RE: New Ford Fiesta ST - official!
Discussion
stanglish said:
Okay, so I lease a current mk7.5 Red Ed (140) Fiesta. It uses the 1.0 3cyl engine. Some thoughts.
....
Rest of the drivetrain
The thing that lets the current 1.0 down is the heavy flywheel which was surely a decision made to improve economy. It hangs revs like a motherf
ker which affects how sporty it feels when coming up through the gears quickly. The engine encourages this because it revs right out so you end up exacerbating the issue unless you make extremely slow shifts.
On the way back down there is noticeably more inertia due to the 3cyl and flywheel. I'd hope that this new ST addresses both points because if not they are almost dealbreakers when you use the car ever day.
The engine designer did an interview I read many moons ago. He said that in fact the flywheel isn't heavy at all, it is because engine friction is so low, it just keeps spinning by itself. Validated this by noticing it will rev up quickly, and engine braking is virtually non existent when lifting off compared to 'old' four pots. So don't bother with the rev hang and just bang in the next gear, engine has little inertia and the drivetrain doesn't really mind when priority is on making progress and not looking for seamless shifts. ....
Rest of the drivetrain
The thing that lets the current 1.0 down is the heavy flywheel which was surely a decision made to improve economy. It hangs revs like a motherf
ker which affects how sporty it feels when coming up through the gears quickly. The engine encourages this because it revs right out so you end up exacerbating the issue unless you make extremely slow shifts. On the way back down there is noticeably more inertia due to the 3cyl and flywheel. I'd hope that this new ST addresses both points because if not they are almost dealbreakers when you use the car ever day.
For those who think 3 Cylinders sound rubbish, I would disagree
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xWItsdqKxk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xWItsdqKxk
I think people need to remember that this is only an ST and not an RS hence the conservative styling. Look back at all the previous fiesta ST's and none of them look that extreme.
I personally think Ford is going to save the 4 cylinder motor for an RS fiesta, it's about time they did one.
I think the new ST sounds great, maybe not as good looking as the previous model but if they can make the 3 cylinder as good as the previous 1.6 motor it will be brilliant. Less weight hopefully which will improve the balance and hopefully allow them to soften the damping a little which seems to be the only negative points of the current ST. As others have said the new engine might add a bit more character and noise and maybe a little cheaper to run.
I was looking into buying a new current ST just before the new fiesta comes out, hoping to get a decent discount but now I'm tempted to wait.
I personally think Ford is going to save the 4 cylinder motor for an RS fiesta, it's about time they did one.
I think the new ST sounds great, maybe not as good looking as the previous model but if they can make the 3 cylinder as good as the previous 1.6 motor it will be brilliant. Less weight hopefully which will improve the balance and hopefully allow them to soften the damping a little which seems to be the only negative points of the current ST. As others have said the new engine might add a bit more character and noise and maybe a little cheaper to run.
I was looking into buying a new current ST just before the new fiesta comes out, hoping to get a decent discount but now I'm tempted to wait.
scjgreen said:
For those who think 3 Cylinders sound rubbish, I would disagree
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xWItsdqKxk
And also this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xWItsdqKxk
https://youtu.be/vVKwAms4TdE
blade7 said:
I don't think lower friction out weighs more valve area in performance terms. The top output 1000cc superbike engines all use 4 cylinders.
So a 600cc bike is better than a litre bike then in terms of performance? Edited by blade7 on Saturday 25th February 12:40
You can't compare this engine to a (litre) bike engine which basically has half the stroke and therefore revs twice as high, has half the torque and half the displacement for a given valve area, so ideal displacement per cylinder is a lot lower. For cars, 0,5l displacement has long been cobsidered ideal, seen at BMW (best engine builder ever?), a V8 is ideally 4L, a V12 6L etc.
One could of course put a bike engine in a car, that would be a form of performance, but it would be very loud as you would have to rev the tits of it all the time to get power to get that havy chunk of metal moving and use a lot of fuel because of friction and reduced VE. This car is the very opposite with 114g of co2 which means a lot more people can actually access the performance, which is the same as higher performance
WCZ said:
can't think of the last time a hot hatch didn't actually have a power upgrade from it preceding model
no thanks
The Clio 200 springs to mind...no thanks
Alright, looks are subjective. The rear genuinely looks like a B-Max or a C-Max and not very pleasant. I'm not sure why manufacturers' are insisting that the rear of new cars should be made to look like a cross-over/SUV. I thought the exact same of the new facelift 1 Series. I'm not too sure on alloys or the new front LED lights either.
The interior is a definite improvement though and they've clearly listened to the criticisms of the previous model. It now looks like they've added bits from the newest Focus ST in there, like the steering wheel and centre console.
My main issue with it is the whole technology side of it and the engine itself.
As the article said, the previous model was a more old-school take on a new hot hatch. This is now just another fast modern hatchback like the rest. Choice of driving modes always seems to be a complete gimmick in my eyes, customisation of the interior is much more of the same and should be left to the Mini brand, cylinder deactivation is just for modern emissions compliance etc.
The engine is also a bit of a worry. I'm sure the guys at Ford know what they're doing but that power from a 3 cylinder surely will cause alot of stress to the engine and could be a bit rough? The tuning options will presumably be limited aswell and the noise it makes could be a concern.
The point made by the chap above is very relevant too. This new model has no more power than and is no faster than an ST200 or even the standard model with the MP215 kit on it.
Why does the engine have to be stressed?
The VW up Mii/Citigo have a 75bhp 1.0 3 cylinder engine and that's not exactly a tuned up hot hatch engine so it not unreasonable to add a turbo (and also .5 of a litre) and gain 100bhp
For example 2.0 non turbo Clio 200 = 200bhp
2.0 turbocharged Civic type R = 300bhp
It's not abnormal gaining so much power with a turbocharger
Obviously it's a bit more complex than that but I'm sure Ford know what they are doing.
Interesting that Ford are going the a different way to everyone else. VW did the opposite with their latest competitor the Polo GTI and moved to an UPSIZED 1.8 from a 1.4 as that engine was ridiculously unreliable.
The VW up Mii/Citigo have a 75bhp 1.0 3 cylinder engine and that's not exactly a tuned up hot hatch engine so it not unreasonable to add a turbo (and also .5 of a litre) and gain 100bhp
For example 2.0 non turbo Clio 200 = 200bhp
2.0 turbocharged Civic type R = 300bhp
It's not abnormal gaining so much power with a turbocharger
Obviously it's a bit more complex than that but I'm sure Ford know what they are doing.
Interesting that Ford are going the a different way to everyone else. VW did the opposite with their latest competitor the Polo GTI and moved to an UPSIZED 1.8 from a 1.4 as that engine was ridiculously unreliable.
I see see loads of these every day on my commute. Do you think most people will care that it's got one less cylinder?
They'll see the fuel economy improvements and Ford will sell even more.
Clever move by Ford, and will likely pave the way for an RS model above if Ford decided they wanted to release one.
They'll see the fuel economy improvements and Ford will sell even more.
Clever move by Ford, and will likely pave the way for an RS model above if Ford decided they wanted to release one.
Edited by framerateuk on Monday 27th February 10:30
culpz said:
The engine is also a bit of a worry. I'm sure the guys at Ford know what they're doing but that power from a 3 cylinder surely will cause alot of stress to the engine and could be a bit rough? The tuning options will presumably be limited aswell and the noise it makes could be a concern.
The 1.0l makes up to 140bhp/litre, and doesn't have a reputation for grenading itself. Coolant loss leading to catastrophic overheating perhaps, but not grenading due to stress. This 1.5 will have a lower specific output, so there's no reason to expect issues. Inevitably various tuners will offer to turn up the boost until the gearbox fails. The 1.0l triple sounds pretty good, IMHO, so perhaps the 1.5 will too. I'm sure Ford have some good acoustic engineers.The BMW B38 engine in the Cooper (134hp) and i8 (228bhp) is a 1.5l turbo triple, and is reported to be torquey, responsive, refined and rev out to 6k without complaint. It doesn't seem to have any reliability issues yet.
Michaelhunt said:
Interesting that Ford are going the a different way to everyone else.
Everyone else except BMW..culpz said:
The point made by the chap above is very relevant too. This new model has no more power than and is no faster than an ST200 or even the standard model with the MP215 kit on it.
It's worth noting that on the facebook official release from Ford the most liked comment (by far) was an existing owner stating "no more power, I'll pass thanks" with subsequent comments agreeing.It (and other 'negative' comments) were all deleted by Ford as of Sat morning.
Michaelhunt said:
Interesting that Ford are going the a different way to everyone else. VW did the opposite with their latest competitor the Polo GTI and moved to an UPSIZED 1.8 from a 1.4 as that engine was ridiculously unreliable.
Ford are better than Volkswagen at the petrol engine reliability thing though.A statement that will probably rub a few people up the wrong way but is ultmatley true!
stanglish said:
Okay, so I lease a current mk7.5 Red Ed (140) Fiesta. It uses the 1.0 3cyl engine. Some thoughts.
Rest of the drivetrain
The thing that lets the current 1.0 down is the heavy flywheel which was surely a decision made to improve economy. It hangs revs like a motherfker which affects how sporty it feels when coming up through the gears quickly. The engine encourages this because it revs right out so you end up exacerbating the issue unless you make extremely slow shifts.
On the way back down there is noticeably more inertia due to the 3cyl and flywheel. I'd hope that this new ST addresses both points because if not they are almost dealbreakers when you use the car ever day.
Oh and I'm sure the artificial sound enhancement will be able to be turned off. As long as you can do that and leave it off I don't mind although it's annoying that a few quid will have gone into developing and installing it. You have to remember there are a bunch of people out there who love DSG farts and RS fake whooshes so I suppose Ford have to give those dribblers something to bring them over to Fiestas.
I currently lease the ST line 140, having previously owned the ST your point regarding the fly wheel and gear changes are the biggest disadvantages in terms of enjoyment from the ST to the 'ST-lite', but seeing as this is the full fat ST, albeit with a 3 cylinder engine, I hope they follow on from the previous ST in respect to drivetrain. Rest of the drivetrain
The thing that lets the current 1.0 down is the heavy flywheel which was surely a decision made to improve economy. It hangs revs like a motherf
ker which affects how sporty it feels when coming up through the gears quickly. The engine encourages this because it revs right out so you end up exacerbating the issue unless you make extremely slow shifts. On the way back down there is noticeably more inertia due to the 3cyl and flywheel. I'd hope that this new ST addresses both points because if not they are almost dealbreakers when you use the car ever day.
Oh and I'm sure the artificial sound enhancement will be able to be turned off. As long as you can do that and leave it off I don't mind although it's annoying that a few quid will have gone into developing and installing it. You have to remember there are a bunch of people out there who love DSG farts and RS fake whooshes so I suppose Ford have to give those dribblers something to bring them over to Fiestas.
You can unplug the sound symposer on the current ST, resulting in a silent and dire experience. Of cars I've driven with artificially sound enhancing, the ST is one of the better ones, the Golf R however is an example of how not to do it. I love all the different sounds cars make but the duel clutch 'farts' and pops and crackles that are becoming more and more coming sound extremely 'chavy' in my ears, and that's coming from someone with an Evo with an external wastegate/screamer set up.
Onehp said:
The engine designer did an interview I read many moons ago. He said that in fact the flywheel isn't heavy at all, it is because engine friction is so low, it just keeps spinning by itself. Validated this by noticing it will rev up quickly, and engine braking is virtually non existent when lifting off compared to 'old' four pots. So don't bother with the rev hang and just bang in the next gear, engine has little inertia and the drivetrain doesn't really mind when priority is on making progress and not looking for seamless shifts.
This doesn't make sense to me as engine braking is primarily a function of swept capacity vs the inertia of the the moving parts (especially the flywheel) with the frictional losses of the engine being relatively marginal. Parallel twin motorcycles are very free-revving because they don't have much in the way of a flywheel despite even fewer frictonal losses per capacity compared with a triple.RumbleOfThunder said:
I noticed the flywheel thing on the BMW video further up the page. Takes an age for revs to drop down again.
The Ford 1.0l triple has a counter-weighted crankshaft pulley and flywheel to balance the engine. Somebody posted above that one of the engineers stated the lack of internal friction is what causes the revs to drop slowly, so not the flywheel.The BMW 1.5l triple has a balance shaft, so presumably doesn't need a counterweighted flywheel or pulley.
No idea what Ford have done to balance their 1.5l triple, but unless they've deliberately engineered it so the revs decay fast, I guess it'll have the same issue as the other two.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff