Ford Focus RS Road Test-does it live up to the hype?
Discussion
Steven_RW said:
My dad has a focus rs (his first ford rs at the age of 71..).
The crackle on sport mode is crap and fake sounding. The car is better off without it.
The suspension in normal mode is the way forward. The next setting is way too hard. Race track only IMO.
The engine sounds "okay". I'm thinking some form of De-cat would massively improve the sound (if possible without CEL etc. etc.).
Power band is nice and wide, pulls well and is strong.
Steering is ace, brakes are ace, turn in and body composure is fantastic. Born A-B country road weapon. We live in central Scotland and on my favourite country run, where the Tommi Evo 6 used to be king.. the RS would do an equally devastating job.
Standard seats hold you very well on the midrift area.
Car in white with standard silver wheels is my favourite and most classy option to date (which is what he ordered).
No comparison to the Golf R from me as I haven't driven one. I've sat in the Boss' Golf R and the interior felt really good. Maybe better than the Ford but personally I wasn't or wouldn't be buying one of these for the interior other than seats, pedal position, steering wheel and gearbox.
The focus RS is a great car. I've driven many other vehicles and the composure of this one is brilliant.
Cheers
RW
Nice review. The main dynamic difference between RS and R is the presence of the RS's GKN Twinster double rear clutch packs. The R has a basic (but light) Haldex system, and the RS has the next gen set-up. Heavier but allows 100/0% torque transfer across the rear axle which makes it more agile and limits understeer. I've ordered an RS too BTW.The crackle on sport mode is crap and fake sounding. The car is better off without it.
The suspension in normal mode is the way forward. The next setting is way too hard. Race track only IMO.
The engine sounds "okay". I'm thinking some form of De-cat would massively improve the sound (if possible without CEL etc. etc.).
Power band is nice and wide, pulls well and is strong.
Steering is ace, brakes are ace, turn in and body composure is fantastic. Born A-B country road weapon. We live in central Scotland and on my favourite country run, where the Tommi Evo 6 used to be king.. the RS would do an equally devastating job.
Standard seats hold you very well on the midrift area.
Car in white with standard silver wheels is my favourite and most classy option to date (which is what he ordered).
No comparison to the Golf R from me as I haven't driven one. I've sat in the Boss' Golf R and the interior felt really good. Maybe better than the Ford but personally I wasn't or wouldn't be buying one of these for the interior other than seats, pedal position, steering wheel and gearbox.
The focus RS is a great car. I've driven many other vehicles and the composure of this one is brilliant.
Cheers
RW
Gamekeeper said:
Nice review. The main dynamic difference between RS and R is the presence of the RS's GKN Twinster double rear clutch packs. The R has a basic (but light) Haldex system, and the RS has the next gen set-up. Heavier but allows 100/0% torque transfer across the rear axle which makes it more agile and limits understeer. I've ordered an RS too BTW.
Sort of, the Golf R has torque vectoring using the brakes, while the Focus RS uses the clutch packs on its rear axle. They both have torque vectoring to improve turn in but the RS's is superior. Last I saw the Golf R could only send 50% of the power to the rear, while its 70% for the Focus RS, of that 70% the Focus can then send 100% to either wheel. 
Picked up this months EVO yesterday. Much better performance figures, 0.60 4.7, 0-100, 12.4, 0-130, 23.6..but hugely off the pace of the BMW M2 (nearly 6 secs slower to 130 MPH, which is only packing 15 BHP more and weighed just 1KG less as tested. Either Mustang ponies are old nags compared with German horses, or the Focus has the aerodynamic properties of a brick, its probably a bit of both! The Focus does seem to be an absolute hoot and lapped 1.4 seconds faster than a M235i.
..so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
..so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
greenarrow said:
Picked up this months EVO yesterday. Much better performance figures, 0.60 4.7, 0-100, 12.4, 0-130, 23.6..but hugely off the pace of the BMW M2 (nearly 6 secs slower to 130 MPH, which is only packing 15 BHP more and weighed just 1KG less as tested. Either Mustang ponies are old nags compared with German horses, or the Focus has the aerodynamic properties of a brick, its probably a bit of both! The Focus does seem to be an absolute hoot and lapped 1.4 seconds faster than a M235i.
..so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
I think in this review they said 11 point something, 11.6 if I remember correctly...so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/content/features/ford-...
And it wins the test,
Its plenty quick enough, its just people are getting used to daft numbers from the German stuff, the Focus has the 4WD which is a third of the mad 0-60 dash coin, it has a fair old wadge of power which is another but it loses out by not having a rapid shifting, dual clutch box like the Golf R, AMG A45 and Audi RS3 have.
Then we moan about not having a manual box !
It will all be pretty academic as so many will end up modded to the hilt and its a good basis for mods, beign 300 cc higher in capacity than most rivals and anyway, on the road, is a few tneths, even a second ot two really going to make that much difference ? its still a very rapid car by all accounts, its just that these days, the gloves are off and 130 bhp hot hatches are a distant memory, they dont even qualify as hot unless they have 300 plus these days, its mad !
Suppose it depends whether you want the best one to drive, nicest dash plastics or best performance numbers ?
I am not sure I would buy one as not really that keen on how it looks, but its a tough package to ignore.
tankplanker said:
ort of, the Golf R has torque vectoring using the brakes, while the Focus RS uses the clutch packs on its rear axle. They both have torque vectoring to improve turn in but the RS's is superior. Last I saw the Golf R could only send 50% of the power to the rear, while its 70% for the Focus RS, of that 70% the Focus can then send 100% to either wheel.
Correct! Good explanation (better than mine)greenarrow said:
Picked up this months EVO yesterday. Much better performance figures, 0.60 4.7, 0-100, 12.4, 0-130, 23.6..but hugely off the pace of the BMW M2 (nearly 6 secs slower to 130 MPH, which is only packing 15 BHP more and weighed just 1KG less as tested. Either Mustang ponies are old nags compared with German horses, or the Focus has the aerodynamic properties of a brick, its probably a bit of both! The Focus does seem to be an absolute hoot and lapped 1.4 seconds faster than a M235i.
..so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
I had an order in for an M2 and cancelled it for a Focus RS, the reason being, my perfect Focus with £3,740 worth of extras was still 32% (or £10,710.00) less than a bog standard BMW M2. To create my ideal BMW M2 (DCT) there would have been a 44% (or £14,875) price difference. I didn't think the M2 was worth the extra outlay...so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
By the time Mountune & Revo etc release their performance packs, £1,000 will probably see the FRS closing the gap hugely on the M2 (in terms of performance) right across the board.
All IMHO of course
Would say more power is a given, in the US 400 bhp has been extracted from the Mustang Ecoboost and the RS version is upgraded from that with different liners and other bits, I cant imagine many will remain standard.
400 bhp hatchbacks, who would have expected that, same the Ferrari 360.
400 bhp hatchbacks, who would have expected that, same the Ferrari 360.
Of course all these straight-line acceleration benchmarks are set on dry smooth roads (Millbrook/MIRA etc). Just the sort of roads we don't actually have in the UK. Be fun to see what the like-for-like numbers are for damp/cold/greasy/bumpy roads. Ie the ones we do actually have. I imagine it would be a massacre.
greenarrow said:
Picked up this months EVO yesterday. Much better performance figures, 0.60 4.7, 0-100, 12.4, 0-130, 23.6..but hugely off the pace of the BMW M2 (nearly 6 secs slower to 130 MPH, which is only packing 15 BHP more and weighed just 1KG less as tested. Either Mustang ponies are old nags compared with German horses, or the Focus has the aerodynamic properties of a brick, its probably a bit of both! The Focus does seem to be an absolute hoot and lapped 1.4 seconds faster than a M235i.
..so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
Those stats are on the previous page of this thread ..so I think overall, the Focus is very quick for a £30K hot hatch, but just not very quick for a 345 BHP car, by modern standards.
I'm with you though completely that it's not that quick for a supposedly 345bhp car. Careful when you say that though, some people get reeeaaaal tetchy.
