New Ford puma...

TTBZ

Don't get the SUV/4x4 thing. If you don't ever drive off road or live somewhere snowy or remote what's the point, better off with an estate if you want space surely. Ironically people who drive these tend to avoid mounting the verge when passing down a narrow country lane, wouldn't want to get a bit of mud on their precious.

boogieman

TTBZ said:

Don't get the SUV/4x4 thing. If you don't ever drive off road or live somewhere snowy or remote what's the point, better off with an estate if you want space surely. Ironically people who drive these tend to avoid mounting the verge when passing down a narrow country lane, wouldn't want to get a bit of mud on their precious.

They’ve got a higher seating position. That there is the appeal for most people over a hatchback/saloon/estate : people just feel safer in them. 

When we were looking for a new car last year I didn’t particularly want an SUV, I was more interested in an estate. Then we tried one. They’re so much easier to get in and out of, especially if you’ve got a dodgy back. They’re also easier to get little’uns into because you’re not having to grovel around on the floor to do up the  seat restraints.  

That Puma though  A friend has the Eco Sport and I thought Ford couldn’t make anything more hideous, but it seems they can. 

ThePrettyDamned

boogieman said:

TTBZ said:

Don't get the SUV/4x4 thing. If you don't ever drive off road or live somewhere snowy or remote what's the point, better off with an estate if you want space surely. Ironically people who drive these tend to avoid mounting the verge when passing down a narrow country lane, wouldn't want to get a bit of mud on their precious.

They’ve got a higher seating position. That there is the appeal for most people over a hatchback/saloon/estate : people just feel safer in them. 

When we were looking for a new car last year I didn’t particularly want an SUV, I was more interested in an estate. Then we tried one. They’re so much easier to get in and out of, especially if you’ve got a dodgy back. They’re also easier to get little’uns into because you’re not having to grovel around on the floor to do up the  seat restraints.  

That Puma though  A friend has the Eco Sport and I thought Ford couldn’t make anything more hideous, but it seems they can. 

The main reason people buy SUVs is because Evoque and show off. There are so many of the  things clogging up the roads in Cambridge, its unreal.

Comedy gold on Friday - I slipped through a small gap to get into the left lane at lights, and a large SUV (a porsche I think) tried to follow... And got stuck... So no one behind them could get through. By the time I got through the lights, they were still there as the right lane was red. 

SUVs and 4x4s don't make a good city car, but that is probably where I see most of them. Out in the country, it's mostly more deliberately equipped land rovers. 

ThePrettyDamned

Agree on the puma, mind. What an ugly way to reintroduce one of ford's modern day classics

jaytmon

Most ridiculous marketing catchphrase:

“...innovative ‘human-centric’ design.”

Seriously. You mean cars aren’t normally designed for humans. 

Heartfeltdawn

digitalscream said:

As someone who, until recently, was a proud (original) Puma owner and still loves them, that makes me want to claw my eyes out. I struggle to see the point of recycling the name for a car that's clearly not even remotely related to the original, even in spirit?

dindude said:

The Puma was never gonna be replaced like for like as no one buys coupes and sports cars any more.

More's the pity. Perhaps I'm just irredeemably old-fashioned, but cars like the Puma/Celica/etc were just unashamed fun while still being usable day-to-day. These days, if you want something like that then you've pretty much got hot hatches and...well, that's it.

Seeing the size increase from old Puma to new Puma, it does make me hope that Ford redo the Probe in the same way because any revamped Probe would be large enough to block out the Sun. 

robgilmo

ThePrettyDamned said:

boogieman said:

TTBZ said:

Don't get the SUV/4x4 thing. If you don't ever drive off road or live somewhere snowy or remote what's the point, better off with an estate if you want space surely. Ironically people who drive these tend to avoid mounting the verge when passing down a narrow country lane, wouldn't want to get a bit of mud on their precious.

They’ve got a higher seating position. That there is the appeal for most people over a hatchback/saloon/estate : people just feel safer in them. 

When we were looking for a new car last year I didn’t particularly want an SUV, I was more interested in an estate. Then we tried one. They’re so much easier to get in and out of, especially if you’ve got a dodgy back. They’re also easier to get little’uns into because you’re not having to grovel around on the floor to do up the  seat restraints.  

That Puma though  A friend has the Eco Sport and I thought Ford couldn’t make anything more hideous, but it seems they can. 

The main reason people buy SUVs is because Evoque and show off. There are so many of the  things clogging up the roads in Cambridge, its unreal.

Comedy gold on Friday - I slipped through a small gap to get into the left lane at lights, and a large SUV (a porsche I think) tried to follow... And got stuck... So no one behind them could get through. By the time I got through the lights, they were still there as the right lane was red. 

SUVs and 4x4s don't make a good city car, but that is probably where I see most of them. Out in the country, it's mostly more deliberately equipped land rovers. 

I disagree, when I was living in London my old Landy was perfect, short wheelbase, thin, and tall so I could see over the traffic jams, also, aggressive London drivers in their big shiny Audis and Beemers tended to give me a wide birth. I think , and so do a lot of car manufacturers, that tall, thin cars do have an advantage, add banged up (driver no longer gives a damn) to the mix and you have the perfect city car. No body seemed to mind my choice of vehicle, had it have been an 80k rangie I wonder if attitudes might have been different?

monquixote

RaymondLin said:

I really don’t know what the obsession with SUV is either.  Some of the country lanes are tiny, some towns have very narrow roads that a Yaris barely fits.  They are bigger, heavier, less aerodynamic so its
worse for fuel.  How often to you need all that space anyway?

