Discussion
noogie said:
I'm looking at getting something small and fun for around £1000-£1500. Currently a toss up between a mkI MX5 (quite high mileage 1.8, but I have had two of these before...) or a Ford Puma (a bit feminine but apparently a good drive). Any thoughts?
Which one did you enjoy driving the most?The Puma's a great little 4 seat (and you can get 4 adults in) FWD coupe.
It's more fun than any cheap coupe has any right to be, but it's not a RWD sportscar.
If your needs don't extend further than 2 seats and a smallish boot (The Puma's isn't massive, but it is a hatch and you can drop the rear seats) then the MX5 would seem the obvious choice, but as someone else said, which do YOU prefer?
M.
It's more fun than any cheap coupe has any right to be, but it's not a RWD sportscar.
If your needs don't extend further than 2 seats and a smallish boot (The Puma's isn't massive, but it is a hatch and you can drop the rear seats) then the MX5 would seem the obvious choice, but as someone else said, which do YOU prefer?
M.
I had a MX-5 and changed it for a Puma.
The obvious point it that the Puma is a much more practical daily driver, it's also more economical. There are the token rear seats, larger boot, better security.
Driving wise I found the main difference was the MX-5's more immediate steering. My Puma suffered from a strange torque steer effect, the steering tightening when accelerating over uneven roads.
I preferred pressing a button to cool things down, rather than stopping and messing around dropping the hood.
The obvious point it that the Puma is a much more practical daily driver, it's also more economical. There are the token rear seats, larger boot, better security.
Driving wise I found the main difference was the MX-5's more immediate steering. My Puma suffered from a strange torque steer effect, the steering tightening when accelerating over uneven roads.
I preferred pressing a button to cool things down, rather than stopping and messing around dropping the hood.
Edited by niva441 on Tuesday 5th June 08:56
marcosgt said:
The Puma's a great little 4 seat (and you can get 4 adults in) FWD coupe.
It's more fun than any cheap coupe has any right to be, but it's not a RWD sportscar.
If your needs don't extend further than 2 seats and a smallish boot (The Puma's isn't massive, but it is a hatch and you can drop the rear seats) then the MX5 would seem the obvious choice, but as someone else said, which do YOU prefer?
M.
Why buy a puma, when you could buy an old tigra (or a corsa) or a fiesta as it's just a puma with a more practical shape? It's more fun than any cheap coupe has any right to be, but it's not a RWD sportscar.
If your needs don't extend further than 2 seats and a smallish boot (The Puma's isn't massive, but it is a hatch and you can drop the rear seats) then the MX5 would seem the obvious choice, but as someone else said, which do YOU prefer?
M.
There is no real alternative to an MX5.
New POD said:
Why buy a puma, when you could buy an old tigra (or a corsa) or a fiesta as it's just a puma with a more practical shape?
There is no real alternative to an MX5.
I know you're trying to get a rise...There is no real alternative to an MX5.
But, for the sake of the OP, the Tigra is nothing like a Puma. And the Fiesta never had the brilliant 1.7 engine.
New POD said:
Why buy a puma, when you could buy an old tigra (or a corsa) or a fiesta as it's just a puma with a more practical shape?
There is no real alternative to an MX5.
Have you driven them? For me, the 1.7 engine that Yamaha played with puts it head and shoulders about the rest. I'm not sure if the suspension was played with, but the Puma certainly felt much more controlled around the twisties than a Fiesta of the same vintage IMHO. There is no real alternative to an MX5.
Edited by yajeed on Tuesday 5th June 09:09
noogie said:
I've not driven a puma before. I expect the mx5 is the better drive, but the puma adds a little more practicality and has a roof that won't leak!
Get an MX5 with a roof that doesn't leak!You should be able to jetwash them if fitted correctly with good rubber seals etc and get only the odd small drip.Even with splits in the sides, my old MK1 roof never let in a drop in the rain.My current 2nd hand one doesn't, either.If they leak, they probably just need adjusting or tightening.
niva441 said:
I preferred pressing a button to cool things down, rather than stopping and messing around dropping the hood.
Don't forget plenty of MX5's have air con (if it works) but you should have had a practice at dropping the roof on the move.It's quite easy at slower speeds....so I am told. 
Never driven a puma myself, but a friend of mine has had a few that he now breaks along with mondeos.He kept one of them for quite some time as he said it was a great car to chuck about.If you have gone the MX5 route a few times, go with the puma for a change maybe?
Digby said:
Don't forget plenty of MX5's have air con (if it works) but you should have had a practice at dropping the roof on the move.It's quite easy at slower speeds....so I am told.
Never driven a puma myself, but a friend of mine has had a few that he now breaks along with mondeos.He kept one of them for quite some time as he said it was a great car to chuck about.If you have gone the MX5 route a few times, go with the puma for a change maybe?
Yes, unless the windows don't work which is a commmon fault, really must see to that... mine let themselves down so I have been known to get rather wet!Never driven a puma myself, but a friend of mine has had a few that he now breaks along with mondeos.He kept one of them for quite some time as he said it was a great car to chuck about.If you have gone the MX5 route a few times, go with the puma for a change maybe?
Also, careful when dropping the roof when moving, especially say below 10c, windows crack v.easily.
Having had a mk2 mx-5 and currently driving a puma I'd go the the mx-5. Thats assuming you dont need the extra space in the rear, both seats and boot, that a puma provides.
Lots of people will go on about rust on the rear arches of a puma, yes they all do it but mx-5's suffer as well.
RWD vs FWD both will give you a thrill as the puma is a very capable little car in the twisties although not as focused a drivers car as the mx.
The 1.7vct in the puma is the best engine in either car though, has loads of character and loves to rev and it will keep doing it all day long with out complaint. Didn't get the same impression from the 1.8 in my '5 despite it having more power.
The brakes on a puma are rubbish, they stop you fine but they are not very strong so a big stop from speed can be a tad nervy and they fade quite quickly.
The interior of the puma is abit cramped though, fine for me and a passenger but with me in the drivers seat the back seat is useless for anyone with legs. The advantage of a 2 seater sports car is I never had to be a taxi as no where for anyone to sit. I really do hate being asked to give people lifts!
I doubt you would be disappointed with either car, the '5 is the better drivers car but the puma is huge fun and other than the rust is reliable and cheap to repair.
What I would love to do at some point is take th 1.7VCT out of a puma, add the bits from the FRP that take it to about 150bhp, supercharge it and stick it in an MX-5. That would be a good combination.
Lots of people will go on about rust on the rear arches of a puma, yes they all do it but mx-5's suffer as well.
RWD vs FWD both will give you a thrill as the puma is a very capable little car in the twisties although not as focused a drivers car as the mx.
The 1.7vct in the puma is the best engine in either car though, has loads of character and loves to rev and it will keep doing it all day long with out complaint. Didn't get the same impression from the 1.8 in my '5 despite it having more power.
The brakes on a puma are rubbish, they stop you fine but they are not very strong so a big stop from speed can be a tad nervy and they fade quite quickly.
The interior of the puma is abit cramped though, fine for me and a passenger but with me in the drivers seat the back seat is useless for anyone with legs. The advantage of a 2 seater sports car is I never had to be a taxi as no where for anyone to sit. I really do hate being asked to give people lifts!
I doubt you would be disappointed with either car, the '5 is the better drivers car but the puma is huge fun and other than the rust is reliable and cheap to repair.
What I would love to do at some point is take th 1.7VCT out of a puma, add the bits from the FRP that take it to about 150bhp, supercharge it and stick it in an MX-5. That would be a good combination.
noogie said:
I'm looking at getting something small and fun for around £1000-£1500. Currently a toss up between a mkI MX5 (quite high mileage 1.8, but I have had two of these before...) or a Ford Puma (a bit feminine but apparently a good drive). Any thoughts?
Looked at both and drove many, preferred the mx5. For a fwd car the puma was pretty good, nice engine and gearbox, as a runaround it's a good choice. Rust is an issue and you are probably more likely to find a looked after mx5 than a puma. Just prefer rwd cars so it would have to be an mx5 for me, just so much more fun.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff