Potential Project - PUMA DIESEL -Info

[Flying Scotsman]

Must be.... Im doing it as im playing and im interested to see what it would be like... So i could either sell on a unique vehicle or keep it as a service team transport vehicle during stage rallies.

 

[Flying Scotsman]

Plus its my time and money to waste..... If i get enjoyment out of it then im not really bothered about the time and money... I had a good time.

 

[Neil]

Is it just me that doesn't see any point to doing this whatsoever? Complete and utter waste of time and money.

The money would be better spent on a Fiesta TDCi.

 

[Flying Scotsman]

Is it just me that doesn't see any point to doing this whatsoever? Complete and utter waste of time and money.

The money would be better spent on a Fiesta TDCi.

Then you'd have a Fiesta... I dont like the shape much...

And the money would probably be better spent on mortgages, kids education funds, investment things.... but i'm playing lol :-D

 

[lusid666]

i quite like the idea but i'd want a tdci lump in so there was still some performance. a mate has a the 2L 130bhp tdci mondeo, goes like hot stink and gets 58 mpg so in a puma that is lighter it could only be quicker and return better mpg

 

[Flying Scotsman]

1.6 TDCI shouldn't be too bad in a Puma...

 

[Flying Scotsman]

Something similar to......??

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/1999-Escort-1-8-TD-Endura-Turbo-Diesel-Engine-Guarantee-FREE-DELIVERY-/200733169493?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item2ebca11755

 

[Bentleya]

Like i said in the post under your original post. The 1.8 Endura DE from the MK4 or the 1.8 Endura DI from the MK5 Fiesta.

It will fit straight in, but you will need uprated suspension as the engine is a lot heavier then a Petrol Puma lump.

 

[Flying Scotsman]

Yeah... easy to swap and achieves my aim... good shout right at the start

 

[JoeB1]

I'd still vote for the 1.8/2.0. My understanding is that all diesel engines are heavy lumps, handling will be affected by whichever one you go for. What is the weight difference between the 1.6 and a 2.0, say?

From my experience the mondeo diesels drive very well, they're nippy and very good on fuel. In a Puma they'd be even better.

 

[All that jazz]

I'd still vote for the 1.8/2.0. My understanding is that all diesel engines are heavy lumps, handling will be affected by whichever one you go for. What is the weight difference between the 1.6 and a 2.0, say?

From my experience the mondeo diesels drive very well, they're nippy and very good on fuel. In a Puma they'd be even better.

Exactly. The huge block of iron you'd have up front would see the handling go to the wall and it'd handle like a barge. Just buy a Fiesta with a diesel lump in it because you'll retain absolutely none of the Puma's handling characteristics by transplanting a coal burning lump into the engine bay.

And what are diesels for anyway? Doing big mileages at constant revs on motorways - exactly what the Puma was not designed for.

Stupid project is stupid.

 

[Flying Scotsman]

I'd still vote for the 1.8/2.0. My understanding is that all diesel engines are heavy lumps, handling will be affected by whichever one you go for. What is the weight difference between the 1.6 and a 2.0, say?

From my experience the mondeo diesels drive very well, they're nippy and very good on fuel. In a Puma they'd be even better.

Exactly. The huge block of iron you'd have up front would see the handling go to the wall and it'd handle like a barge. Just buy a Fiesta with a diesel lump in it because you'll retain absolutely none of the Puma's handling characteristics by transplanting a coal burning lump into the engine bay.

And what are diesels for anyway? Doing big mileages at constant revs on motorways - exactly what the Puma was not designed for.

Stupid project is stupid.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions.... but i will not be buying a fiesta...
And yes it is a heavy lump.... Uprate the suspension.... You can not say for a fact that the Puma will lose all of its characteristics.... you have never tried this... Be sceptical, sure.... but saying as a matter of fact.... that is stupid.

 

[luke55]

Diesels are a lot easier to tune and can offer so much more torque per ft lb
Especially the TDI's

Yes but they normally have higher gearing and more weight which really brings out the non-linear power delivery. Even with the higher gearing, the useable power band is still less. It is true the power is more accessible most of the time, just the torque numbers flatter diesel engines a bit more than they deserve.

And you will freeze to death on winter mornings.

 

[JoeB1]

I'd still vote for the 1.8/2.0. My understanding is that all diesel engines are heavy lumps, handling will be affected by whichever one you go for. What is the weight difference between the 1.6 and a 2.0, say?

From my experience the mondeo diesels drive very well, they're nippy and very good on fuel. In a Puma they'd be even better.

Exactly. The huge block of iron you'd have up front would see the handling go to the wall and it'd handle like a barge. Just buy a Fiesta with a diesel lump in it because you'll retain absolutely none of the Puma's handling characteristics by transplanting a coal burning lump into the engine bay.

And what are diesels for anyway? Doing big mileages at constant revs on motorways - exactly what the Puma was not designed for.

Stupid project is stupid.

That's a bit harsh.

 

[LOONEY]

as the above says he's spot on! the puma is a sports car you dont see lotus putting diesels in the elises lol wounder if a bugatti veyron would do the 250 as a diesel mmmmmmmm i think not the guy if being tight i remember seeing a vauxhall calibra with a cav 1700 td in it and i was think what a complete waste of time and im thinking it again. hay why not make it a auto so you can save on the arm movements and leg work lol

 

[JoeB1]

as the above says he's spot on! the puma is a sports car you dont see lotus putting diesels in the elises lol wounder if a bugatti veyron would do the 250 as a diesel mmmmmmmm i think not the guy if being tight i remember seeing a vauxhall calibra with a cav 1700 td in it and i was think what a complete waste of time and im thinking it again. hay why not make it a auto so you can save on the arm movements and leg work lol

Not all pumas are 1.7s. The 1.4 is hardly on the same level as an elise or bugatti..lol. A tuned 1.8TDi would beat a 1.4 puma in a straight line, and probably around bends too.

A Puma with a diesel lump would still be lighter than most modern petrol cars. If you were going to pick a car to put a diesel engine into, the puma wouldn't be a bad shell.

Anyway most of the fun with these projects is the challenge itself. You could argue it doesn't makes sense to spend £5,000 fitting turbo to a puma, but people do it anyway.

 

[Ginger Tom]

as the above says he's spot on! the puma is a sports car you dont see lotus putting diesels in the elises lol wounder if a bugatti veyron would do the 250 as a diesel mmmmmmmm i think not the guy if being tight i remember seeing a vauxhall calibra with a cav 1700 td in it and i was think what a complete waste of time and im thinking it again. hay why not make it a auto so you can save on the arm movements and leg work lol

Are you a dick? What do you think dominates the le man? Diesel powered cars, would you not call a le man car a sports car? What used to dominate the touring cars? O yeh that would be diesels as well. And as for lotus, whoever decided to put the k series engine in the back of the Elise should be shot

 

[LOONEY]

ginger tom you know my point mate ok the k series was shit. i didnt know about the le mans all im saying is would you put a escort td engine in your puma?

 

[LOONEY]

plus i am changing my 1.4 to a 1.7

 

[lusid666]

Im read somewhere audi do a diesel version of the r8, heard its fnquick