Facelift Focus ST - so surprised

[Zetec-S]

Ron240 said:

Zetec-S said:

All I was saying is that you can pick up a facelift ST for 15k

I think you are being a little bit optimistic on the price there.
The facelift model is exactly 2 years old so to find an ST3 for less than 16 grand there would need to be a good reason for it.
There will be some examples of the facelift on a 64 plate but the majority will start at 15 plate, so a more realistic price for an ST3 petrol would be around 17 grand IMO.

Oh, absolutely, you'd struggle to find an ST3, 17k is definitely more reasonable. But there's a few facelift ST2's available if you're on a budget...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2017...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2016...

[macky17]

Paid £18,100 for a 15 reg ST3 in blue with 19s and 9500 miles and it was the best deal within 100 miles of me.

Interesting that EVO magazine say the RS is only fun when you're ragging it and curiously 'inert' when driving at saner speeds. I tend to take notice of their opinions. Sounds to me as though the ST is the more fun daily driver...

[macky17]

Of course EVO also say the ST is 'ragged when pushed' which is true but you need to be at at least 9/10 before it becomes unruly. Again, ST better daily driver - RS better weekend/track car.

[Tuvra]

macky17 said:

Of course EVO also say the ST is 'ragged when pushed' which is true but you need to be at at least 9/10 before it becomes unruly. Again, ST better daily driver - RS better weekend/track car.

Utter nonsense, unless a soft ride is essential to making a car a "better daily driver".

Judging an RS from a test drive is hardly giving it a fair crack of the whip is it? You have just seen an ST for 2/3 of the price of an RS and instantly think it offers better "bang for buck". Come back after 3 years when the ST's price has tanked & its cost you more than an RS would have over the same period. I spent 2 years in an ST3 and its lightyears behind the RS, especially in terms of fun. To me it sounds like you couldn't get the man maths right to justify the RS so continue to reassure yourself that the ST is the better car.

The ST is a great car, I honestly love them, but let's not kid ourselves here

Edited by Tuvra on Wednesday 22 February 19:02

[Ahbefive]

Totally agree. The ST is good but is inferior to the RS in every way, unless having squishy suspension ia meant to be a good thing.

[macky17]

Tuvra said:

To me it sounds like you couldn't get the man maths right to justify the RS so continue to reassure yourself that the ST is the better car.

The ST is a great car, I honestly love them, but let's not kid ourselves here

Edited by Tuvra on Wednesday 22 February 19:02

I can promise you that's not the case. I already know I bought the right car for my circumstances and tastes. If the mk3 RS had astonished me on the test drive it would be sat on the drive. It didn't.

As we appear to be making personal speculations now (which I certainly hadnt at any point) allow me to retort: perhaps having never owned a truly entertaining or especially fast car, you are relatively easy to impress with moderate performance and a tricked-up drivetrain. With something in the garage for weekends which makes the RS look clumsy and very, very sluggish, perhaps I can be a little more objective...

Then again, perhaps I'm as far off the mark as you were with the man maths thing.

And yes, a more compliant suspension does generally make for a better daily - most people over 18 would agree.

[Tuvra]

macky17 said:

I can promise you that's not the case. I already know I bought the right car for my circumstances and tastes. If the mk3 RS had astonished me on the test drive it would be sat on the drive. It didn't.

As we appear to be making personal speculations now (which I certainly hadnt at any point) allow me to retort: perhaps having never owned a truly entertaining or especially fast car, you are relatively easy to impress with moderate performance and a tricked-up drivetrain. With something in the garage for weekends which makes the RS look clumsy and very, very sluggish, perhaps I can be a little more objective...

Then again, perhaps I'm as far off the mark as you were with the man maths thing.

And yes, a more compliant suspension does generally make for a better daily - most people over 18 would agree.

So the RS didn't astonish (your word not mine) you yet the ST did?? Have a day off mate FFS this is getting tragic.

[Ahbefive]

I really think you need a proper drive of the RS. It's a very different animal to the ST when you push it on the corners.

[macky17]

Tuvra said:

So the RS didn't astonish (your word not mine) you yet the ST did?? Have a day off mate FFS this is getting tragic.

Yes, considering the reviews I'd read and what I had been led to believe, the ST did astonish me. Well done for catching on to the title of this thread and why I started it.

[Tuvra]

Fanboi strong with this one already

Enjoy the car!

[MH82]

I can see the logic here. Expectations for the ST were low and they were exceeded. Expectations for the RS were high and they were not met.

Cars are getting so technically competent these days that I can see how an ST can be perceived to be more fun than an RS. The ST limits are lower and more accessible, so those mundane journeys you can get nearer the limit than on the RS. I should imagine that the RS would need to be driven on track to be truly appreciated and if you don't want to go on track then I can see the ST fulfilling the needs and more.

I too have test driven the mk3.5 Focus St, I currently have the mk2 and I was also very impressed with how the later ST drove and the overall package. I think the ST is now suffering in the same way as the XR3i did against the RS Turbo although in this case, I think the ST is extremely competent whereas the XR3i wasn't quite so. That XR3i could have done with 120bhp and the RS 150bhp but I digress....