They generally have bugger all space in them compared to the MPV type cars they replace for a lot of families.

Someone I know went from a Xara Picasso to a Qashqai and for a car of similar size you could get absolutely naff al in it and was totally useless for gigs.

digitalscream

monquixote said:

RaymondLin said:

I really don’t know what the obsession with SUV is either.  Some of the country lanes are tiny, some towns have very narrow roads that a Yaris barely fits.  They are bigger, heavier, less aerodynamic so its
worse for fuel.  How often to you need all that space anyway?

They generally have bugger all space in them compared to the MPV type cars they replace for a lot of families.

Someone I know went from a Xara Picasso to a Qashqai and for a car of similar size you could get absolutely naff al in it and was totally useless for gigs.

Ironically, I can fit my rig and our bassist's rig in my little Celica

mcsdan

Yuk!

I had one of the Ford racing pumas back in the day. Mental car. Not particularly fast but a fantastic drive. However due to it's racing setup it was hard as nails and any journey over 20 miles was a challenge!

sev112

Loved our red puma, had to trade it in 16 years ago when daughter arrived 

skunkwerx

PC_Dave said:

@skunkwerx - you ok hun?

I am now I've eaten ;p

dindude

Weirdest thing about SUV’s and Crossovers is what terrible value they are. It’s basically a way that car makers can charge the next class up for the class below. When recently choosing my next car and digging into all this, a VW Tiguan starts at £20 below a Passat - the interior is a Golf but with harder plastics in places (I kid you not), less space, not as refined, but hey it’s an SUV not a boring saloon so let’s fool the people.

It runs throughout - a spec’d Puma will be Focus money for essentially a Fiesta and on it goes up through the model ranges.

I basically ended up leasing an Arteon for less than a school run-of-the-mill Tiguan, and it’s a hugely nicer car.

monquixote

digitalscream said:

monquixote said:

RaymondLin said:

I really don’t know what the obsession with SUV is either.  Some of the country lanes are tiny, some towns have very narrow roads that a Yaris barely fits.  They are bigger, heavier, less aerodynamic so its
worse for fuel.  How often to you need all that space anyway?

They generally have bugger all space in them compared to the MPV type cars they replace for a lot of families.

Someone I know went from a Xara Picasso to a Qashqai and for a car of similar size you could get absolutely naff al in it and was totally useless for gigs.

Ironically, I can fit my rig and our bassist's rig in my little Celica

I could easily fit more in my fabia

boogieman

Nissan do seem to make a habit of designing cars with rubbish boot space. My neighbour has a Qashqai and although it’s a similar footprint to our Q5, the boot seems about half the capacity. The Juke is even worse, it’s got a terrible sized boot for the size of the car. 

strtdv

The Juke is a small car, it's basically a Micra on stilts (and drives like that too, and not in a good way) so it's not roomy at all.

boogieman

strtdv said:

The Juke is a small car, it's basically a Micra on stilts (and drives like that too, and not in a good way) so it's not roomy at all.

If they hadn’t put such a stupidly steep rake on the rear hatch it could’ve been much bigger.

Is it really only Micra sized? I thought it looked more like a Focus/Golf size.  

digitalscream

boogieman said:

strtdv said:

The Juke is a small car, it's basically a Micra on stilts (and drives like that too, and not in a good way) so it's not roomy at all.

If they hadn’t put such a stupidly steep rake on the rear hatch it could’ve been much bigger.

Is it really only Micra sized? I thought it looked more like a Focus/Golf size.  

My wife had one as a courtesy car once, and - after wanting one for a couple of years - she said it was probably the worst car she'd ever driven. Tiny inside, made of cheap crap plastic with wrapping of tin foil around it, and generally not remotely enjoyable to drive.

stickyfiddle

The Juke is absolutely that small - I had one as a rental in the UK last week. Supposedly in the "Ford Focus or equivalent" - in reality a significantly smaller and less good car all round, except if you want a high seating position to feel more confident on the road, I assume.

It was no bigger inside than my Mum's 2005-ish Corsa. Absolutely shitheap but one of the UK's best selling cars of the last decade. Baffling. The Qashqai is miles better in comparison, though I still don't see the point.

Next time I'll save a pound a day and go for the class down, which still gets you a proper hatchback - the new Fiesta looks properly great for its class.

randella

digitalscream said:

boogieman said:

strtdv said:

The Juke is a small car, it's basically a Micra on stilts (and drives like that too, and not in a good way) so it's not roomy at all.

If they hadn’t put such a stupidly steep rake on the rear hatch it could’ve been much bigger.

Is it really only Micra sized? I thought it looked more like a Focus/Golf size.  

My wife had one as a courtesy car once, and - after wanting one for a couple of years - she said it was probably the worst car she'd ever driven. Tiny inside, made of cheap crap plastic with wrapping of tin foil around it, and generally not remotely enjoyable to drive.

Had one myself once, again as a courtesy car. I wouldn’t say it was the worst car I’d driven (I’ve had some right shit tips), but I’d agree with the last sentence. Bloody awful car.