RE: Ford Focus RS at the 'ring: Time For Coffee
Discussion
Driver101 said:
rtz62 said:
I'm sorry Driver101, I'll disagree with you here; you can only fairly compare each car based on their list price, and not some sort of voodoo-derived figure.
After all, I may be a better negotiator than you when it comes to a discount, you might go into the dealer at the right time of the month where they might need 1 more sale to make their manufacturers quota, or my wife might go into a dealer whose products have always attracted a larger discount.
I guess we could mirror that in doing 'ring times; personally I couldn't care less if the car im interested in is 3 seconds a lap quicker than another make and model, but in many ways driving a car flat out is the ONLY way to make sure that the playing field is levelled....
Besides which, my third-choice car (i.e. the car that is the furthest down the list of the ones I own, a 248k Audi A4 B5 1.8t Quattro Sport), is plenty fast/slow enough for the school run, in fact Ill be as bold as to say it's as fast as the FRS on my journey ??
After all, I may be a better negotiator than you when it comes to a discount, you might go into the dealer at the right time of the month where they might need 1 more sale to make their manufacturers quota, or my wife might go into a dealer whose products have always attracted a larger discount.
I guess we could mirror that in doing 'ring times; personally I couldn't care less if the car im interested in is 3 seconds a lap quicker than another make and model, but in many ways driving a car flat out is the ONLY way to make sure that the playing field is levelled....
Besides which, my third-choice car (i.e. the car that is the furthest down the list of the ones I own, a 248k Audi A4 B5 1.8t Quattro Sport), is plenty fast/slow enough for the school run, in fact Ill be as bold as to say it's as fast as the FRS on my journey ??
There is nothing vodoo-derived about the numbers. Use Google or join a member's forum to learn about deals for any car.
Carwow are currently advertising the A45 for £35,400. Coast 2 coast cars are £400 more. Approach dealers with these prices and they can match them.
Merc set the future value at £20,650 after 3 years and 30,000 miles.
Ford £16,995 and 18,000 miles and 3 years.
I'm sure there is better Ford deals, but examples I've have seen are close.
Edited by Driver101 on Friday 21st July 18:14
Different companies and dealers can and will offer different prices to get you to sign.
Prices are fluid too, dependent on demand, stock etc.
Of course, it may be that before being a Sgt in the Police I was in the car industry so know nothing about it, and stand t be corrected......
Ahbefive said:
Source for that?
For me it is quite an achievement that these cars are 15 seconds slower. Including a 400bhp impreza Cosworth. Progress indeed as this car is heavier and loaded with safety features as well as being down on power to many cars on the list.
Ahem only choosing to see what you want to see? Focus RS is right below a 2004 Spec-C which "only" has 300ish BHP was done in 2004 on 2004 rubber. There is also a Evo IX on that list that did 8:11 in the wet. You can kid yourself all you want but even an Evo9 has a more advanced AWD system than the Ford. Companies like Porsche,Nissan,Subaru and Mitsubishi are light years ahead compared to what Ford can offer with parts bin off the shelf parts.For me it is quite an achievement that these cars are 15 seconds slower. Including a 400bhp impreza Cosworth. Progress indeed as this car is heavier and loaded with safety features as well as being down on power to many cars on the list.
Edited by Ahbefive on Saturday 22 July 12:25
Most Evo's in the MR/FQ of that period were easily equal to Spec-C Impreza's of that generation. Also Tommi Mak did a 7:55 in a older model STI from 2010 which is nearly a decade ago now.
Edited by BricktopST205 on Saturday 22 July 14:14
BricktopST205 said:
Ahem only choosing to see what you want to see? Focus RS is right below a 2004 Spec-C which "only" has 300ish BHP was done in 2004 on 2004 rubber. There is also a Evo IX on that list that did 8:11 in the wet. You can kid yourself all you want but even an Evo9 has a more advanced AWD system than the Ford. Companies like Porsche,Nissan,Subaru and Mitsubishi are light years ahead compared to what Ford can offer with parts bin off the shelf parts.
Most Evo's in the MR/FQ of that period were easily equal to Spec-C Impreza's of that generation. Also Tommi Mak did a 7:55 in a older model STI from 2010 which is nearly a decade ago now.
All this talk of 2004 rubber as if 2017 rubber has knocked 10s off everyone's times.Most Evo's in the MR/FQ of that period were easily equal to Spec-C Impreza's of that generation. Also Tommi Mak did a 7:55 in a older model STI from 2010 which is nearly a decade ago now.
Edited by BricktopST205 on Saturday 22 July 14:14
The new PS4S is one tenth, yes one tenth quicker than the PSS around their test track.
When did the PSS come out? 2011. So 6 years for 1 tenth.
The cup tyre fitted to the M3 CSL in 2004 was far from slow!! That took like 20+ secs off a standard M3 time.
BricktopST205 said:
Evo9 has a more advanced AWD system than the Ford. Companies like Porsche,Nissan,Subaru and Mitsubishi are light years ahead compared to what Ford can offer with parts bin off the shelf parts.
The Ford's AWD system is GKN's finest so Ford can hardly be criticised for recycling old parts as it's clearly not what happened.Couple of points :
- the Ford is not light and presumably a couple of hundred kilos heavier than the Evo (that's an expected evolution in 15 years) so I think its lap time is very impressive.
- not sure how much Ring driving experience you have but it's really tricky to compare lap times "off the internet". Too many variables like temp, driver, tyres, accuracy, moisture etc etc
- they decided to overspeed the rear wheels, and that will always be to the detriment of lap times (I think, but others might confirm) but to the benefit of fun.
nickfrog said:
The Ford's AWD system is GKN's finest so Ford can hardly be criticised for recycling old parts as it's clearly not what happened.
Couple of points :
- the Ford is not light and presumably a couple of hundred kilos heavier than the Evo (that's an expected evolution in 15 years) so I think its lap time is very impressive.
- not sure how much Ring driving experience you have but it's really tricky to compare lap times "off the internet". Too many variables like temp, driver, tyres, accuracy, moisture etc etc
- they decided to overspeed the rear wheels, and that will always be to the detriment of lap times (I think, but others might confirm) but to the benefit of fun.
Fair points.Couple of points :
- the Ford is not light and presumably a couple of hundred kilos heavier than the Evo (that's an expected evolution in 15 years) so I think its lap time is very impressive.
- not sure how much Ring driving experience you have but it's really tricky to compare lap times "off the internet". Too many variables like temp, driver, tyres, accuracy, moisture etc etc
- they decided to overspeed the rear wheels, and that will always be to the detriment of lap times (I think, but others might confirm) but to the benefit of fun.
That said:-
- No-one EVER said the Evos weren't fun - precisely the opposite, from my memory. Ditto the Spec-C.
- GKN would have engineered the 4wd system to a brief, so it IS Ford's choice. The Spec-C has a driver-adjustable centre diff which can make a big difference to the fun / safety / lap-time balance, whilst the Evo's system was ground-breaking at the time and is still ahead of most modern systems.
havoc said:
Fair points.
That said:-
- No-one EVER said the Evos weren't fun - precisely the opposite, from my memory. Ditto the Spec-C.
- GKN would have engineered the 4wd system to a brief, so it IS Ford's choice. The Spec-C has a driver-adjustable centre diff which can make a big difference to the fun / safety / lap-time balance, whilst the Evo's system was ground-breaking at the time and is still ahead of most modern systems.
Why does no one use it now?That said:-
- No-one EVER said the Evos weren't fun - precisely the opposite, from my memory. Ditto the Spec-C.
- GKN would have engineered the 4wd system to a brief, so it IS Ford's choice. The Spec-C has a driver-adjustable centre diff which can make a big difference to the fun / safety / lap-time balance, whilst the Evo's system was ground-breaking at the time and is still ahead of most modern systems.
Robert-lhcbq said:
In gear times are interesting and give an idea of the affect of dsg shift speeds and 7 speed gearing on acceleration times.
Left to right, focus RS, golf R dsg, RS3 dsg.
Through the years 30-70 the RS3 leaves it for dead. But forced to stay in one gear, they're pretty comparable over 30-50 and 50-70.
Worth noting that thats older less powerful and longer geared 6 speed Golf, the newer 7 speed is faster, and also thats the older slower RS3Left to right, focus RS, golf R dsg, RS3 dsg.
Through the years 30-70 the RS3 leaves it for dead. But forced to stay in one gear, they're pretty comparable over 30-50 and 50-70.
JD said:
Worth noting that thats older less powerful and longer geared 6 speed Golf, the newer 7 speed is faster, and also thats the older slower RS3
Thanks for missing the point. It was about the affect of dsg. The point still stands for old, new, or even future models of R and RS3.No wonder the manual is dead of everyone is obsessed with a few tenths of acceleration
Robert-lhcbq said:
Why does no one use it now?
Good question.- Proprietary Mitsubishi tech?
- Complexity / cost?
- Packaging / space?
- Reliability?
- Marketing / customer 'need'/demand?
I suspect the answer is a mix of 5, 2 and 3 in that order, with possibly 4 thrown in as well. Haldex is a simple-to-package, semi off-the-shelf solution that provides 'straightforward' 4wd onto a fwd package - unless you're developing a hardcore driver's car, who needs anything more?!?
There ARE other systems out there that do similar things - Subaru's system and Nissan's ATTESA are both very sophisticated, 'Quattro' (the proper stuff not the re-badged Haldex on all the MQB cars) is, engine-location aside, pretty capable too. And Mitsubishi are pretty much out of the performance game now, sadly...
Not wanting to add fuel to the fire, but i thought the new Type R did it in 7 minutes 43 seconds?
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-ho...
https://www.topgear.com/car-news/hot-hatch/the-hon...
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/new-ho...
https://www.topgear.com/car-news/hot-hatch/the-hon...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff