2015 Focus 1.5T Ecoboost

[Gas1883]

Also when he was giving me the details of the focus this was straight in front of me with a pcp of £349 pm if I remember right ( it was cheaper whatever ) , so we did go for it then if I remember right mrs preferred her fiesta st , to good for me so eventually just got mk3 focus for work

[Hustle_]

Gas1883 said:

Hustle_ said:

I am interested in a Focus with the 1.5T 3 pot (2019-). From what I’ve read they aren’t as problematic as the earlier 1.0T engines or the earlier 4-cylinder turbos. IIRC the cams are driven by a chain and the oil pump by a wet belt.

I drove a 21 plate focus and even though they look to my eyes lower than my mk3 I found the driving position much higher , more to my liking , but the one we tried was a key start , no sat nav & was £18995 which seemed a lot for a very basic car , add in his special deal for that day of £379 pm for 5 years ( pcp ) ( I normally pay cash ) I left it , it was 1.5 diesel .

They do look expensive. I guess there were fewer made due to supply chain issues.

I've got a mk3 ST estate at the moment and I'm not in love with it tbh. Don't like the power delivery or the central console / armrest. If the stereo is anything to go by I will need the B&O next time.

I'm looking at the 'last of the old shape) ~2018 Mazda 3 with the 2.0 n/a engine as an alternative. Not really apples with apples because of the age gap but they are a few grand cheaper, will almost certainly be more reliable until the rust catches up with them, and there are many around with Bose, Head up display etc.

I will drive both and see. My attraction to the Focus is appearance / image rather than anything else if I'm honest.

[greenarrow]

Hustle_ said:

They do look expensive. I guess there were fewer made due to supply chain issues.

I've got a mk3 ST estate at the moment and I'm not in love with it tbh. Don't like the power delivery or the central console / armrest. If the stereo is anything to go by I will need the B&O next time.

I'm looking at the 'last of the old shape) ~2018 Mazda 3 with the 2.0 n/a engine as an alternative. Not really apples with apples because of the age gap but they are a few grand cheaper, will almost certainly be more reliable until the rust catches up with them, and there are many around with Bose, Head up display etc.

I will drive both and see. My attraction to the Focus is appearance / image rather than anything else if I'm honest.

That's interesting, can I ask, is it the petrol or diesel? I assume the former if its a Mk3 and not a Mk3.5 but I'm interested in what you don't like about the power delivery, as I am thinking of offloading my current car later this year and the Mk3/MK3.5 is on my radar as I think compared with the equivalent year Golf GTI Mk7/MK7.5 they're very good value.

[r3g]

greenarrow said:

That's interesting, can I ask, is it the petrol or diesel? I assume the former if its a Mk3 and not a Mk3.5 but I'm interested in what you don't like about the power delivery, as I am thinking of offloading my current car later this year and the Mk3/MK3.5 is on my radar as I think compared with the equivalent year Golf GTI Mk7/MK7.5 they're very good value.

I had a 63 plate mk3 ST-3 estate petrol and liked it apart from the renowned bonnet gap that makes it look like it's sat on the latch when it's fully closed, and also the combination of torque steer and wide thin profile tyres which meant that the steering wheel gets ragged out of your hand when you pull out to overtake something and cross the slightly raised white lines on single carriageway roads. Also, despite the seat having 3000 different adjustments, I could never find a comfy position that didn't give me an awful pain in my right knee after a longish drive. But I couldn't fault the power nor the handling which were both excellent and provided plenty of fun factor if you were in the mood.

Watch for rust on them as the sub frame on mine was already very scabby at only 5 years old.

[Hustle_]

I should say I'm not used to turbo petrols and the cars I find the nicest to drive are low tech. Also I'm a chassis guy rather than a power guy. The ST is by far the most powerful car I've owned, the most powerful other than this is an old 190bhp 6-pot BMW.

I ended up with the ST by accident because a friend was trading it in for a newer one and both of my old, st cars were being old and st. I've now driven the ST about 1,000 miles but my opinion on it hasn't changed a lot. My main complaint is what you'd expect somebody who is used to naturally aspirated cars to complain about. It's the way the turbo comes in and the difficulty of smoothly metering that out in the low gears. It has a big glut of power which it sustains reasonably well, but particularly in the low gears you are encountering this big ramp-up in power quite a lot. The gearbox isn't the quickest. If you don't want to defeat the synchros, you need to make those changes 1st-2nd, 2nd-3rd, quite deliberate so when you're trying to drive moderately you get this surge situation going on. I end up trying to avoid the power band in the low gears, but then you aren't going any faster than anyone else. And you're still struggling to get 30mpg anyway.

There is some uncertainty about whether my car has the factory map or whether it's been remapped but if I was going to go to the trouble I'd be getting it returned to standard or remapped to try and flatten the curves a bit, even though it'd come at the expense of outright power.

Then when you do use all the power you wish it had an LSD. It's a good chassis obviously but even with PS4s on its torque steer abound. Roads which are smooth enough to put the power down in the low gears are few in my area. In the high gears you're just going way too fast.

It's more power than I want, so that's personal to me... but particularly in a FWD car without an LSD.

All in all it's not a car which often encourages me to use all the power for various reasons, which makes it less fun. But people love them and they review very well.

[r3g]

Hustle_ said:

My main complaint is what you'd expect somebody who is used to naturally aspirated cars to complain about. It's the way the turbo comes in and the difficulty of smoothly metering that out in the low gears. It has a big glut of power which it sustains reasonably well, but particularly in the low gears you are encountering this big ramp-up in power quite a lot.

I agree with your comments on the other stuff, but the above wasn't my experience at all. In fact I would go so far as saying that it is an extremely well-behaved car at both the lower pootling speeds and v-max. If you just want to waft along and chill after a long, hard day at work for example, it will do that very well. It was one of things I enjoyed about it as many performance cars are hard work if you try to drive them slowly. The turbo is barely noticeable at the slower speeds so I don't understand your comment of it being "unable to meter that out in the low gears" unless you drive everywhere with a heavy right foot and use the accelerator pedal like an on/off switch?

[Hustle_]

It's an opinion. This being PH I fully expected someone would tell me that I am an idiot and can't drive for toffee

[dontlookdown]

Hustle_ said:

They do look expensive. I guess there were fewer made due to supply chain issues.

I've got a mk3 ST estate at the moment and I'm not in love with it tbh. Don't like the power delivery or the central console / armrest. If the stereo is anything to go by I will need the B&O next time.

I'm looking at the 'last of the old shape) ~2018 Mazda 3 with the 2.0 n/a engine as an alternative. Not really apples with apples because of the age gap but they are a few grand cheaper, will almost certainly be more reliable until the rust catches up with them, and there are many around with Bose, Head up display etc.

I will drive both and see. My attraction to the Focus is appearance / image rather than anything else if I'm honest.

The sister who was looking at the Focus which I started this thread about, has just bought a Mazda 3 of that vintage with the more powerful 2.0 engine.

I think they are underrated - nice looking, well equipped, good to drive and the interior is quite nicely finished. Steering and gear change in particular are pleasant to use.

Even with the sport 165bhp engine the performance is not going to set your hair on fire, but it's not slow.

[anyoldcardave]

Gas1883 said:

This was from the water leak , still baffled how leaking seems would get on back seat , garage said it was comming up from below seat , there was plenty of water on tyre well , front / back foot wells but it wasn’t deep enough to get under seat , but who knows , seems fixed now , have to remind garage they said they’d sort rear seat as looks a mess .

Looking at that seat, they were telling you porkies.

Put a washing machine tab, or a little liquid washing machine detergent in a bucket of warm water, gentle scrub, then all over with a microfibre, so it is evenly damp,not too damp, should bring your seats back, without the need of the garage.
.

[Gas1883]

anyoldcardave said:

Looking at that seat, they were telling you porkies.

Put a washing machine tab, or a little liquid washing machine detergent in a bucket of warm water, gentle scrub, then all over with a microfibre, so it is evenly damp,not too damp, should bring your seats back, without the need of the garage.
.

Thenkyou , will try