RE: SOTW: Ford Focus ST170
Discussion
Antj said:
ahhh the Focus St170.
shame they never called it the ST145 which is what most rr'd at unless they had the recall from Ford.
Not sure about that.shame they never called it the ST145 which is what most rr'd at unless they had the recall from Ford.
RR's can tell porkies a lot of the time.
A friend had an ST170 overlapping with my GTi6 ownership and we were often level-pegging along a by-pass we both commuted to work along through a few of the gears.
I really like the ST170... subtle but pretty effective.
Much better than the horrors Ford inflict on our eyes these days with garish colours as the only choices, along with super-chav styling.
Hmmm
Dave
Very good value now but I test drove one new (an estae as it happens) and took an instant dislike/apathy towards it - it simply failed to match up to the no doubt biased road tests. I went across the road and test drove a CTR and bought it without a mment's hesitation - a vastly superior car though I doubt you could get one for she dmoney.
yonex said:
Mr2Mike said:
In terms of interior quality it was better than the Clio, and it was nice to drive in terms of ride and handling. However the lack of rust protection is making itself known these days compared to the Clio, and reliability is perhaps not as good as you'd hope (e.g. the electronically controlled inlet manifold is a common and expensive failure point).
As a hot hatch it was mediocre IMO. Too heavy and not enough power meant the French tin can would disappear into the distance. What's the point of buying the performance model in the range and suffering the higher insurance, maintenance and fuel bills if it doesn't actually provide the performance to back it up?
Clio's are hardly known for their strength!As a hot hatch it was mediocre IMO. Too heavy and not enough power meant the French tin can would disappear into the distance. What's the point of buying the performance model in the range and suffering the higher insurance, maintenance and fuel bills if it doesn't actually provide the performance to back it up?
What has strength got to do with anything, I didn't mention it? If you mean strength in terms of safety in an accident, both the Clio and the Mk1 Focus have a 4 star NCAP rating, both are pretty safe cars. Unless the Focus is rotten of course.Changedmyname said:
Devil2575 said:
Rammy76 said:
Changedmyname said:
After driving my wife focus ,I'm glad I have a golf.
You prefer driving a mk4 Golf to a Focus?!Each to their own I suppose.
I'd always wanted to try out an ST170, although tall gearing for a peaky engine when there are 6 speeds does seem a bit strange.
I had a Mk1 2.0 ESP estate. At the time it seemed to handle well and could be controlled on the throttle(but it was 10 years ago now), although the ESP was too interfering. If my memory is correct, I think it tended to understeer more than my current Mondeo(although I'm a better driver these days).
The Brakes weren't very inspiring.
The gearbox must have done the job, I can't remember much about it.
Performance was reasonable (-similar to a 2.0TD, with less low rpm torque), but not significantly better than a 1.8.
"Throttle response" was dulled by the constriction in the throttle body at small throttle angles.
-Reaming out the throttle body effectively shortened the throttle pedal travel required, making the car feel more responsive.
Adding a K&N panel filter and a second intake pipe to the airbox may or may not have helped, but it did sound better
The catalytic converter was mounted very close to the cylinder head with very short headers. At the time there was talk of fitting an ST170 exhaust manifold with its longer headers to provide more horsepower, although I never tried it.
Economy wasn't great ~32mpg when driven carefully.
The ST was reputedly significantly more thirsty, with better suspension and brakes.
I had a Mk1 2.0 ESP estate. At the time it seemed to handle well and could be controlled on the throttle(but it was 10 years ago now), although the ESP was too interfering. If my memory is correct, I think it tended to understeer more than my current Mondeo(although I'm a better driver these days).
The Brakes weren't very inspiring.
The gearbox must have done the job, I can't remember much about it.
Performance was reasonable (-similar to a 2.0TD, with less low rpm torque), but not significantly better than a 1.8.
"Throttle response" was dulled by the constriction in the throttle body at small throttle angles.
-Reaming out the throttle body effectively shortened the throttle pedal travel required, making the car feel more responsive.
Adding a K&N panel filter and a second intake pipe to the airbox may or may not have helped, but it did sound better
The catalytic converter was mounted very close to the cylinder head with very short headers. At the time there was talk of fitting an ST170 exhaust manifold with its longer headers to provide more horsepower, although I never tried it.
Economy wasn't great ~32mpg when driven carefully.
The ST was reputedly significantly more thirsty, with better suspension and brakes.
Edited by MC Bodge on Friday 23 November 17:58
big_boz said:
TameRacingDriver said:
Think I'd rather just go for the 2.0-litre version, sounds like there's very little difference in performance, so you may as well have the slightly better fuel economy, insurance costs and probably slightly cheaper purchase price IMO.
Good shout 2.0ESP with a blue fin on is probably a better car.80085 said:
Good shout indeed, I have a 2.0 esp, chipped, manifold, exhaust,filter bilstiens, 18"s and minus 100kg, goes very nicely, likes revs and returns decent mpg's and with shocks and wheels handles even better. I am a big fan of the mk1, the handling is amazing.
Good stuff. Why not stick with 15/16" wheels though?I had a 20 minute drive of my mate's ST170 back when they were new , which he had as a courtesy car(!) when his Astra was in for repairs.
I liked the look of it and it sounded quite good. The performance at the time seemed fine. He later told me that a his friend had managed to pull away from him when they both 'gunned it' on the motorway!
Years later I considered buying a 5 door version, but the one I went to see had lots of issues and the seller was unwilling to budge on price. I then bought a Leon Cupra, which I still have
I liked the look of it and it sounded quite good. The performance at the time seemed fine. He later told me that a his friend had managed to pull away from him when they both 'gunned it' on the motorway!
Years later I considered buying a 5 door version, but the one I went to see had lots of issues and the seller was unwilling to budge on price. I then bought a Leon Cupra, which I still have
Mr Whippy said:
Not sure about that.
RR's can tell porkies a lot of the time.
A friend had an ST170 overlapping with my GTi6 ownership and we were often level-pegging along a by-pass we both commuted to work along through a few of the gears.
I really like the ST170... subtle but pretty effective.
Much better than the horrors Ford inflict on our eyes these days with garish colours as the only choices, along with super-chav styling.
Hmmm
Dave
yup, the first St170's released had a recall for mapping as they were all down on power. Mymates just bought one as a track car and its early one and when he chjecked it at work ( works for Ford Main dealer) his has not had the recall done on it. So could be quite a few like that, same seen on a few owners forums.RR's can tell porkies a lot of the time.
A friend had an ST170 overlapping with my GTi6 ownership and we were often level-pegging along a by-pass we both commuted to work along through a few of the gears.
I really like the ST170... subtle but pretty effective.
Much better than the horrors Ford inflict on our eyes these days with garish colours as the only choices, along with super-chav styling.
Hmmm
Dave
The first Focus ST tested by EVO magazine took over 23 seconds to hit the ton, which even in 2002 was very poor for a hot hatch....the second one, in 2004 did it in 20.9 secs I think, which is similar to a GTI-6, so not that slow for the BHP rating really....I seem to recall them shortening the gear ratios slightly in about 2004 which together with the recall makes a difference I guess
Actually I quite like the ST. I had a MK1 1.6 Zetec which was an absolute ball of fun, you could chuck it into bends at silly speeds and it always seemed to come out ok...the model i would have however is the very rare estate...
Actually I quite like the ST. I had a MK1 1.6 Zetec which was an absolute ball of fun, you could chuck it into bends at silly speeds and it always seemed to come out ok...the model i would have however is the very rare estate...
[quote=omgus]
I looked at ST225's when buying my ST170, fantastic cars but just not as good on the roads i like to have fun on, if i had more fast A-roads or did more motorway treks i would agree but on B-roads i found the Mondeo was left lacking a bit in comparison to the Focus.
quote]
St225 is the ST Focus St220 is a Mondeo. I have uprated the suspension and ARB's on my ST and handles pretty well, but as a point and squirt car my mates St170 is a long way back. You can have lots of agility but sheer grunt ( albeit 300bhp in the ST Focus) is not in the same league at as 'possibly never made' 170 bhp , especially at 100k miles like my mates st170.
I looked at ST225's when buying my ST170, fantastic cars but just not as good on the roads i like to have fun on, if i had more fast A-roads or did more motorway treks i would agree but on B-roads i found the Mondeo was left lacking a bit in comparison to the Focus.
quote]
St225 is the ST Focus St220 is a Mondeo. I have uprated the suspension and ARB's on my ST and handles pretty well, but as a point and squirt car my mates St170 is a long way back. You can have lots of agility but sheer grunt ( albeit 300bhp in the ST Focus) is not in the same league at as 'possibly never made' 170 bhp , especially at 100k miles like my mates st170.
Itsallicanafford said:
DStanley1809 said:
I know they are cheap cars now but it still makes me sad to see the car I drive referred to as a shed
...don't worry about it being call 'a Shed', its really a term of endearment...IMO think of it more like a car that a petrol head would regard as interesting, which can be bought cheaply these days.I know it shouldn't but it just feels different when it's your own car being featured lol
motor mad said:
I test drove both the ST170 and the EP3 about 6 years ago. The ST170 was a bit too sensible and certainly didn't feel as powerful as I'd expected. I opted for the EP3 based on the engine and gearbox combination.
I still like the shape.
Not strictly fair- more of an EV1 (2.0 Type S) competitor.I still like the shape.
I tested the ST170 and Civic Type S back to back before plumping for the Civic. Sweeter gearchange (one of the nicest I've ever tried, actually), an engine that felt happier to sing and also felt more powerful, despite being apparently 10bhp short (but also 30kg lighter and with closer ratios).
They're weird, the quasi-hatches. Not fast enough to be hot hatches, too thirsty to be viable family cars. Strangely appealing all the same. Excellent compromises where an EP3 or RS would have too much aggression and too few doors for a family.
DStanley1809 said:
Oh, I understand how Shed works and what it means - I enjoy sitting at my desk at work most Fridays looking at SOTW and being impressed/surprised by just what can be had for <£1,000.
I know it shouldn't but it just feels different when it's your own car being featured lol
It was yours then?I know it shouldn't but it just feels different when it's your own car being featured lol
http://www.speedmonkey.co.uk/2012/10/hot-hatches-o...
A few sheds in this article that are stonking value now.
A few sheds in this article that are stonking value now.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff