RE: Ford Focus RS vs. Honda Civic Type R
Discussion
rb5er said:
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 s
t different day. As per every other thread.... nobody cares about or wants a Polo GTi
The Polo isn't a bad little car. It's nearly as good as the Clio, Fiesta, Corsa and 208 GTi it is sold against. I quite like them.Same s
t different day. As per every other thread.... nobody cares about or wants a Polo GTiBaryonyx said:
The Polo isn't a bad little car. It's nearly as good as the Clio, Fiesta, Corsa and 208 GTi it is sold against. I quite like them.
Yes its "nearly" as good as every other junior hot hatch but still falls short.But do you really want to hear about it in every thread on PH?
rb5er said:
Yes its "nearly" as good as every other junior hot hatch but still falls short.
But do you really want to hear about it in every thread on PH?
I absolutely fBut do you really want to hear about it in every thread on PH?
king do not, despite quite liking the Polo GTi (a colleague has one, it's not bad). I wish Joe would fk off so we can get back to discussing the Civic and the Focus. 
Did a good sprint on the way home again - 612 miles on the clock now! I hope it doesn't mind a reasonably heavy running in period, I haven't been hanging about today!
I swung by a private race track (not the A96, honest) on the way home and can attest to just how quickly the Civic gathers pace in 3rd and 4th gear, impressive indeed, as I have said before it's a tad laggy at the low end, but the boost is incredible once you get the turbo spinning (just a superb gear change away if you really must press on), I took a workmate back to Westhill, he was holding on for dear life - and that was when we were going in a straight line!
Baryonyx said:
I absolutely fking do not, despite quite liking the Polo GTi (a colleague has one, it's not bad). I wish Joe would fk off so we can get back to discussing the Civic and the Focus.
But you aren't all discussing the Ford and focus you are all talking bullsking do not, despite quite liking the Polo GTi (a colleague has one, it's not bad). I wish Joe would fk off so we can get back to discussing the Civic and the Focus. t fan boy garbage about how which one is one tenth faster on the track than the other and buying it because of that even though both are probably going to get st on by me on a trackday because you are too scared to damage your 30 grand car and stupidly expensive tyres.I am sorry for going on about the Polo but I thought they were all a bag of s
t (in fact i wouldnt have been seen dead in a vw a few months ago) until I drive one and now I love it. I'm not sure people realise how extensive the upgrades have been on it.Just to keep it almost thread relevant I was looking at Megane's before getting the Polo but didn't fancy the extra general running/maintenance costs/insurance etc
Anyway tell us more about how a Focus RS is the best or is the civic is the best?
Edited by JoeMarano on Tuesday 24th May 21:17
mattyc69 said:
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2016...
This one?
The massively undesirable non GT spec that with a bit of haggling can be had for £27K brand new from a dealer.
Don't know nothing about them what extras does the gt have? This one?
The massively undesirable non GT spec that with a bit of haggling can be had for £27K brand new from a dealer.
Kawasicki said:
the Focus is also quite a bit bigger - it is 20 mm longer, 88 mm (!) wider and 30mm taller than the Civic.
That can't be right surely? I would have thought the Civic was a good bit bigger than the Focus? Especially surprised at the figure for the width - the new Civic feels a fair bit wider than the previous generation so if the Focus really is that much wider then I wouldn't fancy threading it down some of my favourite roads.As an owner of the new Type R, it's pretty clear where my vote goes, but there are a number of reasons why it appeals more than the Focus. The additional weight of the RS is a big downside, the Civic is already heavier than I'd ideally like. I don't need (or especially want) 4WD, so carrying the additional weight for the odd time it has a clear advantage doesn't really appeal. The current generation Focus styling does nothing for me, although the RS does at least make it a bit more interesting. The interior doesn't look particularly special either - it was the one thing that let down the Mk2 RS so a shame they didn't improve on the basic Focus this time around.
Strange to see that so many on here are so strongly in favour of one or other, they're clearly both great cars and it's more a matter of personal taste which appeals most. I certainly wouldn't criticise anyone for choosing the one that works for them.
dwol said:
Don't know nothing about them what extras does the gt have?
Off the top of my head... touchscreen satnav, dual climate control, DAB, cruise control, auto headlights/wipers, auto folding door mirrors, auto dimming rear view mirror, reversing camera, front and rear parking sensors, road sign recognition...JoeMarano said:
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.
uh huh.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.
So we are looking at south african road tests then, it was still slower? Ah, it was DSG which has less torque..conclusive then
The reason it's not benchmarked is because it's good but not exceptional, I hate to be the one to break it to you. You bought it (factually) because you couldn't afford the Clio and you were afraid you'd like the ST. It's fine liking a car but to then promote it as a class leader based upon your own personal decisions is like licking a stamp on the reverse side and expecting it to stick.
It's a good car though.
LaurasOtherHalf said:
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.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.
As much as I loved my little MX5, the Type-R is an altogether more serious prospect on both road and track.
I was more thinking that if you were planning on doing a
lot of trackdays but budgets were limited then a cheap mx5 would give you 90% of the fun for 10% of the costs while keeping your nice new uber hatch for B road enjoyment and daily duties.
It's all horses for courses. I could afford all of these hatches if sold off my toys and daily but I certainly couldn't then afford to replace the tyres and brakes after 1 or 2 trackdays.
JoeMarano said:
But you aren't all discussing the Ford and focus you are all talking bullst fan boy garbage about how which one is one tenth faster on the track than the other and buying it because of that even though both are probably going to get st on by me on a trackday because you are too scared to damage your 30 grand car and stupidly expensive tyres.
r
Yes Joe, I am terrfied that you would be faster than me on a track day and your world conquering Polo would show my Civic up, that's exactly why I think you are a sad, obsessed bt fan boy garbage about how which one is one tenth faster on the track than the other and buying it because of that even though both are probably going to get st on by me on a trackday because you are too scared to damage your 30 grand car and stupidly expensive tyres.r
d. Got it in one.
Axionknight said:
JoeMarano said:
But you aren't all discussing the Ford and focus you are all talking bullst fan boy garbage about how which one is one tenth faster on the track than the other and buying it because of that even though both are probably going to get st on by me on a trackday because you are too scared to damage your 30 grand car and stupidly expensive tyres.
r
Yes Joe, I am terrfied that you would be faster than me on a track day and your world conquering Polo would show my Civic up, that's exactly why I think you are a sad, obsessed bt fan boy garbage about how which one is one tenth faster on the track than the other and buying it because of that even though both are probably going to get st on by me on a trackday because you are too scared to damage your 30 grand car and stupidly expensive tyres.r
d. Got it in one.
yonex said:
uh huh.
So we are looking at south african road tests then, it was still slower? Ah, it was DSG which has less torque..conclusive then
The reason it's not benchmarked is because it's good but not exceptional, I hate to be the one to break it to you. You bought it (factually) because you couldn't afford the Clio and you were afraid you'd like the ST. It's fine liking a car but to then promote it as a class leader based upon your own personal decisions is like licking a stamp on the reverse side and expecting it to stick.
It's a good car though.
I must admit I liked the Clio but it wasn't worth the massive price jump up with the decent optons ticked of course I could afford one as mentioned earlier...So we are looking at south african road tests then, it was still slower? Ah, it was DSG which has less torque..conclusive then
The reason it's not benchmarked is because it's good but not exceptional, I hate to be the one to break it to you. You bought it (factually) because you couldn't afford the Clio and you were afraid you'd like the ST. It's fine liking a car but to then promote it as a class leader based upon your own personal decisions is like licking a stamp on the reverse side and expecting it to stick.
It's a good car though.
The VW was supposed to be my compromise car but it genuinely doesn't feel it which is why I'm so shocked and I'm also surprised that people overlook it so much. That said like I mentioned I've overlooked all VW brand cars for too long now. For the road it's A+
JoeMarano said:
both are probably going to get st on by me on a trackday because you are too scared to damage your 30 grand car and stupidly expensive tyres.
That really is something. t on by me on a trackday because you are too scared to damage your 30 grand car and stupidly expensive tyres.Is it a new "thing" that people in £30k cars are more scared to drive them on a track day than JoePolo?
PoloJoe, are you throwing down some kind of trackday gauntlet?
Edited by rb5er on Tuesday 24th May 22:15
HorneyMX5 said:
Oh I get that completely and I can understand why you chopped the mk3 in for it.
I was more thinking that if you were planning on doing a
lot of trackdays but budgets were limited then a cheap mx5 would give you 90% of the fun for 10% of the costs while keeping your nice new uber hatch for B road enjoyment and daily duties.
It's all horses for courses. I could afford all of these hatches if sold off my toys and daily but I certainly couldn't then afford to replace the tyres and brakes after 1 or 2 trackdays.
I do fear the cost of replacing the discs and pads all round, I was more thinking that if you were planning on doing a
lot of trackdays but budgets were limited then a cheap mx5 would give you 90% of the fun for 10% of the costs while keeping your nice new uber hatch for B road enjoyment and daily duties.
It's all horses for courses. I could afford all of these hatches if sold off my toys and daily but I certainly couldn't then afford to replace the tyres and brakes after 1 or 2 trackdays.
Just gotta take it on the chin I guess, it's a costly hobby this motoring lark. I had a Clio 200 Cup for fun duties, cheap consumables and great on the track - a really good car to help me get to grips with track driving and such forth, very forgiving.
By the by, last time I owned a fast Honda, an S2000, I smashed it due to my lack of god like driving ability!
JoeMarano said:
I must admit I liked the Clio but it wasn't worth the massive price jump up with the decent optons ticked of course I could afford one as mentioned earlier...
The VW was supposed to be my compromise car but it genuinely doesn't feel it which is why I'm so shocked and I'm also surprised that people overlook it so much. That said like I mentioned I've overlooked all VW brand cars for too long now. For the road it's A+
But how can something not be worth it when you haven't driven it? I'm genuinely baffled how you are linking all the dots around what both the buying public and the reviews say are the best cars in the sector. Either, you are somewhat enlightened or I am missing something here? You chose a 'compromise', I put it to you that this is your personal 335d (mapped) and that you are sunk up to your nuts defending a one night stand that has turned into a pregnancy test and triplets as something that was, for the best.The VW was supposed to be my compromise car but it genuinely doesn't feel it which is why I'm so shocked and I'm also surprised that people overlook it so much. That said like I mentioned I've overlooked all VW brand cars for too long now. For the road it's A+
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff