RE: Ford Focus RS - full details
Discussion
KarlMac said:
Thats the race technology bit. Never going to touch a road car. That part was sold off to VW, which became Mahle.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAHLE_Powertrain
Perfectly calm, thanks treacle.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAHLE_Powertrain
Perfectly calm, thanks treacle.
well whether or not that is the 'real' Cosworth brand, the link I shared does touch road cars as the banner on the homepage is of the Stage 2 upgrade to a GT86/BRZ and they have a performance section.
Perhaps the section that was sold off during the Mahle merger has the commercial rights or whatever to the Cosworth parts brand?
(not a Cosworth nerd btw, as proved above, maybe?)
Anyway back on track
Focus 4wd Rulez! Golf R is s
te! 
BugLebowski said:
I must be seriously out of touch... Do people really rate a Golf as being classy??
I mean it's a german hatchback!? Surely it's a bit like saying my adidas trainers are classier than your nike trainers....
Boring seems to rate as classy round these parts! Either that, or something the middle class account managers would lease is classy. Either way, I'm with you.I mean it's a german hatchback!? Surely it's a bit like saying my adidas trainers are classier than your nike trainers....
Edited by Ali_T on Wednesday 4th February 15:13
chuntington101 said:
Fastdruid said:
chuntington101 said:
I see this car being a Ford tuners dream car. The 2.3 should be pretty tuneable with bolt on mods. And with it being used in the stang as well, the harder core stuff (forged bottom ends, cams etc) should also be available.
Are these direct injection now?
Yes. It's a derivative of the Mazda L3-VDT 2.3L DISI Turbo engine (ie the one in the 3 & 6 MPS) engine which was direct injection 10 years ago.Are these direct injection now?
The Mk2 3 MPS had forged steel crank, forged alloy conrods and forged alloy pistons so I'd be shocked if the greater power'd Ecoboost doesn't.
Do you know if this engine has the exhaust track built into the head like the 1.0 Ecoboost engines?
Not sure about how tunable/comparable it'll be out of the box as it's not the same engine, it's just derived from the Mazda engine and with ~10 years more development.
wormus said:
dinz said:
On the obviously touchy subject of build quality, the Golf R isn't great. It's a good couple of rungs down the ladder from my previous A4 Avant and TT Coupe, but it's a damn sight better than the 2011 Focus Titanium X my wife had for two years. That thing was awful. Cheap plastic body panels (they felt plastic when they flexed in and out like a wobble board when washing it anyway!) and horrible, cheap plastic interior. This was a £22k car that felt like a £10k budget special!
Really? We've had a Focus Mk3 since new in 2011 and it's been great. No squeaks or rattles and cruises quietly on the motorway at 80mph with the comfort you'd expect from a much larger car. Plastic body panels are quite common these days, my brother's old A6 also had plastic front wings.Edited by wormus on Wednesday 4th February 14:01
I understand that a lot of cars use plastic body panels, but i've never had one that flexes so badly when being washed! I'll never forget the first time I washed it, I just couldn't put any pressure on the front wings through fear of caving them in!
Ali_T said:
Hellbound said:
The Golf R is classier. It costs more because the materials used cost more. VAG's might and brilliantly efficient manufacturing process and engineering resources means it doesn't cost £5k more than it does. It's a great package that isn't boring to drive.
The materials aren't any more expensive, just cleverly designed to appear so. VW is on a massive cost cutting and decontenting exercise because the supposed savings on the MQB platform completely failed to materialise. They have to cut $6.8 billion from costs to maintain profitable and that can only come from cheaper parts being used. Right now, they're only making 2.9% margin where they predicted 6-8%. Michael Macht , their production chief and overseer of the MQB platform, was sacked 6 months ago. Well, he left by "mutual agreement"....so he was sacked. So, if you really think VW use better quality parts than other manufacturers, you're in for a rude awakening. There's every chance they're now cheaper....Anyway they've rolled back expansion a little and cut down the variations of parts they manufacture. They've pretty much done what they've set out to do when it comes to efficiency savings.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/01/29/uk-volksw...
When the mid life refresh comes along for the Golf I won't be surprised if a variant of the Golf R Touch concept interior is implemented. The Audi TT/Lambo Huracan dash is a dead cert.
Fastdruid said:
Not sure about how tunable/comparable it'll be out of the box as it's not the same engine, it's just derived from the Mazda engine and with ~10 years more development.
