EVO mag Ford Racing Puma vs Clio Trophy - Other Marque | Automotive Discussion - Fiesta ST Owners Club

Jump to content

EVO mag Ford Racing Puma vs Clio Trophy


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1
StiggyTheST

StiggyTheST
  • Club Member
  • 862 posts

https://www.evo.co.u...clio-182-trophy


  • mjcapri, ST3spin, MickyD and 1 other like this

#2
mjcapri

mjcapri
  • Club Member
  • 98 posts
I do like the Racing Puma, Ive never been in one but the GF had a standard 1.7 and it was a cracking little car. If the FRP had a bit more power thered be one in my garage, but I think Id find it frustratingly slow to be honest, especially with the cars handling capabilities. On paper its slower than my XR4i and thats really ancient, like 1983 ancient!

#3
PaulG

PaulG
  • Club Member
  • 230 posts

Loved the FRP - one of the best handling FWD cars I've ever had the pleasure of driving. Still looks great today as well.  Lots of bespoke parts so I suspect running one now could lead to headaches. Brakes didn't have dust seals on them, so you had to get them rebuilt peridoically. There were tuners who could eek them out to near 200bhp, but not the quickest in a straight line.

 

Sounded fantastic too - the little pops and burbles sounded great, unlike the modern ECU forced ones.


  • mjcapri likes this

#4
MarksST

MarksST
  • Club Member
  • 5843 posts
  • Mark
  • West Sussex

I do like the Racing Puma, Ive never been in one but the GF had a standard 1.7 and it was a cracking little car. If the FRP had a bit more power thered be one in my garage, but I think Id find it frustratingly slow to be honest, especially with the cars handling capabilities. On paper its slower than my XR4i and thats really ancient, like 1983 ancient!

As you don’t drive on paper you’ll probably find the FRP would be faster than the 4i where it mattered.



#5
dhindley

dhindley
  • Club Member
  • 261 posts

Interesting comparison, no doubt two awesome cars in their own right. Currently, they are not in the same league in price, though. This annoys me as EVO do this all the time.

 

Cheapest FRP is £16k with 94k miles:

 

https://www.autotrad...size=1.8&page=1

 

 

Most expensive Clio Trophy is £8.5k with 86k miles:

 

https://www.autotrad...=bs273ef&page=1

 

Anyone with budget for one, would not go looking at the other. EVO just looking for new stuff to write as usual.

 

We do have a member on here who has an FRP I believe, @MickyD


  • ST3spin likes this

#6
MarksST

MarksST
  • Club Member
  • 5843 posts
  • Mark
  • West Sussex

Interesting comparison, no doubt two awesome cars in their own right. Currently, they are not in the same league in price, though. This annoys me as EVO do this all the time.

 

Cheapest FRP is £16k with 94k miles:

 

https://www.autotrad...size=1.8&page=1

 

 

Most expensive Clio Trophy is £8.5k with 86k miles:

 

https://www.autotrad...=bs273ef&page=1

 

Anyone with budget for one, would not go looking at the other. EVO just looking for new stuff to write as usual.

 

We do have a member on here who has an FRP I believe, @MickyD

Was the price of them the reason for the article?



#7
PaulG

PaulG
  • Club Member
  • 230 posts

Mk8 PE is the closest handling wise I've come to the FRP.

 

Damn I miss Imperial Blue Fords...



#8
MickyD

MickyD

    "Race Red Owner"

  • Club Member
  • 5750 posts

I do like the Racing Puma, Ive never been in one but the GF had a standard 1.7 and it was a cracking little car. If the FRP had a bit more power thered be one in my garage, but I think Id find it frustratingly slow to be honest, especially with the cars handling capabilities. On paper its slower than my XR4i and thats really ancient, like 1983 ancient!

 

???

 

It was not slower than an XR4i!!!  :rofl:

 

The car is by any standards not rapid after 60 (though it would still hold its own today with most FWD cars at least up to 60 mph....

 

.... BUT that was not the point of the car! Once you got the car up to speed you could maintain that speed though every corner and brake later than anyone when the need arose (oh and unlike the ST the brakes could be used as hard, as long and as often as you wanted without ever worrying about them possibly overheating. I totally agree with the reviewers comments about going though the corner then doing it again and again faster and faster but never finding the limit because I have mentioned on here this is the only car that I felt the car had more to give than I was able - sometimes it felt impossible to loose the car no matter what you asked of it but in the back of your mind you knew when it did go it would go big style just because of how much lateral energy it had built up.

