FORD RACING PUMA info.

Coco · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:02

Absolutely, the Racing Puma is a very special car, which to get the best of will require fairly deep pockets.

Something which is always forgotten about the FRP's is that they were £23k brand new, the running costs many years later still reflect that it was originally an expensive car. So trying to compare the running costs with a similar priced used HotHatch is never going to be right.

Coco · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:05

Stonedofmoo said:
I thought it had another 30bhp, and comparing it to an ST24 is ridiculous. A racing Puma would slap an ST24 silly around a track

Puma 1.7 = 123 bhp (120 bhp/ton)
Racing Puma = 153 bhp (132 bhp/ton)
Mondy ST24 = 167 bhp (129 bhp/ton)

And absolutely agreed on the track front, same goes for a fast B-road, a well driven FRP would keep tow with many many cars.

EddScott · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:05

Hello, don't ignore me!!!

Why are running costs so high? Insurance and servicing?

Mic · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:06

Id be more inclined to buy a DC2 Integra Type R

Mechanical Arts · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:09

Mic said:
Id be more inclined to buy a DC2 Integra Type R

So would I, but the type R is more expensive to insure.

Mic · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:17

Mechanical Arts said:
So would I, but the type R is more expensive to insure.

But weigh that up against the the costs of running a Puma, my brother ran a type r for nearly two years, only things he had to do where oil changes and brake pads I think.

Stonedofmoo · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:18

Why is a Puma so expensive to run then. I cant see how a car with 40k miles on the clock would be falling apart and need repairing all the time

What makes them so expensive?

Coco · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:20

EddScott said:
Hello, don't ignore me!!!

Why are running costs so high? Insurance and servicing?

Sam is the Man for specifics, but as you asked so nicely!

Service:
I believe the servicing is the standard Ford 10-12k/1 year, ~£150 from Ford. However, many owners take them to 'specialists' such as PumaBuild who know what they are doing & treat them with care. This quality service & peace of mind carries a price.

Brakes:
Consumables such as brake pads/discs are more expensive on the FRP due to being higher quality Brembo's (?) than many 'fast-cars'. If your driving hard you will get through sets pretty often & the calipers do need cleaning out every 12k/1year as a guess.

Tyres:
Tyre's aren't expensive, off the top of my head i'd guess at 195/45/16, but the front's won't last that long.

Suspension:
As handling is the FRP's strongest suit, it in turns takes the most punishment. Typical Ford means the bushes need replacing fairly often, not the cheapest job. After that I imagine it's the usual regular allignment / tracking checks.

After that, it's your typical costs a hand-built, hard-driven £23k car comes with.
As for insurance, it's a limited edition, it's expensive to replace the special body panels & it's owned by people who 'enjoy' there driving, that's why it's expensive.

Different strokes for different folkes, i'd take a FRP over a DC2 anytime.

eidolon · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:37

As an ex Puma driver I'd say that anyone who compares them to an ST24 really doesn't understand what they're about. Sometimes paper can't illustrate why a car is so damn good.

On paper the standard, and even the Racing Puma don't look very special at all but just get in them and drive and you'll see why it was Top Gear car of the year 1997. They're just such a chuckable, fun car to drive that you really have to drive it to appreciate it.

Right then, my opinion on the regular Puma

Good points :
* Damn good fun
* Did I mention it was good fun?
* Reasonably nippy
* Quite economical
* It's fun to drive

Bad points :
* brakes are awful
* rear visibility is terrible
* fuel tank is pretty small
* when air con is on you feel like somebody just stole your engine and replaced it with something from a sewing machine.

I'll probably think of more things later but that gives you an idea.

sij2910 · 27 Feb 2006 at 14:40

they look nice

Robdav · 27 Feb 2006 at 15:27

eidolon said:
As an ex Puma driver I'd say that anyone who compares them to an ST24 really doesn't understand what they're about. Sometimes paper can't illustrate why a car is so damn good.

On paper the standard, and even the Racing Puma don't look very special at all but just get in them and drive and you'll see why it was Top Gear car of the year 1997. They're just such a chuckable, fun car to drive that you really have to drive it to appreciate it.

Right then, my opinion on the regular Puma

Good points :
* Damn good fun
* Did I mention it was good fun?
* Reasonably nippy
* Quite economical
* It's fun to drive

Bad points :
* brakes are awful
* rear visibility is terrible
* fuel tank is pretty small
* when air con is on you feel like somebody just stole your engine and replaced it with something from a sewing machine.

I'll probably think of more things later but that gives you an idea.

quoted for truth. I'm an ex-puma owner too and would agree with all the above. Front tyres tend to disappear before your eyes! I managed to get about 250 miles per tank out of mine, but then I did like to use the loud pedel more often than not.

EddScott · 27 Feb 2006 at 15:47

Do they all come with the posh looking seats?

Is there turbo charge conversions available?

Yes, I'm fed up with owning common as muck Imprezas!

Coco · 27 Feb 2006 at 16:03

All FRP's have the Sparco seats & alcantara trimmed interior, including steering-wheel grips :cool:

. Plus a shiny aluminium gear-knob, other than that it's basically a mk5 Fiesta in the cabin!

PumaBuild, who are I believe the number one Puma specialists don't rate the gains from tuning the engine. I can't see why a turbo-conversion isn't possible, but a DC2 would be a better base-car for modifications.

Edit:
Plus it's not what the FRP is about. Keep it special, keep it standard.

Edit '2!:

EddScott said:
Yes, I'm fed up with owning common as muck Imprezas!

Talk about going from one end of the scale to the other! I expect not many people on here have seen a FRP on the road!

mr tommo · 27 Feb 2006 at 16:54

Right guys, cheers for the advice. Now ive been on puma build website and seen the prices for certain things....

Full Service =

Oil Filter
4.5 Litres Engine Oil (5w/30)
Air Filter
Fuel filter
Pollen Filter
Spark Plugs (NGK Platinum)
Screen Wash
Diagnostic Fault Check
70 point check and report
£147.02

Now this is every 12,000 miles or 1 year right?

Cam Belt Service 1.7 VCT

The Racing Puma has different cam settings to any other puma. We have the special tool required to set the all important cam timing this setting tool is NOT the same as a std puma. When changing the cam belt the tensioner and the stretch bolt must be changed this is all included in our price.
£240.88

Im guessing this only needs doing as a one off? at around the 60,000 mile mark?

Brake Service

Racing Puma has Alcon 4 pot callipers which need regular Cleaning we can remove brake pads and clean the pistons with our brake cleaning system. £47.00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alcon Front Calliper Service

Over a period of time Racing Puma callipers need a service to check and remove any oxide build up, Pistons need to be replaced if they show any signs of wear or pitting a total of 16 seals will also need replacing. Pistons and seals are available at extra cost.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
£146.88

Again, how often would each one of these need doing?

Just trying to work out running costs

tom

neil-ste · 27 Feb 2006 at 17:01

Fun can't be quantified and given a number. A very good friend of mine has an FRP and while it is no quicker in a straight line than my Civic, it out performs it in pretty much every other aspect. A little more power and they would make a very, very fast real world car.

Plus the ladies think they look good

Sam · 27 Feb 2006 at 18:06

Hi There

Give me 30 minutes ( just got home from work and ill give you some info on them and my experiances )

Sam

mr tommo · 27 Feb 2006 at 18:08

Ok thanks mate. Im going be out from now till the early hours

So don't think im ignoring you

tom

Arc · 27 Feb 2006 at 18:55

Coco said:
PumaBuild, who are I believe the number one Puma specialists don't rate the gains from tuning the engine. I can't see why a turbo-conversion isn't possible, but a DC2 would be a better base-car for modifications.

Same reason its difficult to mod the ST170, Fords VVT style system (or in the Pumas case an earlier variation on it).

Coco · 27 Feb 2006 at 19:06

Arc said:
Same reason its difficult to mod the ST170, Fords VVT style system (or in the Pumas case an earlier variation on it).

Absolutely, same goes for modern day Renault & Peugeot/Citroen engines I believe. It seems you have to go back 10 years to be able to tune these manufactures engines to get decent gains for acceptable money.

For modern car's your always best going Jap to get super-tuning for fair-money! The VAG group give fairly decent results for not a huge amount of cash on both petrol & diesels.

[TW]Fox · 27 Feb 2006 at 19:07

eidolon said:
As an ex Puma driver I'd say that anyone who compares them to an ST24 really doesn't understand what they're about.

It was a straight line performance benchmark and NOTHING more. Even I am not stupid enough to suggest an ST24 will hold a candle to a Puma around some twistys, but you've got to admit, huge running costs for something with that sort of performance is excessive.

That was the point I was making which you appear to have missed.

I appreciate how chuckable they are and respect them as a result, and infact the standard Puma is a fantastic car and it's very hard to fault, but thats the standard Puma. It does not have 'racing' pretensions, it does not have astronomical running costs, it does not cost £10,000 for a 6 year old example.

You can buy cars just as chuckable for less than an FRP, you can buy cars considerably faster for less than an FRP, and they'd cost less to run by all accounts.