Edited to add that I didn't read the original post to this forum thread. I've just read it, and this car has surprised me by being AWD. I guess Ford must be making some slower AWD cars on this platform soon.
It's a lovely looking Focus, possibly the nicest one Ford have made, and I want it. I think it will be great to drive, but the price will be similar to the A45 AMG, and upcoming Audi RS3. I can't wait for the reviews.
Edited by iloveboost on Wednesday 4th February 21:14
Ali_T said:
Sampaio said:
So... it's an Evo X?
Overweight and under performing? My FQ330 certainly was! And I don't believe, for one second, that the new 4wd system is only a 20kg penalty unless it's made out of balsa wood. AdamBingley said:
There's no way that the Quality of the Golf R will be matched by a ford.
This argument doesn't wash anymore. Gone are the days of the Escort RS Turbo vs Golf GTI 16V. Similar performance, but the VW was better made. Not anymore though. Fords are every bit as well made as VWs and we've waited a long time for a really good fast Ford, whereas the VAG machine have been churning out samey boxes constantly for the past decade. The Golf R is a very talented car, though.dukebox9reg said:
macky17 said:
The Ford will be more engaging to drive than the R and with 2.3 litres will have more inherent torque and tuneability. But yes, if Playstation is your thing the DSG Golf might be quicker in a straight line if you're struggling with the 3 pedals.
The new Ford engines aren't very tuneable compared to their VAG counterparts (or even Fords old YB). Thats coming from somebody on the fence. Not a fan boy of either but have friends in both camps. Even the basic Golf engine will map to a similar level to the higher output ST mapped and there is serious issues taking the 2.0 ecoboost past 300bhp without having to start replacing things I am lead to believe from a blue oval fan running his ST on an extreme dream science map at the mo.
The old Vag 2ltr with 260bhp mapped to over 300bhp with no issues. Look at what the Golf R is mapping to now and I bet the Ford unit wont safetly touch it.
Golf Rs have fragile turbos apparently and don't last long when mapped. Excessive EGTs are a problem on the VW unit (when whacking up the boost) because the turbo and manifold are one part, and there's a cat converter attached to the manifold, so the exhaust gases back up quite considerably, which turbine wheels don't particularly like.
The last over-engineered engine from VW was the Edition 30 / 8P S3 / MK6 R engine (EA113 code), which can map to 400hp using stock internals and stock turbo. The only supplementary parts needed to achieve that figure are: meth injection, a larger intercooler & and uprated mechanical fuel pump. Compared to the regular GTI engine, it had 4 bolt mains, stronger rods with bigger wrist pins, stronger pistons & rings, stronger everything! Even the stock injectors flow 1000cc. The EA888 engine that followed isn't quite as beefy, but it has a broader torque curve.
Edited by SuperchargedVR6 on Wednesday 4th February 16:54
J4CKO said:
shoestring7 said:
lee_erm said:
I think that's a an excellent interior/dash.
The Golfs, not so much.
SS7
The front is hideous.
If you're after the Fat Gaz. late 20s look of the Suburu set a decade or so on, then this is that cars successor. But then again, Ford has always made cars for a segment of society that has liked brash, crass, coarse and vulgar looking. This car has that design ethos/DNA running right through it.
Hellbound said:
Are you suggesting VW is going downmarket and they'll soon start churning out Dacia's?
Anyway they've rolled back expansion a little and cut down the variations of parts they manufacture. They've pretty much done what they've set out to do when it comes to efficiency savings.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/01/29/uk-volksw...
When the mid life refresh comes along for the Golf I won't be surprised if a variant of the Golf R Touch concept interior is implemented. The Audi TT/Lambo Huracan dash is a dead cert.
I'm talking about from the outside I haven't seen the interior shotsAnyway they've rolled back expansion a little and cut down the variations of parts they manufacture. They've pretty much done what they've set out to do when it comes to efficiency savings.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/01/29/uk-volksw...
When the mid life refresh comes along for the Golf I won't be surprised if a variant of the Golf R Touch concept interior is implemented. The Audi TT/Lambo Huracan dash is a dead cert.
SuperchargedVR6 said:
If the Fiesta RS is anything to go by, this Focus engine should make bonkers power, although it may not rev as sweetly as the VW unit if the 2.3 capacity comes with a long stroke.