 

In all honesty if I was asked to blend the best abilities of all Ford small cars past and present to make a perfect small fiesta replacement it would have:

 

the endlessly modifiable engine from a Mk7 ST

the lightweight wheels from the PE

the handling and bodywork of the FRP

the brakes from the FRP.  

 

Even today 20 odd years on I would say the FRP handling was and is still the best (and I have owned/own both the Mk7 ST and Mk8 PE ST and the FRP- though at a level of harshness that many today would consider unacceptable 

 

Or to put it another way - if someone who had more time on their hands than me was able to fix the brakes on my FRP and I got the engine out and recon'd it had an MOT and the keys where left in front of me to pick which car to take out for a drive.... the ST would be very lonely on that driveway....  :rofl:

 

The only bad thing about the FRP was it made me do things I didn't want to do which is why I had to garage mine  :laughing:  It got me 9 points on my licence and would goad me into lifting off the throttle... through a village... at 3am.... to see how many car alarms it could set off.... followed be rinse and repeat with me giggling like a spotty teenager with an ASBO as I departed the area....

 

The car is evil but so so nice  :grin:


  • mjcapri and ST3spin like this

#9
PaulG

PaulG
  • Club Member
  • 230 posts

@MickyD got any pics mister? :D



#10
MickyD

MickyD

    "Race Red Owner"

  • Club Member
  • 5750 posts

@PaulG This is my one 

 

Attached File  IMG_5273.jpeg   224.97KB   1 downloadsAttached File  IMG_5210.jpeg   182.22KB   1 downloadsAttached File  IMG_5268.jpeg   221.72KB   1 downloads


  • mjcapri, ST3spin, PaulG and 2 others like this

#11
mjcapri

mjcapri
  • Club Member
  • 98 posts

As you don’t drive on paper you’ll probably find the FRP would be faster than the 4i where it mattered.


The Sierra handles like a shopping trolley so yes i realise that.... But it doesn’t alter the fact that we all enjoy a bit of grunt. The ST170 is another great handling FWD car, albeit not quite to the same extent, but it gets widely criticised for being slow. I found mine reasonably quick actually, as quick as you’d expect it to be, but clearly nowhere near as fast as later turbo charged ST models (Focus or Fiesta).

#12
mjcapri

mjcapri
  • Club Member
  • 98 posts

???
 
It was not slower than an XR4i!!!  :rofl:
 
The car is by any standards not rapid after 60 (though it would still hold its own today with most FWD cars at least up to 60 mph....
 
.... BUT that was not the point of the car! Once you got the car up to speed you could maintain that speed though every corner and brake later than anyone when the need arose (oh and unlike the ST the brakes could be used as hard, as long and as often as you wanted without ever worrying about them possibly overheating. I totally agree with the reviewers comments about going though the corner then doing it again and again faster and faster but never finding the limit because I have mentioned on here this is the only car that I felt the car had more to give than I was able - sometimes it felt impossible to loose the car no matter what you asked of it but in the back of your mind you knew when it did go it would go big style just because of how much lateral energy it had built up.
 
In all honesty if I was asked to blend the best abilities of all Ford small cars past and present to make a perfect small fiesta replacement it would have:
 
the endlessly modifiable engine from a Mk7 ST
the lightweight wheels from the PE
the handling and bodywork of the FRP
the brakes from the FRP.  
 
Even today 20 odd years on I would say the FRP handling was and is still the best (and I have owned/own both the Mk7 ST and Mk8 PE ST and the FRP- though at a level of harshness that many today would consider unacceptable 
 
Or to put it another way - if someone who had more time on their hands than me was able to fix the brakes on my FRP and I got the engine out and recon'd it had an MOT and the keys where left in front of me to pick which car to take out for a drive.... the ST would be very lonely on that driveway....  :rofl:
 
The only bad thing about the FRP was it made me do things I didn't want to do which is why I had to garage mine  :laughing:  It got me 9 points on my licence and would goad me into lifting off the throttle... through a village... at 3am.... to see how many car alarms it could set off.... followed be rinse and repeat with me giggling like a spotty teenager with an ASBO as I departed the area....
 
The car is evil but so so nice  :grin:


I should have been more specific, I meant slower 0-60 and a lower top speed, not that the latter matters in reality. Official 0-60 for the FRP is 7.9 I believe, which is the same as the ST170 which as per my previous post isn’t exactly praised for its straight line performance. Or is the FRP actually quicker than the official figures suggest (genuine question)?

Regardless, the FRP is a gorgeous car and I’d certainly like to try one!

#13
MickyD

MickyD

    "Race Red Owner"

  • Club Member
  • 5750 posts

I should have been more specific, I meant slower 0-60 and a lower top speed, not that the latter matters in reality. Official 0-60 for the FRP is 7.9 I believe, which is the same as the ST170 which as per my previous post isn’t exactly praised for its straight line performance. Or is the FRP actually quicker than the official figures suggest (genuine question)?

Regardless, the FRP is a gorgeous car and I’d certainly like to try one!

 

Yep that sound about right on the 0-60 but remember this is a car of 20 years ago, the Mk6 ST was also a NA engine with 0.3 litres more capacity and still produced less BHP and similar 0-60 some 6 years later.... 

 

As I said though it was never about the 0-60 it was about the handling and brakes.. Owen Mildenhall summed it up perfectly saying that going fast in a straight line is easy, corners are where the fun is and the puma is fun. Top Gear also mentioned in the day as well about the brake stating that round a track after 4 laps a Vectra GSI's brakes would have faded and an Audi S3 only a couple of laps later but the FRP's would not break a sweat many laps further on.

 

It never got the true recognition when it came out due to its high price compared to the Elise and Impezza of the day and ever since it has always been put down as almost the underdog that no one expects to do very well against anything they put it against.... only to be proved wrong! In Owens hands round Pembrey on a group test the Clio 172 did a lap in 1 min 15.40 an Intega R in 1 min 15.48... the FRP did it in 1 min 13.75.... and it had even started to rain when the FRP was out so it did its laps on a dampened track and with 20-30 bhp less than its rivals!!

 

Remember also the review posted by @StiggyTheST also said the engine did not feel good so that might have been some of the issue with why it struggled to keep pace.


  • mjcapri likes this

#14
mjcapri

mjcapri
  • Club Member
  • 98 posts

Yep that sound about right on the 0-60 but remember this is a car of 20 years ago, the Mk6 ST was also a NA engine with 0.3 litres more capacity and still produced less BHP and similar 0-60 some 6 years later.... 
 
As I said though it was never about the 0-60 it was about the handling and brakes.. Owen Mildenhall summed it up perfectly saying that going fast in a straight line is easy, corners are where the fun is and the puma is fun. Top Gear also mentioned in the day as well about the brake stating that round a track after 4 laps a Vector GSI's brakes would have faded and an Audi S3 only a couple of laps later but the FRP's would not break a sweat many laps further on.
 
It never got the true recognition when it came out due to its high price compared to the Elise and Impezza of the day and ever since it has always been put down as almost the underdog that no one expects to do very well against anything they put it against.... only to be proved wrong! In Owens hands round Pembrey on a group test the Clio 172 did a lap in 1 min 15.40 an Intega R in 1 min 15.48... the FRP did it in 1 min 13.75.... and it had even started to rain when the FRP was out so it did its laps on a dampened track and with 20-30 bhp less than its rivals!!
 
Remember also the review posted by @StiggyTheST also said the engine did not feel good so that might have been some of the issue with why it struggled to keep pace.


Yeah we need to remember that it’s a 20 year old car, my comment comparing it to the XR4i wasn’t a criticism I was just comparing the straight line to an even older car that I can relate to. I’ve no doubt it’s a capable car, when you look at what they kitted the FRP out with it’s very impressive for a road car by any standard. It’s a much more special car than any Clio or Integra IMO.

It’s not the first article I’ve read where a heritage fleet car has featured and seemingly not been in the best of health; it’s understandable really when the cars spend most of their lives under a dust sheet.

#15
MickyD

MickyD

    "Race Red Owner"

  • Club Member
  • 5750 posts
Yep the Puma engines (all of them) are especially susceptible to damage especially the special cylinder coating. Most owners sites warn owners not to leave them un-run for any length of time - the main reason I plan on getting my engine totally stripped prior to getting the car back on the road.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users