2002 Ford Puma from UK and Ireland - Comments

Hi I used to own a ford puma 6 months ago, someone pulled out in front of me and it is now written of. so I've bought a renault 19 16v meant for a cheap run around. but I'm so impressed with it I'm going to keep it. it is a lot faster than the puma when you go higher than 4000 rpm, and out handles the puma in the dry as well. these cars come with strut braces as standard. i was gutted when the puma was written of, but now I think its for the best, BUY A RENAULT 19 16V EVERYBODY!

Author here again:

I'm not sure why I come back here. I suppose it is expecting something new, but there always seems to be more comments along the same lines.

A) People who own/drive pumas are highly complementary

b) People who haven't quoting statistics about other faster cars

To a's: glad you like your cars!

To address a couple of b comments: I am not a hot hatch connoiseur; I am only 21 and am too busy working in Central London to buy another car (what would be the point!?). For that matter, my next car will not be a hot hatch, but probably a junior executive car.

To address another couple of comments: I am not in fact a girl (!). Because I choose a car that drives well and not just based on its bad-boy looks and 0-60 time? Wow. How female. If I want to go fast I will fit NOS, but, again, that is totally irrelevant.

To the last comment about the Renault: this is the sort of comment that is constructive; a direct comparison. I have never driven that car, but have heard good things about it. Anyone else reading, unless you have some direct comparison (and not just another statistic) please stay off. What makes me smile again and again is that most people commenting here probably haven't even driven one. Anyone that has will recognise the fantastic feeling that driving down a backroad in the Puma gives: the confidence it gives the driver to go that bit faster; turn the wheel and inch and the car moves an inch; put the foot to the floor and you get a progressive, flexible engine...

The Puma is a fine little car with junior hot hatch performance and a chassis to match many hot hatches of its day. The reason you are getting so much grief on this thread is that you claim to beat BMW 330i and Golf Mk5 GTi in a drag race with a much slower car. If these races happened then the other drivers were either very poor or weren't trying!

Try racing a car in your own league and reporting back the results, like a Saxo VTR or a Golf 110 TDi, if you claim the scalps of 200 BHP+ performance cars then people will try and bring you back down to earth and criticise your little 123BHP fiesta based coupe.

Yeah, I don't understand why all these people are concerned with 0 - 60 times.

You buy a hot hatch or any small sports car really for handling.

My Chevy Aveo, hardly sporty, gets blown away by other cars in a drag race (no surprise there) but I'm always beating them around corners, especially on mountain roads around here. And that's what I bought it for besides its insanely cheap price ($6995 NEW).

Just been reading all of the above comments and can't believe one little Puma can cause so much controversy.

I used to own a Racing Puma and yes it was a nice little car, handled well and I never had any problem (as such) with it. I can see why you’re so happy with it.

I now own a Civic Type R and can honestly say that regardless of the road, the power, grip and handling of my Civic is far superior in every way tan my old Racing Puma. I sure that even a really mediocre CTR driver will be able to keep up (and probably overtake you) with you on your regular drive home with 200bhp under their right foot.

Sorry!

The Puma is a great little car. Drove the std 1.7 and racing a couple of years ago and enjoyed both. In fact was quite amazed. However it is a little car and the racing's suspension will rock your bones so not the best car for long journeys. Regardless of that small negative, well done Ford for bringing out a car that was well priced, great fun, cheap to run and stylish. And they haven't stopped... Focus ST, this car is fantastic, drove it before Christmas and was overwhelmed by the power and that glorious 5-pot sound. Am awaiting a March delivery and cannot wait and that was not planned! Recommend you all drive one if you can find a demo and talk nicely to your bank managers.

In regards to the previous comment I am now going to join the band wagon for the speed comments and my car will beat yours philosophy. You claim the civic type-r will hammer any racing puma regardless of factors or situations. well when "what car" or another monthly car mag raced your trusty civic and a seat cupra r round a track the puma came out on top minus 48bhp and 300cc under your honda now that's what people have been getting at! it's quite impressive how a car so obviously underpowered compared to the honda can beat it on pure handling.Pure drivers car. thank you very much. deal or no deal!

CTR owner back..

I would like to see such a review! Both Top Gear and 5th gear have raced the Civic around their tracks against other hot hatches including Clio 172/182, Leon Cupra R, Alfa 147 GTA, New (05) Golf GTI to mention some, and in all cases the Civic (driven by a professional) was quicker than the lot!