[Ahbefive]

MH82 said:

I can see the logic here. Expectations for the ST were low and they were exceeded. Expectations for the RS were high and they were not met.

Cars are getting so technically competent these days that I can see how an ST can be perceived to be more fun than an RS. The ST limits are lower and more accessible, so those mundane journeys you can get nearer the limit than on the RS. I should imagine that the RS would need to be driven on track to be truly appreciated and if you don't want to go on track then I can see the ST fulfilling the needs and more.

You quite obviously haven't driven the RS and are just spouting a nonsensical opinion. The limits are very different, a boot full around a corner will have the tail wagging rather than understeering. The limits are indeed very accessable, in fact do accessable that it has caught me out once or twice like some RWD cars can.

It's like saying that an M3s limits are not accessable on the road.

The RS is not a track car even if it does do well on one.

[Daggerpie]

We've got a re-mapped, late Mk3 ST3 Estate as an everyday "quick" runabout, I've owned much quicker German exotica (M5, 911 etc) but absolutely adore the Ford as an everyday car.

I will admit with around 275bhp now after the map, you do have to gradually feather the power down in the first 3 gears as the torque steer can be dangerous, but I believe this is slightly better now in the 3.5.

Now if they did an AWD RS equivilant in estate form I'd put my name down on one tommorrow. Currently it seems the Golf R Estate is king of the fun estates at the mo.

[macky17]

MH82 said:

I can see the logic here. Expectations for the ST were low and they were exceeded. Expectations for the RS were high and they were not met.

Cars are getting so technically competent these days that I can see how an ST can be perceived to be more fun than an RS. The ST limits are lower and more accessible, so those mundane journeys you can get nearer the limit than on the RS. I should imagine that the RS would need to be driven on track to be truly appreciated and if you don't want to go on track then I can see the ST fulfilling the needs and more.

This is exactly what I'm getting at. I've no doubt the RS is more fun at 9/10s + but as a daily the ST possibly does mundane journeys better without needing to boot it out of corners just to wake it up. it feels on its toes all the time.

I am a fanboy it's true... for my Noble. The ST is simply a great daily that surprised me. There are evidently fanboys here though - RS ones.

[Ahbefive]

What you are overlooking is that the RS is better in literally every way with the exception of not having soft suspension.

It does everything that the ST does and more.

And yes ST and RS fanboys all round in here but that doesn't take away from the fact that the RS is better than the ST in every way. A 10 minute test drive at mundane speeds with a salesman in the passenger seat gives you very little feel for a car which is clear from your opinion of it.

[macky17]

Covered 600 miles now and enjoying every journey. It seems to me that only a front mechanical lsd separates the ST from greatness. You'd have steering, handling and chassis as good as an RS megane with a better engine and gearbox...

The cost of an MP275 at mountune? Around £1300. The cost of a fully fitted quaife at the same outfit? About £1300. Why anyone with the money to spend would go for the former and merely highlight the shortcomings of the drivetrain ive no idea. The car certainly isn't 25bhp from greatness. Of course both together would be another matter if you have 2.5k to blow.

I think I'll look at the diff later this year. Then I'll go hunting some fat, overweight RSs to pick off on dry B roads.

It's ok, I'm joking! Let's keep this an ST discussion from now on.

[JulianHJ]

After my previously-voiced reluctance to consider a new one, the maths is actually in its favour. Well, the man-maths certainly is anyway. My current Focus is nearly dead, or at least uneconomical to repair (ABS fault/impending DMF etc). A trip with it to the dealer resulted in a productive conversation with a nice chap in the sales department. Subject to a test drive I'll be placing an order for a blue ST3 estate imminently. Anyone know what the current lead time is?

[Lurking Lawyer]

JulianHJ said:

Subject to a test drive I'll be placing an order for a blue ST3 estate imminently. Anyone know what the current lead time is?

FWIW, I placed an order in mid-January and was initially quoted 14 weeks for delivery i.e. end of April/start of May.

A month after placing the order, I got a call from the dealer saying it was coming sooner than anticipated and would be here by end of February. It slipped by a week after that and I collected it last week, so around 8 weeks from ordering. Judging from other comments on focusstoc.com, others have had similar experiences.

I asked him how this had happened and he wasn't sure but said he understood that Ford had ramped up production of UK ST orders to try to fulfil demand for people wanting them ahead of the tax hike from £185 to £500 on 1st April.

[Ron240]

Lurking Lawyer said:

the tax hike from £185 to £500 on 1st April.

Yes that's the first year rate which will always be built into the on the road cost, but the annual rate after that is going down from £185 to £140.
I appreciate you will most likely know this but some may not.

[JulianHJ]

Thanks, I've been spending some time on focusstoc.com - you might have seen my thread on there. The one quandary I still have is whether the 19" wheels will make the ride unacceptably harsh. Other than that, I'm pretty much settled on spec.