It's 1.2mm longer than the Golf R (94mm against 92.8mm) and 87.5mm bore against the Golfs 82.5mm. Both are undersquare so favour low revs but the MZR/Ecoboost is nearer to square than the Golf R and the MPS revs very sweetly (although as previously mentioned power does tail after 5k) so I'd actually say it's more likely to be more revvy.
Edited by Fastdruid on Wednesday 4th February 17:23
GroundEffect said:
Harry Flashman said:
Plus - great mechanicals, superb price.
Minus - no 3 door, warm hatch looks.
Weak effort Ford. Your fast hatches are meant to look silly. Rather have a Mk2 RS. But if I needed a brand new fast hatch, this would be it I think, on what you get for the money alone.
It's for the global market. It can't look like the C307 RS and still sell in USA and China...Minus - no 3 door, warm hatch looks.
Weak effort Ford. Your fast hatches are meant to look silly. Rather have a Mk2 RS. But if I needed a brand new fast hatch, this would be it I think, on what you get for the money alone.
Sampaio said:
Sorry to hear that, why the move to a Giulietta QV? It had to be looks/interior because the driving can't be much better...
No other reason than it was the only car that made my smile on the test drive! Looked at Golf R, A45, M235i....all the usual suspects. Only the GQV and Focus St were actually fun to drive on a backroad. The rest were all about pub bragging rights and going as fast as possible. Didn't interest me anymore. The Evo is an amazing car, but also so aloof that it wasn't really that much fun as a daily driver. Though it's also a cheapish test to see if Alfa really are any better, because I have my eyes on a 4C for the weekend. Mind you, the GQV with the Eibach Pro Street kit and a Spider tuning box is every bit as quick as the Evo was....in the dry.Edited by Ali_T on Wednesday 4th February 17:33
Ali_T said:
mmcd87 said:
I bet it's brilliant.
A '08+ hatchback Impreza STI with the Prodrive kit is probably quite close in theory. Maybe not as quick on track but most never see one. Obviously not as 'nice' a package all round, but 5 doors, adjustable 4wd, 330ps, manual, flared bodywork, etc. The newer ones are more refined than the older versions too, so arguably more usable. Plus they have a bit of character, unlike the new VAG stuff.
I had the STI 330S. Trust me, it's not got 330bhp. I'd rate them more around 360+ and most dynes of stock cars agree. It was underplayed because they were preparing the CS400. The Evo X FQ330 was far slower.A '08+ hatchback Impreza STI with the Prodrive kit is probably quite close in theory. Maybe not as quick on track but most never see one. Obviously not as 'nice' a package all round, but 5 doors, adjustable 4wd, 330ps, manual, flared bodywork, etc. The newer ones are more refined than the older versions too, so arguably more usable. Plus they have a bit of character, unlike the new VAG stuff.
Ali_T said:
No other reason than it was the only car that made my smile on the test drive! Looked at Golf R, A45, M235i....all the usual suspects. Only the GQV and Focus St were actually fun to drive on a backroad. The rest were all about pub bragging rights and going as fast as possible. Didn't interest me anymore. The Evo is an amazing car, but also so aloof that it wasn't really that much fun as a daily driver. Though it's also a cheapish test to see if Alfa really are any better, because I have my eyes on a 4C for the weekend. Mind you, the GQV with the Eibach Pro Street kit and a Spider tuning box is every bit as quick as the Evo was....in the dry.
Sounds like a perfect reason to pick the alfa then! And again, it looks gorgeous. I understand what you mean by A45s and such not being that much fun on a backroad, they're too fast, heavy and detached.Edited by Ali_T on Wednesday 4th February 17:33
drivin_me_nuts said:
J4CKO said:
shoestring7 said:
lee_erm said:
I think that's a an excellent interior/dash.
The Golfs, not so much.
SS7
The front is hideous.
If you're after the Fat Gaz. late 20s look of the Suburu set a decade or so on, then this is that cars successor. But then again, Ford has always made cars for a segment of society that has liked brash, crass, coarse and vulgar looking. This car has that design ethos/DNA running right through it.
Not sure the Golf is the paragon of class and taste that everyone seems to put it forward as, we live on a pretty middle class road and there are four newish black Golfs, there are only twenty houses, to me that just seems like a complete lack of imagination and interest.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff