[idge]

Hi guys,

I'm looking for a 1.7 puma to chop my corrola t-sport in for - its faaaaaaaaast but wobbly, crap economy and the mrs can't drive it without revving to 8k every time she pulls away!

It's only for about 5000 miles a year (we have a 59 plate zetec s fiesta as the main car) but i'll need it to be reliable as we'll be using to keep the miles off the fiesta and get me to work (10 miles).

Money is quite tight and I want to spend as little as poss but get the most reliable car. I see a lot of 2001-02 cars at about £2000 that are tempting but I've also seen a few between £1250-1500 98-99 pumas with FSH.

Is it a big risk going for an older car, even if its in good condition? Do puma's suffer badly with mileage or age? Or should i just spend 500-750 more on a newer one?

Cheers

[Dogsbody]

Service history I would say was more important.
I had a 100'000 mile plus one which was always serviced.
It went better than the 40k odd one that replaced it.

Cam belt etc needs to be changed when due and regular oil changes.
Why not look around for a Millennium or one of the other two special editions?
You might find they have been looked after better and will hold their value better.

There is a good buyers guide in the Wiki on this site.
Clicky

[idge]

Cheers Graham, i'll have a thorough read of that guide. Just wondered what peoples experiences were in terms of reliability on older pumas.


I've seen two in my area that i'm keen on:
89K 1998 S Reg - fsh, cambelt + service just done, rust just removed at paintshop, mot for 12 months up for £1.5K.
70K 2002 51 Reg - fsh, cambelt 2 yrs ago mot for 5 months up for £2K.

Going to have a look at both at the weekend and any others if they come up. So would you say if the S-reg is in better knick go for it?

[dave208]

Id go for the newer one for the difference in money
As long as they both have FSH and are similar condition etc....... it depends if you want to keep the car for a long time or may want to sell it in a year or so's time ??

I (Personally) think the newer one would offer better value for money and would clearly have a better resale value when the time comes....

But the FSH and cambelt is the big one.....

[YOG]

£500 more for a car 3+ years newer and 19K less miles seems a bargain to me. I would negotiate the price and ask them to re MOT it before buying.

The 1998 car, how did they remove the rust - just rub it down, treat and respray, or cut it out first?. Why would someone pay out a lot of money for a new cambelt (was it the kit?) and then sell it?

[idge]

YOG, on 28 July 2010 - 12:39 PM, said:

The 1998 car, how did they remove the rust - just rub it down, treat and respray, or cut it out first?. Why would someone pay out a lot of money for a new cambelt (was it the kit?) and then sell it?

Not sure on the rust, but its a trader, so they've done the cambelt and service etc before its sold on. Thinking about it, either they've done the cambelt early (3 years) or late (2 years) if its every 5 years or 80k.

[YOG]

If its a Trader, I doubt they cut the rust out (which is the only way to do it properly, if you don't want it to come back soon), ask them.

[p3t3]

ive just bought a 2000 millennium with 50k miles.

i set out to spend 1500 on a puma but after going and looking at a few i noticed that for the sake of spending the extra £500 you get a lot more car. worth it in my opinion :-)