you could argue lack of air con - I used to get mighty warm on long summer runs. Id say the mr2 might cost a bit more to run but not by a huge margin, mine had an appetite for rear tyres - but then I spent a lot of time towing my boat with it.

I never felt truly comfortable in the puma compared to the Mister

[Jasandjules]

The MK1 MR2 makes you forget that cars can lose grip, they are superb fun to drive, and of course if you get a T-Bar, you get to cruise around looking at the stars at night through the roof, not to mention when the sun comes out. As above though, get a good one - read rear arches which have been sorted out. I've had several over the years. I've only ever driven a Puma once, and I certainly enjoyed it BUT the Puma is not anywhere near as nice as the MR2 IMHO.

[mike9009]

Another vote for the MR2. (although I am slightly biased and have no direct experience of the Puma - although missus used to have the fiesta it was based upon)

As other have mentioned the biggest MR2 mk1 downfall is rust. Mine also went around the radiator mounts at the front of the car in addition to the rear arches.

In the six odd years of ownership and 70,000 miles I did in it - I had very few reliability problems. From memory the electric aerial failed (due to rust!), exhaust rusted through and had a minor coolant leak (hoses).

Everything else was regular service items, tyres and a battery. (not bad over the ownership period)

Mike