So what you’re really saying is that if your Fiesta (sorry I mean Puma) is quicker than all of these cars... I think not!

Don't get me wrong, I have owned a Racing Puma (and did really like it), but it’s just not up to par with today’s modern hot hatches. After reading your previous comments am I right in thinking that you don't even own a Racing Puma, just a standard 1.7?! You talk about the Civic having suspect handling, slipping over manhole covers etc. what rubbish, so would any car in the wet, especially your Puma. Don't forget that I have owned a Puma (racing version) and there's no way in the world that it handles better than my CTR. I don't car what you say, it's a load of garbage, you know it and so does everyone else!

Maybe buy a car that can even hope of slaying the cars you claim to have, before comparing it to ones that are just way out of your league!

Get over your Puma and get a new car! In keeping with Fords, buy a new Focus ST, the reviews to date have been pretty good. Although, hang on, your Puma is quicker than a CTR round a track... the CTR is only marginally slower than the new Focus ST (Top Gear Powerlap)... which means...

Nah screw it, stick with your Puma and save yourself thousands!

I have just bought a Clio 182, and have read very good things about it and particularly against the CTR, I am interested to know which tests showed the CTR to be faster than the 172 / 182 Clios?

In 2002, Autocar tested the hot hatches on sale at the time and the quickest round a wet lap of a track (Castlecombe I think) was the Clio 172, followed by the MG ZS 180 and then the Pug 206 GTi 140, the CTR came 4th and they said it just does not handle well in the wet. The Cooper S, Leon Cupra, T Sport Corolla, ST170, a47 Selespeed and Golf TDi were well behind.

The Puma would have come last in this test or any other against real hot hatches, the author of this joke review needs to drive a 182 or Civic R to get a sense of reality.

CTR owner back again...

Don't know about performance in the wet, but watched Topgear shootout between a CTR and a Clio 182 and the laptimes were as follows CTR 54.29, Clio 54.49. Not much in it at all!

Also watched one of the last 5th Gear programmes on C5 and the CTR came out quicker than the Clio 182 Cup - again not much in it. To be honest they are both very capable cars with many excellent reviews, if it haddn't have been for the need of extra space I would have bought a Clio 182 anyway. I've been to a few track days and the Clio's do seem quicker, I think perhaps to get the best from a CTR you need to be a pretty good driver. Much respect for both cars though!

Author here:

I claim that it is a more entertaining drive with a more direct feel to the steering. Criticisms of CTR have always been to do with handling; from my opinion all the way up to car magazines. I am afraid that you are just in denial; the CTR is nothing special anymore.

I could buy a new car. On my wage I could get a new Focus, a new clio, or anything else you mention. I DON'T WANT TO! I have a cheap-to-run, fun-to-drive car that is admired by anyone who has actually driven it, and respected by those people who actually know about cars (e.g. motoring press).

You're right, there is very little to choose between them in performance. The CTR is a larger and better built car and the Clio is better equipped, both have comfy seats and look awesome!

If only they could keep up with a Puma 1.7i!!!

The author of this review claims that a 1.7 123 BHP Ford Puma can beat a Civic R in handling and that the closest match off the lights is a BMW 330i.

My Clio 182 handles similarly to a Type R and accelerates similarly to a 330i except at top end where the BM will run away with it. I don't claim to beat either car despite having a similar car to yours for weight, but with 60BHP or 50% extra power.

Fancy meeting up and comparing the 2 cars at one of the run what you brung meets at Santa Pod or York drag strips this year?

It seems the best way to settle this, if your Puma is within half a second of my Clio at the end of a 1/4 mile run then I will respect it and your review and will apologise on here for my previous posts!

How about it?

I really don't understand you people. You should just go back to your Playstations.

I'll say it again: IT IS NOT ABOUT OUTRIGHT SPEED.

Secondly: I think you are hard pushed to claim that a Clio looks good! It is a completely generic off-the-shelf shopping trolley.

Well there you have it!

You make big performance claims for your car and then chicken out when asked to prove them in an honourable and legal way.

We will just have to rely on performance figures then, and they say you are lying.

I won't comment on the looks of the Puma because enough people have left comments regarding hairdressers etc. Real drivers prefer cars that look purposeful, squat stance (low centre of gravity), wheels that fill the arches etc etc, I could go on, but my point is proven!