Puma 1.7 vs Focus ST170
Discussion
I'm starting a new job next month which will involve a certain amount of driving to customer sites (UK wide), will be getting paid a car allowance to use my own vehicle.
I'm going out tomorrow to look at a 1.7 Puma and a 3-door Focus ST170.
Having previously owned a 1.7 Puma, I know that they're not the best of cars for motorway slogs, but I am a fairly enthusiastic driver and will usually seek out the more 'scenic' route - where the Puma certainly excels.
Given my propensity for A/B-roads vs M/Ways, I'm looking for a little advice as to how the ST compares with the Puma in this regard.
I'm going out tomorrow to look at a 1.7 Puma and a 3-door Focus ST170.
Having previously owned a 1.7 Puma, I know that they're not the best of cars for motorway slogs, but I am a fairly enthusiastic driver and will usually seek out the more 'scenic' route - where the Puma certainly excels.
Given my propensity for A/B-roads vs M/Ways, I'm looking for a little advice as to how the ST compares with the Puma in this regard.
Not owned an ST170, but have owned a 1.7 Puma and currently own a Mk1 2.0 Focus Zetec. I did briefly test drive an ST170, I was very underwhelmed.
Focus is no doubt a better Motorway car, but I didn't find the Puma too bad either, drove to Silverstone and Birmingham from Cardiff a few times with no complaints.
The Focus is a better handling car with MUCH better brakes and an ST170 will be quicker, but the Puma is the more entertaining car by far. I'd pick the Puma for a B-Road blast any day.
Focus is a nicer place to be as well with half leather seats and more spacious cabin. Can't hide the Fiesta based dash in the Puma, no matter how much silver paint you put on it! Very cramped and quality isn't as good as the Focus (which isn't great either).
The Focus will feel very sedate and lazy compared to the lively nature of the Puma.
Focus is no doubt a better Motorway car, but I didn't find the Puma too bad either, drove to Silverstone and Birmingham from Cardiff a few times with no complaints.
The Focus is a better handling car with MUCH better brakes and an ST170 will be quicker, but the Puma is the more entertaining car by far. I'd pick the Puma for a B-Road blast any day.
Focus is a nicer place to be as well with half leather seats and more spacious cabin. Can't hide the Fiesta based dash in the Puma, no matter how much silver paint you put on it! Very cramped and quality isn't as good as the Focus (which isn't great either).
The Focus will feel very sedate and lazy compared to the lively nature of the Puma.
Never driven a Puma but had an ST170 for a while.
Cons
Poor on fuel like most fords. I got 24mpg average
Not that quick vs clio sport/CTR, warm hatch rather than hot hatch
insurance high for what it is
Pros
Did handle quite well
pretty comfy on a long trips
Good looking car
reliable
When buying watch out for the variable length inlet runner. Theres an actuator/cable that often fails on them which stops it working.
Cons
Poor on fuel like most fords. I got 24mpg average
Not that quick vs clio sport/CTR, warm hatch rather than hot hatch
insurance high for what it is
Pros
Did handle quite well
pretty comfy on a long trips
Good looking car
reliable
When buying watch out for the variable length inlet runner. Theres an actuator/cable that often fails on them which stops it working.
Currently own a puma 1.7 and I use it on the motorway everyday. Its a tad busy above 70mph but its not unbearable sat at 70-80mph. It sits at 4k rpm at 80.
I've not driven an st170 but it should be as much fun in the twisties, certainly the brakes on my 1.8 TDCI were a darn sight better then the puma's. Although from what I hear the st170 doesn't seem that quick and fuel consumption quite poor compared to the performancy and econamy of the standard 2.0 focus.
I've not driven an st170 but it should be as much fun in the twisties, certainly the brakes on my 1.8 TDCI were a darn sight better then the puma's. Although from what I hear the st170 doesn't seem that quick and fuel consumption quite poor compared to the performancy and econamy of the standard 2.0 focus.
Focus is a much bigger heavier car but arguably better suspension and an extra 50ish hp.
Not driven the ST but the plain mk1 focus 1.6 was fun to drive but not *quite* as good as a 1.4 puma (they had about the same power).
With the extra power I would have thought the Focus would be better myself.
Not driven the ST but the plain mk1 focus 1.6 was fun to drive but not *quite* as good as a 1.4 puma (they had about the same power).
With the extra power I would have thought the Focus would be better myself.
Rickyy said:
Not owned an ST170, but have owned a 1.7 Puma and currently own a Mk1 2.0 Focus Zetec. I did briefly test drive an ST170, I was very underwhelmed.
I've owned a 2L zetec and and ST170 and the ST170 doesn't feel much quicker than the 2L due to the ST170 having very long gears and a different gear box. It is actually a fair bit quicker but you need to rev the nuts of it.stargazer30 said:
I've owned a 2L zetec and and ST170 and the ST170 doesn't feel much quicker than the 2L due to the ST170 having very long gears and a different gear box. It is actually a fair bit quicker but you need to rev the nuts of it.
This.You have to work the engine very hard, and it's deceptive how quick they are due to their refined nature.
I found mine an excellent compromise as a fun car and motorway cruiser as once in 6th gear it is just over 3000rpm at 80mph.
