RE: Ford Focus RS vs. Honda Civic Type R

[Axionknight]

True, but when manufacturers set so much stock by then it's easy to see why they are used as a yard stick.

Didn't bother me one iota personally, a Golf has gone round the Ring quicker now anyway I believe. I liked the way the car drove when pressing on, liked the way it looked, thought the space it offered was about right for what I needed and the figures stacked up, so I bought it.

[HorneyMX5]

It strikes me that these things are becoming too expensive to use on a trackday with any regularity unless you've got a lot of money to spend. The weight and the size of the tyres mean you'll spending big bucks replacing them and brake pads after day.

I know it's "the answer to everything" type response but a £1000 MX5 with some decent coilovers, decent pads and R888s will lap Llandow in under 50secs fairly easily. The costs of the pads and tyres are considerably less and with the lack of weight will last a hell of a lot longer. Plus you can do mad skidz yo! etc. Plus it'll use less fuel.

Dan's probably better placed than anyone having owned an MX5 (Sold it now I guess as no article on it for a while) and has also driven a large number of these on track to give an opinion on cheap MX5 vs expensive modern hot hatch for track thrills.

[JoeMarano]

This is why I grin when people knock the Polo.

All the last page or two of comments

[AMGJocky]

Ali_T said:

AMGJocky said:

Failing that, I'd choose an RS3. That noise.

Haven't owned one but I get the suspicion an enthusiast would get frustrated wit hit quickly. Sounds much like my old STI 330S. Great sounding and powerful engine attached to an overly numb, rubbery and understeering chassis. You do get over the noise and then realise you're getting no joy out of your car.

It doesn't sound like any Scooby I've ever heard.. I have been around an RS3 regularly.

[AMGJocky]

JoeMarano said:

This is why I grin when people knock the Polo.

All the last page or two of comments

So the Polo has numb steering and no feel through the chassis too? Shame

[Axionknight]

AMGJocky said:

JoeMarano said:

This is why I grin when people knock the Polo.

All the last page or two of comments

So the Polo has numb steering and no feel through the chassis too? Shame

It's because he has rose tinted specs on with lenses so thick and heavy you could club a man to death with 'em.

[SuperchargedVR6]

s2000db said:

Great article thanks!

Hmmmm, so RS beats M2, now Type R beats RS.. Very confusing time for those withe a good budget to spend imo...

Subjectively, in the hands of journalists, and they change their minds frequently. Consumers should drive them themselves and draw their own conclusions.

[neil1jnr]

AMGJocky said:

JoeMarano said:

This is why I grin when people knock the Polo.

All the last page or two of comments

So the Polo has numb steering and no feel through the chassis too? Shame

I agree on the advantages of the Polo GTI being lighter and less expensive to run than all of the larger hot hatches mentioned already.... but the biggest problem with the Polo GTI is that the Fiesta ST is better.

[Gibbo205]

Ali_T said:

It really isn't. I test drove an A45 twice when I was looking for my FQ330's replacement and found the handling and ride far worse. In corners, especially, it really can't hold a candle to the Evo X. And the dashboard seemed to be made out of the same plastic Airfix made HMS Victory from. Same dodgy textured moulding and same hollow, tinny sound when you tapped it! Anyone bigging up the A class's interior needs to actually sit in one and poke around. I found it remarkably prosaic and certainly didn't feel £40k.

Surprised, not tried one just read all the rave reviews and it just seems to have the right ingredients. Surprised to hear you say that though I used to own an EVO X FQ-360 with a few subtle mods to take power to 400. It was a great drive with the only real weaknesses being cheap interior, though it did have good toys and I went with the manual as I found the SST not much joy.

So out of all these cars assuming you have driven some of them would you say the EVO X still reigns supreme when it comes to ability? What I liked about the EVO X most was how surprisingly comfortable it was whilst being completely amazing on any road, any weather, totally amazing car. I only got rid of it because I wanted something more driving orientated and at the time went to a 911 C2S.

[AMGJocky]

neil1jnr said:

AMGJocky said:

JoeMarano said:

This is why I grin when people knock the Polo.

All the last page or two of comments

So the Polo has numb steering and no feel through the chassis too? Shame

I agree on the advantages of the Polo GTI being lighter and less expensive to run than all of the larger hot hatches mentioned already.... but the biggest problem with the Polo GTI is that the Fiesta ST is better.

The ST and the Clio

[rb5er]

Well those and pretty every other hot hatch available to buy.

[JoeMarano]

AMGJocky said:

The ST and the Clio

Possibly. Possibly on a track although Ford are reluctant to let anyone do an unbiased test

On the road there is a clear winner though!

[Ali_T]

Gibbo205 said:

So out of all these cars assuming you have driven some of them would you say the EVO X still reigns supreme when it comes to ability? What I liked about the EVO X most was how surprisingly comfortable it was whilst being completely amazing on any road, any weather, totally amazing car. I only got rid of it because I wanted something more driving orientated and at the time went to a 911 C2S.

For on limit handling, the Evo has pretty much everything that's been mentioned before licked. Regardless of the Focus RS reviews, it has a fairly crude way of achieving the results and I haven't seen any mention of an LSD at the front either. I haven't tried one, mind, and I cancelled my deposit anyway because I think I'm very much over the"how fast can you get from A to B" phase of life, like yourself. I'm more interested in a car that makes me happy, not that makes me sweat!

[anonymous-user]

JoeMarano said:

Possibly. Possibly on a track although Ford are reluctant to let anyone do an unbiased test

On the road there is a clear winner though!

Have you tried them back to back, I've never seen a Polo GTI feature in a warm hatch shoot out myself? And you said you dismissed the Clio because it was too expensive and ST because it was popular, so I take it neither have been driven? You cannot compare a 172 to a modern equivalent 'anything'

I can't see many reasons to go for the Polo other than if you're a big VW fan, personally I find them a bit bland and soulless but each to their own.

[Axionknight]

Jesus, that st is like catnip for him man, stop it, I beg of you.

[JoeMarano]

It was because all the reviews said it had better road manners than anything in its class yet not being far behind for involvement. Since I drive on the road 99.9% of the time that's the answer.

There was a test by a south African autotrader (I believe)that compared the ST, Clio and Polo on track and the Polo came in second one second slower than the ST on a one minute forty ish lap

For that test they used the dsg version which has 70nm less torque than the manual.

That said those same testers had the Polo and ST come neck and neck in a drag race which just wouldn't happen as the Polo has more power and torque than the ST and also has quicker 0-60 and top speed.

Edited by JoeMarano on Tuesday 24th May 19:52

[SidewaysSi]

JoeMarano said:

It was because all the reviews said it had better road manners than anythin in its class yet not being far behind for involvement. Since I drive on the road 99.9% of the time that's the answer.

Who said that? I thought the Polo was universally known to be a bit cack.

[LaurasOtherHalf]

HorneyMX5 said:

It strikes me that these things are becoming too expensive to use on a trackday with any regularity unless you've got a lot of money to spend. The weight and the size of the tyres mean you'll spending big bucks replacing them and brake pads after day.

I know it's "the answer to everything" type response but a £1000 MX5 with some decent coilovers, decent pads and R888s will lap Llandow in under 50secs fairly easily. The costs of the pads and tyres are considerably less and with the lack of weight will last a hell of a lot longer. Plus you can do mad skidz yo! etc. Plus it'll use less fuel.

Dan's probably better placed than anyone having owned an MX5 (Sold it now I guess as no article on it for a while) and has also driven a large number of these on track to give an opinion on cheap MX5 vs expensive modern hot hatch for track thrills.

I couldn't fit the wife, pram, child and car seat in the MX5 as I can the Type-R. It's comfortably quicker on track too, even though the MX5 had suspension work and was wearing R888s.

As much as I loved my little MX5, the Type-R is an altogether more serious prospect on both road and track.

[rb5er]

JoeMarano said:

That said those same testers had the Polo and ST come neck and neck in a drag race which just wouldn't happen as the Polo has more power and torque than the ST and also has quicker 0-60 and top speed.

We had already had this conversation in another thread. The fiesta is the more powerful car with 197bhp on overboost. And as was previously pointed out this overboost lasts between 15-22 seconds. How often are you in full throttle in one gear for 15 seconds at a time? Never.

Same st different day. As per every other thread.... nobody cares about or wants a Polo GTi

[sinbad666]

Gibbo205 said:

Also note the lap times above the AMG was on Michelin Pilot Sport 3, which is a road tyre, whereas all the cars ahead were either on MPSS or cup 2's, I think its fair to say plonk the AMG on MPSS and it will go 1s faster and even quicker again on cup 2's.

Civic uses continentals which are known to not be as good as the MPSS or Cup2's

As for the AMG, funny as I think it does look like it's been through Halfords.