UK-POLOS.NET - THE VW Polo Forum

Which is the fastest out of these to my friend seems to think him POOMA will beat the crap out of my gti

On the twisties, it'll leave you for dead.

You're both even in terms of everything. They weigh about the same, have 16v engines producing 125 bhp, etc etc.

Don't diss the Puma. They are great cars!

They are quite quick! Not as quick as mx5 tho!

Jon

done plenty of Puma's, in straight lines and round bends

there NISH-PENCE !

:-p

Cal

must have been the other version of pumas, maybe the 1.4
mr parkers says 0-60 on the puma is 7.9,
hmm i reckon the polo would keep up for a while but the puma would still beat it

What you lot talkin about! PUMAs have a fiesta bases and the suspension is proper s**t! dampers and brakes for that matter were and still are rubbish!! unless your talkin about the WRC one?? (then with the help from tickford and ford racing its a little beast!!)

The 1.4 is 83bhp

1.6 is 103bhp

1.7 is 123bhp

1.7 ford racing one 153bhp ( Now that will go like s**t)

So it would be a very good race between the polo and puma but i think the GTi would do it from personnel caining of my lil car! but the Puma racing one would play more and win i think!

1.7i 16V 3d - 123 126 9.2 38 178 12

1.7i 16V Ford Racing 3d - 152 126 7.9 34 178 15

The GTI would prolly win in the straight, but not by much. I cant speak for cornering.

Comparitivly speaking the Puma is nothing to the GTi. It looks nice, but there are a few factors. The Puma doesn't have climate control, only drivers side airbag, no CD changer, no xenons. The interior is basically a fiesta and it feels like one (v plastic).

GTi is more a more refined car, be an interesting race!

moynas wrote:What you lot talkin about! PUMAs have a fiesta bases and the suspension is proper ****! dampers and brakes for that matter were and still are rubbish!! unless your talkin about the WRC one?? (then with the help from tickford and ford racing its a little beast!!)

The suspension on the puma is 'proper ****!' ?? have u driven one at all wish my polo was half as fun to drive as the puma (when it was standard anyway)

I think if you were to read any car magazine during the late 90's, you would find the Puma being described as one of the best handling small coupes avaliable.

It was almost voted "Top Gear Car Of The Year" twice in a row! The Puma is a seriously good car, I might even own one some day.

shame it's as ugly as sin

Redline wrote:I think if you were to read any car magazine during the late 90's, you would find the Puma being described as one of the best handling small coupes avaliable.

HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAH

Puma's = Big Pile Of Poo

You may be right that the TOP of the range model handles like a dream, but ive driven the lesser models and they are a load of pants and to top it off, they are a very ugly car.


That hould tell you not to buy one. . .ever!

im sure people disagree, but when do you ever see one on the road? that alone should also show you how unwanted they are.

Cal

they're not very nice really, bit cheap and plastic as well, bit like a vauxhall tigra - same sorta s**t

CalvinGTI wrote: HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAH

Puma's = Big Pile Of Poo

You may be right that the TOP of the range model handles like a dream, but ive driven the lesser models and they are a load of pants and to top it off, they are a very ugly car.

To be honest, believe what the hell you like.

But go find a road-test from either a magazine or the internet that states the any Puma model handles poorly, and I'll be very very suprised.

so y have u got a polo gti man if the POOMA IS SO GREAT LOL