Tuvra said:
I had an order in for an M2 and cancelled it for a Focus RS, the reason being, my perfect Focus with £3,740 worth of extras was still 32% (or £10,710.00) less than a bog standard BMW M2. To create my ideal BMW M2 (DCT) there would have been a 44% (or £14,875) price difference. I didn't think the M2 was worth the extra outlay.
By the time Mountune & Revo etc release their performance packs, £1,000 will probably see the FRS closing the gap hugely on the M2 (in terms of performance) right across the board.
All IMHO of course
And what happens when a modified RS comes up against a modified M2..? I'm sure it won't just be RS' that owners tinker with.By the time Mountune & Revo etc release their performance packs, £1,000 will probably see the FRS closing the gap hugely on the M2 (in terms of performance) right across the board.
All IMHO of course
Edited by AMGJocky on Friday 20th May 13:06
Edited by AMGJocky on Friday 20th May 13:07
J4CKO said:
It will all be pretty academic as so many will end up modded to the hilt and its a good basis for mods,
Not from what I have heard. There are hardware and software limits built into the AWD system, meaning that upping the power will result in more front bias and altered dynamics from stock.AMGJocky said:
And what happens when a modified RS comes up against a modified M2..? I'm sure it won't just be RS' that owners tinker with.
There won't be many modified M2's where as the vast majority of RS' will at least be running a Mountune Kit.Never the less, lets do the numbers again, £29,620 for a basic Focus RS. It has £1k spent on it, so (using Golf R Revo gains) lets assume its now up around 400-420bhp? The car has cost £30,620. The BMW costs £44,070, lets be honest £1k isn't going to get you 10% out of this engin. So lets say this slightly modified M2 (£45,070.00) is up around 385bhp, for arguments sake.
A 385bhp M2 versus a 400/420bhp RS may still be quicker, but your still comparing a £30,620 car with a £45,070.00 car. That's 47% or £14,450 more. Therefore I strongly believe the RS offers more "bang for buck" than the M2
rb5er said:
AMGJocky said:
And what happens when a modified RS comes up against a modified M2..? I'm sure it won't just be RS' that owners tinker with.
Do BMW do manufacturer backed remaps like Mountune do for Ford? If not then I doubt many will be remapped whilst in warranty.Tuvra said:
There won't be many modified M2's where as the vast majority of RS' will at least be running a Mountune Kit.
Never the less, lets do the numbers again, £29,620 for a basic Focus RS. It has £1k spent on it, so (using Golf R Revo gains) lets assume its now up around 400-420bhp? The car has cost £30,620. The BMW costs £44,070, lets be honest £1k isn't going to get you 10% out of this engin. So lets say this slightly modified M2 (£45,070.00) is up around 385bhp, for arguments sake.
A 385bhp M2 versus a 400/420bhp RS may still be quicker, but your still comparing a £30,620 car with a £45,070.00 car. That's 47% or £14,450 more. Therefore I strongly believe the RS offers more "bang for buck" than the M2
I get what you're saying, but personally I don't think there's really much to compare between them. They were both part of a group test on Evo of course, but that's really where it ends. I imagine that driving an M2 is an infinitely more special experience than the RS and what it offers is a fair whack above what the RS can do. That's echoed in the Evo reviews as well anyway. Never the less, lets do the numbers again, £29,620 for a basic Focus RS. It has £1k spent on it, so (using Golf R Revo gains) lets assume its now up around 400-420bhp? The car has cost £30,620. The BMW costs £44,070, lets be honest £1k isn't going to get you 10% out of this engin. So lets say this slightly modified M2 (£45,070.00) is up around 385bhp, for arguments sake.
A 385bhp M2 versus a 400/420bhp RS may still be quicker, but your still comparing a £30,620 car with a £45,070.00 car. That's 47% or £14,450 more. Therefore I strongly believe the RS offers more "bang for buck" than the M2
I'd be surprised if people who were willing to pay for a new M2 would be pulled in by a fast Ford - I'm sure there will be some people, but for me, the RS isn't really in the same league. I shall be experiencing an M2 soon anyway, so will feedback my own personal thoughts of course once I've had a go! Bang for your buck is great and all, some people prefer Waitrose over Asda if you get my drift. (Not wanting to sound like I'm slating the RS, I'm sure it's a great hot hatch)
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff