Why compromise ? It's a car - there's no reason to buy less than the perfect one. It's not like there's a shortage of used cars around :)
She's considering a Puma, but she doesn't think
Um...
It's a good job, cos they're s**te :)
Why compromise ? It's a car - there's no reason to buy less than the perfect one. It's not like there's a shortage of used cars around :)
She's considering a Puma, but she doesn't think
Um...
It's a good job, cos they're s**te :)
Erm, the big difference, and this is what makes them _totally_ different cars, is the plastic folding roof on the MX5.
I'd have an MX5, but wouldn't even have a Puma if it had an Alfa badge on it.
You live in the frozen north, you wouldn't understand.
You lie.
No I don't. It's a pointless little car - none of the practicalities of a hot hatch without any significant performance or styling improvements....
You're missing the point. If she finds a car in the shade of blue she likes, it wont be a comprimise, no matter what the rest of the spec is!!!!
Dont ask me!
Indeed. But cheap to fix (except probably the hood), and i understand them!
[snip]
Sounds familiar. Charlie and I had different agendas when Ka looking. She wanted cream leather and dark blue metallic. I wanted air conditioning and ABS. We compromised! :)
None of the practicalities? Rear seats, boot, ease of servicing, inexpensive insurance, not too thirsty.
Great handling, looks great too (but does need lowering).
Tiny rear seats only suitable for midgets or kids, tiny boot that will barely hold a weeks worth of shopping.
But the hatch supposedly has great handling, too.... and I can think of other hot hatches that would be as good or better but also offer decent boot space and proper rear seats.
Looks are a personal thing, I hate them.
Now of course, we have the StreetKa. Would anyone in their right mind consider the StreetKa even remotely in the same class as the MX5?
Richard
I'd have a Barchetta - better styling, bigger engine for less cash.
The boot isn't tiny. But the rear seats are small.
It has.
Go on then
Aye that too. I like the look, some dislike, but it's great that it looks unique and it polarises opinions. Like or dislike you'll remember it!
Better styling? They look like a fish out of water.
Handling, anybody? :) Left hand drive?
They're great machines, but a bit too specialist for most people... rightly or wrongly.
Many people in the market for "a cute open top sports car" consider the Streetka to be in the same class as the MX5... Ford (and most other manufacturers) sell a car on image and perceived class of car (not class of image, heh) and many buyers / keepers don't really care what end is driven.
For what it's worth, the Streetka drives well, but I guess like many Fords the chassis feels so well tied down that it could cope with another 50% power. :) Oh, and scuttle shake.... minimal... if any...
Alfa 145 Colverleaf, Fiat Bravo HGT, Golf MkIV GTI Turbos are getting cheap, Xsara VTS, Pug 306, Honda Civic VTEC.... there's loads of hot hatches out there that are as good as or better than a Puma.
Opinions. It's a proper little sportscar not a chopped shopping trolley.
Handling is fine, being a sporty Punto setup, LHD is an issue for some, doesn't worry me.
Huge amount of car for very little cash. Buy a used one and it'll hold it's value, too.
Sorry did you mean that they'd handle better than the Puma?
Of the ones listed, as a blend of drivers car and ownership experience, the Civic probably comes closest - but only because it's reliable. The Golf is too staid to drive and it's not that good an ownership experience. The 145 / Bravo are great fun to drive but not such a good ownership experience. The Xsara and Peugeot? Hmm. A great sounding donk on paper that sadly lives up to real world driving, it needs all six ratios because it needs thrashing to perform and that makes it a pain in traffic.
So it has a very hard set up?
Aye, but because they're left hand drive many people consider them to be too specialist - that's why few have been sold. :-(
Alfa 145 and Bravo will be very close. Maybe not in terms of outright grip, but they're going to be more fun overall because of the engines in them.... the Golf, well, because it's supremely well built and is bloody quick.
Feel the value, and the handling of the Xsara. Stupidly good value for money - you'd get something several years newer than a Puma for the same money. Pug has more perceived 'cool', Civic is a bit rice for my liking.
All in all, they'll offer most people a lot more everyday practicality than a Puma.
I don't believe that a great engine makes a great car, it's the complete package.
The Golf isn't supremely well built nor is it especially quick (130 mph, 8.5 seconds to 60?). The 1.8T 150 PS donk is a lovely piece of kit but it's not the best engine for a GTI.
The Xsara handles well right until you overcook it, then it becomes a mess. And, sorry, cheap doesn't mean good.
Because it's a better package.
In some circles, yes, but in others, every other Peugeot 306 looks like the GTi-6 but has either the uninspired 1.6 engine or one of the turbodiesels...
Yeah it probably is. I really want to dislike the Civic, but every time I drive one, I'm left thinking "if I liked these sorts of cars I'd have one, no problemo." Loses on points to the Focus model for model, except the Type-R, and I've not tried the RS Focus.
But not a better driving / ownership package.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.