</font><font color="blue" class="small">( I looked at the Puma and was not impressed with the "quality". The Meteor was much heavier duty.
The 72" has a polyethylene disk under the chute base that makes for smoother rotation of the chute and less grabbing when frozen. The 51" did not and the chute moved around a bit. Some of the welds and smaller parts were not a well done as the Puma, but the blowers themselves are more rugged IMO. If you live on a dirt road, you want more steel.
)</font>
I'll stack my 2 year old 64" Puma up against a Meteor or Blizzard any day. My Puma is a heavy duty brute. The quality of construction and welds and heavy dutiness is far superior to those other brands that I have looked at. The basic box of the Puma is 1/8" steel.
According to the manufacturers specs, the 51" Meteor weighs 265 lbs and the 60" weighs 285 lbs, while the 54" Puma weighs 362 lbs and the 64" weighs 382 lbs. That indicates that the Puma weighs 30% or so more that the Meteor. Yes I know the widths are different but the 54" Puma weighs 80 lbs more than the 61" Meteor. It seems to me that the Puma has more steel.
My Puma also has a polyethylene disk under the chute base. It makes the hydraulic chute rotation a breeze even when snowed and iced up.
I have a 250' or so, 15' wide gravel driveway with a 50' x 75' gravel parking area. I regularly pickup and throw rocks and gravel and I am impressed with the sturdiness and ruggedness of the Puma. No more steel is needed.
IMO, the Meteor and Blizzard need more steel to be considered in the same category as the Puma. This is based on my actual experience over the last two years and the manufacturer's own specifications.