Ford Puma, 1.4 or 1.7
30 November 2006, 03:16 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ford Puma, 1.4 or 1.7
Hullo folks.
A friend is looking at a few cars and is quite keen on a wee puma...
Some reports say the 1.4 is the better option overall then others say the 1.7.. Apparently the 1.7 has issues with cylinder liners but not sure if this is a big issue.....
Any hints / tips either way or anything specific to look out for?
Thanks,
Chris
A friend is looking at a few cars and is quite keen on a wee puma...
Some reports say the 1.4 is the better option overall then others say the 1.7.. Apparently the 1.7 has issues with cylinder liners but not sure if this is a big issue.....
Any hints / tips either way or anything specific to look out for?
Thanks,
Chris
30 November 2006, 03:28 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dundee
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My mate has the 1.7. Its pretty nippy, and the handling is very good. I believe they made them with 1.6 engines in them towards the end. All i've heard about the racing ones is that they look good, but not really worth the money.
30 November 2006, 03:47 PM
#4
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Dull White BMW
Posts: 5,052
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 1.7 had issues with the Nikasil cylinder liners if the correct oil wasn't used. The 1.4 is s bit gutless at less than 100bhp I think, the 1.7 is 123bhp. I had a 1.7 and loved it!
The Racing Puma was 150bhp and apparently handled better than an Integra however they are prone to rust on the wide arches and the brakes need frequent rebuilds. Still nice eye-catching cars!
Steve
The Racing Puma was 150bhp and apparently handled better than an Integra however they are prone to rust on the wide arches and the brakes need frequent rebuilds. Still nice eye-catching cars!
Steve
30 November 2006, 03:52 PM
#5
I also had a 1.7 and I loved that car. It was a company car and although it went back nearly 3 years ago I still miss it to this day. It may not be the most powerful car out there but the handling and the way it drove made it so much fun for the money. Across country you can keep up with pretty much anything and the chassis inspires confidence. The 1.7 is the one to have though.
Major drawbacks were the lack of space in the front and back & the small petrol tank. You'll only see around 200 miles to a tank and a tank holds about £35 of fuel at todays prices I guess.
Major drawbacks were the lack of space in the front and back & the small petrol tank. You'll only see around 200 miles to a tank and a tank holds about £35 of fuel at todays prices I guess.
30 November 2006, 05:01 PM
#7
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: MIDLANDS
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My 2 pences worth..
I had both the 1.7 and the 1.4 pumas, the 1.7 is a touch faster but dont under estimate the Zetec se 1.4 not as slow as you may think, the 1.7 is not all that rapid but due to having varialble cam timing pulls harder at the top end! the 1.4 is quite grunty low down, but loses up top, which ever one you decide to go for you wont be disapointed brilliant fun, but poo brakes!! as standard on the non racing pumas.
Olly
I had both the 1.7 and the 1.4 pumas, the 1.7 is a touch faster but dont under estimate the Zetec se 1.4 not as slow as you may think, the 1.7 is not all that rapid but due to having varialble cam timing pulls harder at the top end! the 1.4 is quite grunty low down, but loses up top, which ever one you decide to go for you wont be disapointed brilliant fun, but poo brakes!! as standard on the non racing pumas.
Olly
Last edited by J.A.P (OLLY); 30 November 2006 at 05:09 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MarkO
ScoobyNet General
19
10 February 2000 05:01 PM