Never been in a Puma so can't comment.
Puma is no good for motorway work, forget it. They do 4k at 80 and you're on the edge of the VCT kicking in at that rpm so scoff fuel like a good'un. If you're the sort of person that does 50-60 on motorways then a Puma would be okay but if you're a 70-80+ driver then the Puma gets really annoying really fast.
All that jazz said:
Puma is no good for motorway work, forget it. They do 4k at 80 and you're on the edge of the VCT kicking in at that rpm so scoff fuel like a good'un. If you're the sort of person that does 50-60 on motorways then a Puma would be okay but if you're a 70-80+ driver then the Puma gets really annoying really fast.
They're not THAT bad, come on.I owned a 1.7 for 3 years and that rarely dropped below 35 MPG average no matter where or how I drove it and a Puma's not a car that encourages gentle 50MPH tootles on the Motorway
If you're the kind of driver for who getting 40+ MPG is important, you're looking at the wrong kind of cars, but that's not the impression I get of the OP.
M.
marcosgt said:
They're not THAT bad, come on.
I owned a 1.7 for 3 years and that rarely dropped below 35 MPG average no matter where or how I drove it.
If you're the kind of driver for who getting 40+ MPG is important, you're looking at the wrong kind of cars, but that's not the impression I get of the OP.
M.
Simple fact of the matter is that they aren't motorway cars. The gearing is too short on them and so as the OP has stated he'll be doing motorway work then imho it wouldn't be a good choice when he's also considering a Focus that will do 1k less revs at the same speed and probably better mpg too. If he doesn't care about the mpg or the rpm off the end of the dial on a motorway then sure, go for the Puma, it's much more fun to drive imho. I owned a 1.7 for 3 years and that rarely dropped below 35 MPG average no matter where or how I drove it.
If you're the kind of driver for who getting 40+ MPG is important, you're looking at the wrong kind of cars, but that's not the impression I get of the OP.
M.
Focus ST170 has the nicer interior and doubtlessly the more grown-up car. Much easier on a motorway run.
Puma is based on the similar age Fiesta and it shows, particularly with the interior. Ultimately more fun and the 1.7 engine likes to rev and is quite rewarding.
The big downside for me with the Focus ST170 was the engine. It had a crude Variable Valve setup which asks for revs but rewards with it feeling stressed and uncomfortable. Not desperately reliable (in that form) either.
IMO with both, you sit too high.
Puma is based on the similar age Fiesta and it shows, particularly with the interior. Ultimately more fun and the 1.7 engine likes to rev and is quite rewarding.
The big downside for me with the Focus ST170 was the engine. It had a crude Variable Valve setup which asks for revs but rewards with it feeling stressed and uncomfortable. Not desperately reliable (in that form) either.
IMO with both, you sit too high.
Thanks for the info guys, I went out today and bought.......another Puma!!
It was local, rot free and pretty cheap, it had also just had a fresh MOT put on it and had gone through without a single advisory.
After spending the last few months driving a very sheddy Mk4 Fiesta 1.25, it's a big (and very pleasant) change to be back into something fun.
It was local, rot free and pretty cheap, it had also just had a fresh MOT put on it and had gone through without a single advisory.
After spending the last few months driving a very sheddy Mk4 Fiesta 1.25, it's a big (and very pleasant) change to be back into something fun.
All that jazz said:
Simple fact of the matter is that they aren't motorway cars. The gearing is too short on them and so as the OP has stated he'll be doing motorway work then imho it wouldn't be a good choice when he's also considering a Focus that will do 1k less revs at the same speed and probably better mpg too. If he doesn't care about the mpg or the rpm off the end of the dial on a motorway then sure, go for the Puma, it's much more fun to drive imho.
OP said:
I am a fairly enthusiastic driver and will usually seek out the more 'scenic' route
All that jazz said:
marcosgt said:
They're not THAT bad, come on.
I owned a 1.7 for 3 years and that rarely dropped below 35 MPG average no matter where or how I drove it.
If you're the kind of driver for who getting 40+ MPG is important, you're looking at the wrong kind of cars, but that's not the impression I get of the OP.
M.
Simple fact of the matter is that they aren't motorway cars.I owned a 1.7 for 3 years and that rarely dropped below 35 MPG average no matter where or how I drove it.
If you're the kind of driver for who getting 40+ MPG is important, you're looking at the wrong kind of cars, but that's not the impression I get of the OP.
M.
I suppose to a degree, that's a matter of opinion, but it's certainly NOT a 'simple fact'.
A Focus might be quieter on the motorway, but I bet it won't be as much fun overall.
I guess the answer is for the OP to try the Puma out and see what he thinks.
M.
Puma's are awesome, can't believe I've ignored them for so long. Been driving my mates about recently and although not the fastest car in the world, it feels bloody lively with lovely direct steering. Did find the seats and driving position in general a bit crap and rear arches seem to be a consumable item but for the price of them hey who cares.
Maxus said:
hora said:
Plus it'll actually have brakes 
Are poor brakes a Puma thing? Mine are very spongey but with a firm push they do eventually work. OP.. To put it simply I would take the Focus for long motorway trips and the Puma for everything else. As competent as the Focus is its just a bit dull.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff