RE: Shed Of The Week: Ford Focus ST170
Discussion
abitlikefiennes said:
For the record I don't consider Julia Roberts attractive by any measurement. On the other hand, Monica Bellucci is off the chart.
The interior dates the car terribly. It's so 90's. See also: X-Files; Jeff Banks; Girl Power; Hooch; Reebok Pump; Mark & Lard on Radio 1; Laser Tag and Global Hypercolour T-shirts.
Yes I think the west and east can agree on this! Well said!!The interior dates the car terribly. It's so 90's. See also: X-Files; Jeff Banks; Girl Power; Hooch; Reebok Pump; Mark & Lard on Radio 1; Laser Tag and Global Hypercolour T-shirts.
Edited by abitlikefiennes on Friday 29th May 16:54
Jazzy Jefferson said:
Very much this. I had one for a while. Fantastic car. Never went wrong, and can be hustled down a B-road with enough speed for it to be rather fun. Great motorway cruiser as well. We'll ignore the fuel economy.
I think most people just don't "get it." Coincidently, a lot who don't, haven't owned nor driven one
I'll have an ST170 over a 205GTi or MX5 thanks.
ST over a 205. Never in a month of Sunday's! I think most people just don't "get it." Coincidently, a lot who don't, haven't owned nor driven one
I'll have an ST170 over a 205GTi or MX5 thanks.Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 31st May 13:32
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 31st May 18:30
yonex said:
Jazzy Jefferson said:
Very much this. I had one for a while. Fantastic car. Never went wrong, and can be hustled down a B-road with enough speed for it to be rather fun. Great motorway cruiser as well. We'll ignore the fuel economy.
I think most people just don't "get it." Coincidently, a lot who don't, haven't owned nor driven one I'll have an ST170 over a 205GTi or MX5 thanks.
ST over a 205. Never in a month of Sunday's! I think most people just don't "get it." Coincidently, a lot who don't, haven't owned nor driven one
I'll have an ST170 over a 205GTi or MX5 thanks.Edited by Jazzy Jefferson on Sunday 31st May 13:32
Edited by yonex on Sunday 31st May 18:30
yonex said:
When a car is a bit s
t there is always someone that will say nobody understands it 
Some of these 'bad' warm hatches were just not in line with expectations. I hope I don't sound pretentious, but here goes: t there is always someone that will say nobody understands it Manufacturers realised that the single twenty something hot hatch owners of the mid-eighties were now thirty something fathers in the mid-nineties. They knew that they'd be buying relatively large and luxurious hatches, but many still yearned for an exciting hot hatch. This is getting a bit 'Mills and Boon'.
So manufacturers set about to meet this changing market with softer, luxurious warm hatches still branded as hot hatches.
Problem is that after they started releasing these cars lots of hot brands entered the market! Around this time you had 'Type R', 'Cupra R' and 'Renaultsport', etc. This made these new 'hot' models seem luke-warm, and many manufacturers spent the next few years hotting them up. They also made sure the next 'hot' model wasn't significantly out-gunned.
I'm not saying that these warm hatches were brilliant to drive fast, I'm just saying I understand what market the manufacturers aimed at.
If I sound like a pretentious know it all, then I'm sorry!
Sadly this is one of those cars that look good on paper but in real life fail to deliver.
I test drove one of those years back (times when 200hp in a hatch was top notch) and I found ST170 devoid of character and uninspiring. It felt no different than a regular 1.6 hatch. A very bland and uninteresting car to drive.
I test drove one of those years back (times when 200hp in a hatch was top notch) and I found ST170 devoid of character and uninspiring. It felt no different than a regular 1.6 hatch. A very bland and uninteresting car to drive.
I like the Mk1 Focus but I wasn't overly impressed with the ST170, a friend bought one and the seats were crap and not comfortable at all, the gearbox and gearing was woeful and it was a touch heavy on the jungle juice considering the meager performance on offer.
They do look smart though and it was a reliable old bus.
I'd be lodging my money elsewhere, frankly.
They do look smart though and it was a reliable old bus.
I'd be lodging my money elsewhere, frankly.
Edited by Axionknight on Monday 1st June 07:40
Bladedancer said:
Sadly this is one of those cars that look good on paper but in real life fail to deliver.
I test drove one of those years back (times when 200hp in a hatch was top notch) and I found ST170 devoid of character and uninspiring. It felt no different than a regular 1.6 hatch. A very bland and uninteresting car to drive.
I think this has been said many times, but part of the problem is the long gearing. It's a 1300+kg car with a 2.0 non-turbo that does 110km/h in second. For a long time Ford made top gear a very long 'overdrive', with longer lower gears to match it. They should have given the ST170 the shortest gearing possible to reach a genuine 100km/h in second, with matching shorter other gears. It would then have felt faster, and posted maybe a two or three tenths faster 0-100km/h and 0-60mph. Weirdly they gave the Fiesta ST relatively far shorter gearing, despite it only being a five speed.I test drove one of those years back (times when 200hp in a hatch was top notch) and I found ST170 devoid of character and uninspiring. It felt no different than a regular 1.6 hatch. A very bland and uninteresting car to drive.
I'm sure the steering and handling are great, as they good in the normal Focus Mk1. Also the seats and brakes are probably great.
The mrs cousin had one for a while the same time I had my Mk1 1.6, apart from the obvious facelift and the wheels there was noting to really tell them apart externally, and if he hadn't have had the 1/2 leather interior then it would have looked the same as the 2ltr zetec that was also in the street.
This was one of the problems with the ST, it didn't look like Ford really tried to make it look like a special model. I could have easily have made me 1.6 looks the same as an ST with just a seats and wheel upgrade and a cheap badge and no one would really have known.
I drove his ST170 a few times for him and cant say I was that much more impressed with the power. Gearing did seem really off and unless you were hammering it it just didn't feel any faster than my 1.6. It didn't feel any better when he spent serious money on mods either, it just sounded better. Wasn't that good at shaking my 1.6 in the twisty South Wales roads, although it did pull well on the straights over my 99bhp example!
Having all this in mind I didn't consider it as an option when a new car was on the cards. I couldn't reason paying the price of the decent ones over just another Focus. All the others I looked at were abused and badly modified.
I don't have any issues with the interior as many of you seem too, its better than the RS one!
or maybe its just living with one for as long as I did makes me fonder of it than those who may not have lived with it. I found the layout better than any other car I've driven/owned since, everything was easily found. especially compared to the dull flat consoles you got at the time in VAG & Vauxhall cars!
This was one of the problems with the ST, it didn't look like Ford really tried to make it look like a special model. I could have easily have made me 1.6 looks the same as an ST with just a seats and wheel upgrade and a cheap badge and no one would really have known.
I drove his ST170 a few times for him and cant say I was that much more impressed with the power. Gearing did seem really off and unless you were hammering it it just didn't feel any faster than my 1.6. It didn't feel any better when he spent serious money on mods either, it just sounded better. Wasn't that good at shaking my 1.6 in the twisty South Wales roads, although it did pull well on the straights over my 99bhp example!
Having all this in mind I didn't consider it as an option when a new car was on the cards. I couldn't reason paying the price of the decent ones over just another Focus. All the others I looked at were abused and badly modified.
I don't have any issues with the interior as many of you seem too, its better than the RS one!
or maybe its just living with one for as long as I did makes me fonder of it than those who may not have lived with it. I found the layout better than any other car I've driven/owned since, everything was easily found. especially compared to the dull flat consoles you got at the time in VAG & Vauxhall cars!
iloveboost said:
I'm sure the steering and handling are great, as they good in the normal Focus Mk1. Also the seats and brakes are probably great.
The half-leather seats are terrible. The driving position is much too high. I regularly have to pump the brakes half-dozen times before driving off as they have a tendancy to notWork, which can be a little terrifying.Yes, and even an estate!
I often think that this is the car that I should have bought instead of my mk4 Golf GTi (or any Focus for that matter)! The consensus in the motoring press seemed to be at the time that the chassis was fantastic and the engine OK, if a little lacklustre. From the comments on here, maybe it wasn't as good a car as I thought (but surely still at least 10 times better than the Golf)? I had wanted a Golf GTi for so long and yet the mk4 GTi (2.0) just wasn't a proper GTi!
I still think the mk1 Focus ST looks sharp and has dated very well. I thought of it as a more mature alternative to the RenaultSport Clios at the time and if not as fun as the 306 GTi-6/Rallye, it certainly has a more modern interior and the added practicality of 5 doors or even an estate bodyshell! Surely this is a consideration if you have a family but don't want to give up and get a boring car/MPV?
I quite like the mk1 Focus interior. It's more stylish than most and didn't it have a neoprene finish? Much nicer than some of the more modern, plasticky Ford interiors IMHO. Would the perfect Focus ST be the mk1 bodyshell and interior with the engine and gearbox (5-pot turbo) out of the mk2 ST?
I often think that this is the car that I should have bought instead of my mk4 Golf GTi (or any Focus for that matter)! The consensus in the motoring press seemed to be at the time that the chassis was fantastic and the engine OK, if a little lacklustre. From the comments on here, maybe it wasn't as good a car as I thought (but surely still at least 10 times better than the Golf)? I had wanted a Golf GTi for so long and yet the mk4 GTi (2.0) just wasn't a proper GTi!
I still think the mk1 Focus ST looks sharp and has dated very well. I thought of it as a more mature alternative to the RenaultSport Clios at the time and if not as fun as the 306 GTi-6/Rallye, it certainly has a more modern interior and the added practicality of 5 doors or even an estate bodyshell! Surely this is a consideration if you have a family but don't want to give up and get a boring car/MPV?
I quite like the mk1 Focus interior. It's more stylish than most and didn't it have a neoprene finish? Much nicer than some of the more modern, plasticky Ford interiors IMHO. Would the perfect Focus ST be the mk1 bodyshell and interior with the engine and gearbox (5-pot turbo) out of the mk2 ST?
corcoran said:
iloveboost said:
I'm sure the steering and handling are great, as they good in the normal Focus Mk1. Also the seats and brakes are probably great.
The half-leather seats are terrible. The driving position is much too high. I regularly have to pump the brakes half-dozen times before driving off as they have a tendancy to notWork, which can be a little terrifying.white_goodman said:
Yes, and even an estate!
I often think that this is the car that I should have bought instead of my mk4 Golf GTi (or any Focus for that matter)! The consensus in the motoring press seemed to be at the time that the chassis was fantastic and the engine OK, if a little lacklustre. From the comments on here, maybe it wasn't as good a car as I thought (but surely still at least 10 times better than the Golf)? I had wanted a Golf GTi for so long and yet the mk4 GTi (2.0) just wasn't a proper GTi!
I still think the mk1 Focus ST looks sharp and has dated very well. I thought of it as a more mature alternative to the RenaultSport Clios at the time and if not as fun as the 306 GTi-6/Rallye, it certainly has a more modern interior and the added practicality of 5 doors or even an estate bodyshell! Surely this is a consideration if you have a family but don't want to give up and get a boring car/MPV?
I quite like the mk1 Focus interior. It's more stylish than most and didn't it have a neoprene finish? Much nicer than some of the more modern, plasticky Ford interiors IMHO. Would the perfect Focus ST be the mk1 bodyshell and interior with the engine and gearbox (5-pot turbo) out of the mk2 ST?
Handling is very good on them. I tracked mine a few times and even though the engine is a bit underpowered on the road you can keep the revs high on track and make the most of it. I often think that this is the car that I should have bought instead of my mk4 Golf GTi (or any Focus for that matter)! The consensus in the motoring press seemed to be at the time that the chassis was fantastic and the engine OK, if a little lacklustre. From the comments on here, maybe it wasn't as good a car as I thought (but surely still at least 10 times better than the Golf)? I had wanted a Golf GTi for so long and yet the mk4 GTi (2.0) just wasn't a proper GTi!
I still think the mk1 Focus ST looks sharp and has dated very well. I thought of it as a more mature alternative to the RenaultSport Clios at the time and if not as fun as the 306 GTi-6/Rallye, it certainly has a more modern interior and the added practicality of 5 doors or even an estate bodyshell! Surely this is a consideration if you have a family but don't want to give up and get a boring car/MPV?
I quite like the mk1 Focus interior. It's more stylish than most and didn't it have a neoprene finish? Much nicer than some of the more modern, plasticky Ford interiors IMHO. Would the perfect Focus ST be the mk1 bodyshell and interior with the engine and gearbox (5-pot turbo) out of the mk2 ST?
Edited to add - I also thought the car had a very nice gear change despite what some have posted on here. Seating position is too high though tbh.
Edited by St John Smythe on Tuesday 2nd June 19:49
Edited by St John Smythe on Tuesday 2nd June 19:49
I didnt have an ST 170 but I did have a 1.6 Silver......
These cars are greatly underrated - put your self back at when they were launched and what there was in the same class and the focus romped the competition - the equiv astra ? similar fiats and VW's of the era ? The previous escort ?
The focus was a revelation, handling that had been sorted by engineers and not bean counters. Richard Parry-Jones wanted to kiss goodbye to the horrors of the escort. The engine was a modern twincam 16v designed by yammaha of all companies. It was a brilliant engine. I had a marea diesel before the focus so getting in to a car with alloys leather petrol revability and AC was a step up. My first new car.
I dont think Ive had a car that handled as sweetly as what that car did - it was excellent one up and on the twisties.....
previous fast fords the 1.1 escort and an xr3 there was a significant difference between the two, but the new focus the base 1.6 was a really good car so you had to do some to improve on that....
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff