RE: Production Focus RS Breaks Cover
Discussion
Witchfinder said:
CarbonM5 said:
4wd is cack imo,more weight,more drag,more fuel.More problems..Unless its raining.
Which it does. Around 70% of the time in Britain it's either raining, or it's greasy because it rained within the last day or two.rjkm said:
CarbonM5 said:
focus man said:
see and hear bout the rs....
http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallpapers/Videos.a... V
this might tell you lot what you want to know!!!
I agree with Capito on the 4wd Vs Fwd topic.This car doesnt need 4wd.http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallpapers/Videos.a... V
this might tell you lot what you want to know!!!
People forget that a standard 230bhp Escort cossie had too much traction to make it really interesting out of the show room,even a 1.6 focus would be a more involving drive.The cossie needed over 350bhp to make it dance a bit.
4wd is cack imo,more weight,more drag,more fuel.More problems..Unless its raining.
focus man said:
see and hear bout the rs....
http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallpapers/Videos.a... V
this might tell you lot what you want to know!!!
Very good interview by autocar Steve Sutcliffe on the new RS, and he asked most of the question about why the car is not 4WD, as far as I can see, Ford could not produce a car which was 4WD for 25K, which would explain why the car is still front will drive. But saying that, a front will drive car with a LSD can still handle very well, and is differently a step in the right direction. As for the car, I think it look good, and it will be interesting to see it up against the Subaru and Evo that do have 4WD, can the RS really keep up with a LSD and new suspension layout?http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallpapers/Videos.a... V
this might tell you lot what you want to know!!!
Edited by waynepixel on Wednesday 9th July 11:45
Apparently it will be less than 100kg heavier than the ST! That's a shame, it would have been nice if they'd been able to loose a bit, not gain more!! Oh well, I'd still want one if I was in the market from what I've seen so far. It's only around £1k more than the Volvo I've just ordered as a company car, and I know which I'd rather have, but being petrol it's not going to happen!
Edited by plfrench on Wednesday 9th July 15:04
lnk2008 said:
lol ome on mate you obviously have never had your hands on a decent car or do any track day driving ,and another thing if our jc is such a d*ck then why dont lambo or mitsi use fwd ???? because ur wrong and their not
evos are all under 5 secs 0-60 show me a focus that can do that ,thats no cossied
And you have obviously never sat in an English lesson.evos are all under 5 secs 0-60 show me a focus that can do that ,thats no cossied
Why people think it's OK to rant abuse at someone for having an opinion when they can't even use the language properly I'll never know.
jag guru said:
But now, in 2008 it,s " successor " has to be sub £25k ?
The market's more competitive now. Everyone and his dog makes a "sports" hatchback or saloon nowadays. Look at what else you can get in the £22.5K - £27.5K range (i've assumed someone with a roughly £25K budget would consider £2.5K either way)jag guru said:
The Escort Cosworth shells were basic FWD shells sent to Karmann in Germany for modification.Yes, to take the 4x4 Sierra drivetrain. That cost money!The 3.0 X-Type awd drivetrain could have
been used in an AWD Focus in a similar fashion (turbo,ed to give it
the required power )No need for anything more exotic than that.
I refuse to believe the time and effort spent on the existing FWD
mods,cost nothing ! I accept the Escort homologation argument,that,s
entirely valid.
But,what I dont get, is this obsession with the £25k pricetag ? A
Cosworth Escort on release in 1992 was £22k..............it,s sixteen
years later.
They ( Escort) sold like hotcakes........£22K was a lot of money,
in 1992. But now, in 2008 it,s " successor " has to be sub £25k ?
That doesn,t seem to equate to being anywhere near the same ballpark
imo.
You've missed THE key point.been used in an AWD Focus in a similar fashion (turbo,ed to give it
the required power )No need for anything more exotic than that.
I refuse to believe the time and effort spent on the existing FWD
mods,cost nothing ! I accept the Escort homologation argument,that,s
entirely valid.
But,what I dont get, is this obsession with the £25k pricetag ? A
Cosworth Escort on release in 1992 was £22k..............it,s sixteen
years later.
They ( Escort) sold like hotcakes........£22K was a lot of money,
in 1992. But now, in 2008 it,s " successor " has to be sub £25k ?
That doesn,t seem to equate to being anywhere near the same ballpark
imo.
For Ford to go rallying back then, the homologation regs required a road going 4WD vehicle.
Now they don't. Until the regs for WRC change, you wont see a 4WD Focus.
jag guru said:
That may be the case,but I dont see M-Sport rallying
a FWD Focus,do you ? regs or not.And,Yes I agree,I dont expect to
see a roadgoing AWD Focus anytime soon.
Sorry chap, don't see what you're getting at?a FWD Focus,do you ? regs or not.And,Yes I agree,I dont expect to
see a roadgoing AWD Focus anytime soon.
If the WRC regs allow 4WD with no requirement for road going cars to have the same, then why would they not compete with 4WD?
Conversely, Ford do NOT have to produce a 4WD road car - so they wont.
I've figured out what i don't like about it - its the wheels. I've never been a fan of multi-spokes, but those just ruin the car for me. I prefer a simple 5-spoke, like this:
Compare:
I find it incredible that they're 19" wheels - the new Focus is a seriously big car...
edited to add: yes, i stole those 5-spokes off the 'new' Sagaris picture...
edit(2): Another view...
Compare:
I find it incredible that they're 19" wheels - the new Focus is a seriously big car...
edited to add: yes, i stole those 5-spokes off the 'new' Sagaris picture...
edit(2): Another view...
Edited by Beefmeister on Friday 11th July 21:17
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff