RE: Ford Fiesta ST: UK Drive
Discussion
J4CKO said:
200 bhp from 1.5 litres is not a huge deal these days, Peugeot do 260 bhp from 1.6.
The Datapost Escort RS1600i Ran a scrap 1.6 8V CVH in the mid 80s without a turbocharger and made 300bhp. So saying that 200bhp is not a huge deal because PSA get 60bhp more from a 1.6, is just daft!!! Ford can 110% go and make a 1.5 v6 turbo F1 spec engine 1000bhp and shove it into that Fiesta if they want. But why would they??? Its blatantly obvious Ford have deliberately made this engine a certain spec to maintain its reliability and for business sense for the company!!
The next gen fiesta will need to step up in power yet again to keep people interested, otherwise stepping up in too much of power increments, just because a rival offers alot more, will just lead to pointless 500-600bhp shopping carts in 10-15yrs time!
stavr0ss said:
I’ve been for two test drives in one now and the engine is an absolute peach. Pulls really well and the quaife diff makes itself known through the steering rack nicely. The gain in size and weight is noticeable but the extra grunt and the engine noise more than counteract that.
Genuinely considering selling my Elise and getting one of these. Finance/lease looks strong too- 3k down, 2.9 interest and about 275 per month.
has no extra grunt though? Genuinely considering selling my Elise and getting one of these. Finance/lease looks strong too- 3k down, 2.9 interest and about 275 per month.
I'm waiting for the mountune pack before replacing my mk7
vanschpunk said:
J4CKO said:
200 bhp from 1.5 litres is not a huge deal these days, Peugeot do 260 bhp from 1.6.
The Datapost Escort RS1600i Ran a scrap 1.6 8V CVH in the mid 80s without a turbocharger and made 300bhp. So saying that 200bhp is not a huge deal because PSA get 60bhp more from a 1.6, is just daft!!! Ford can 110% go and make a 1.5 v6 turbo F1 spec engine 1000bhp and shove it into that Fiesta if they want. But why would they??? Its blatantly obvious Ford have deliberately made this engine a certain spec to maintain its reliability and for business sense for the company!!
The next gen fiesta will need to step up in power yet again to keep people interested, otherwise stepping up in too much of power increments, just because a rival offers alot more, will just lead to pointless 500-600bhp shopping carts in 10-15yrs time!
People seem to struggle to comprehend the 1.0 Ecoboost making any power and holding together for more than a day or two because it is a 1 litre and 1 litre engines are weedy, brought up on a pecking order largely based on NA engines.
When in actual fact, a 1 litre Ecoboost is as powerful and torquey as 2 litre NA engines of old, thing is, with a turbo it may have 1 litre capacity but more air gets squashed in so its not really comparable than an engine under atmospheric pressure.
The rest of it, not sure what Competition MK3 Escorts, F1 engines and Ford fitting 1000 bhp engines to Fiestas has to do with it ?
J4CKO said:
When in actual fact, a 1 litre Ecoboost is as powerful and torquey as 2 litre NA engines of old, thing is, with a turbo it may have 1 litre capacity but more air gets squashed in so its not really comparable than an engine under atmospheric pressure.
Makes you wonder why some people want to map them for more....J4CKO said:
People seem to struggle to comprehend the 1.0 Ecoboost making any power and holding together for more than a day or two because it is a 1 litre and 1 litre engines are weedy, brought up on a pecking order largely based on NA engines.
WordSomething like this:
1.0 140hp: as above (140hp/l)
1.5 200hp: it lost a cylinder and will break down anytime (boost bro) and be awful (this thread) (133hp/l)
2.0 381hp: bit much, innit? (190hp/l A45)
3.0 450hp: needs more power! (150hp/l RS5)
4.0 720hp: it's underrated, actually has almost 800hp, best car eva eva! (180-200hp/l 720s)
6.0 1500hp: pff, know a guy that got more power from his 2 litre engine, eat that Bugatti... (250hp/l Chiron)
Edited by Onehp on Tuesday 17th July 12:29
blade7 said:
J4CKO said:
When in actual fact, a 1 litre Ecoboost is as powerful and torquey as 2 litre NA engines of old, thing is, with a turbo it may have 1 litre capacity but more air gets squashed in so its not really comparable than an engine under atmospheric pressure.
Makes you wonder why some people want to map them for more....
Because, we bought the misers 100 bhp version, we knew it wasnt perhaps up to her performance requirements and bought it knowing a remap was available, there werent many 125's around at the time (and they were a lot dearer) as think that would have been enough and in 2015 dont think the 140 was out or was very new, I was aware it was coming and confident that the remap was fine given that Ford had their own version with similar power.
Its funny, she has no interest in driving our sons ST, she took my M135i out the other day as I was away and her car was blocked in by it, not because she had the chance to drive it without me around (not that I am bothered), still prefers her Fiesta and cannot imagine there is anything better and hates anything flashy, she could get herself pretty much anything but she loves her Fiesta.
Just looks horrible.
The previous incarnation wasn’t bad but this just looks like they’ve softened and dulled everything down.
In an age of 350-400bhp hot hatches if 200 is the best they can manage its pretty disappointing. Also WAY too big. It’s supposed to be a hatchback not a barge.
The previous incarnation wasn’t bad but this just looks like they’ve softened and dulled everything down.
In an age of 350-400bhp hot hatches if 200 is the best they can manage its pretty disappointing. Also WAY too big. It’s supposed to be a hatchback not a barge.
I had a quick sit in one of these today. First impressions are, the interior is a lot better with the new screen and it feels very well put together. The seats are very comfortable and supportive but don't squeeze you too tight like the last gen (which were too tight imo). The negatives however are it's aesthetically a bit boring and not aggressive enough for my liking, possibly as it was a 5 door model, but it just didn't feel all that special.
Jonesy23 said:
They drive OK, still not 100% convinced by the handling but there you go. But I found the new Fiesta had some fundamental annoyances.
- The cabin looks OK in pictures but the ergonomics are s
t when you come to use it. Really st. Visibility, alignment and position of controls is all wrong from the drivers seat. It's nice and tidy to look at in a review picture from the back seat but not much good when you want to use it in anger.
- Interior materials aren't exactly an improvement either. It might look better at a glance (maybe) but to me on contact it felt cost engineered compared to what came out 5 years ago from the same team.
- The instrument cluster is from a 90s Japanese Christmas cracker, all flat black featureless plastic. Putting a screen into it doesn't make up for the rest. Nasty.
- Rear visibility is utter crap, first car I've used that really demanded a reversing camera. And I've tried a few. I have better memories of a long wheelbase Sprinter than I do of the Fiesta.
- Forward visibility is crap too; really noticeably bad when you're on a roundabout and realise you have no real clue where the kerb is.
- The controls for the infotainment etc on the dash and steering wheel are illogical and prioritise the wrong things. They also don't match the slightly older layouts for the same systems (Sync3) or indeed any other flow or feature set from anyone else.
Kit isn't too bad if you have the right options, but miss one or two off and certain features don't make much sense. Like still having steering wheel controls for cruise features when only the limiter is actually there so you have all the buttons except the enable.
I was seriously disappointed. The way it drives isn't good enough to make up for the endless annoyances of using it.
And the worst part is that the new Focus seems to be just a big version of the Fiesta in many ways so no escape if you go for that.
Usability was basic basic stuff at Ford for the past 25 years but someone has utterly lost their grip on it.
I had a new fiesta rental a few weeks ago and this is quite an accurate representation of my thoughts, obviously not the ST but I’m assuming the dash is carried over, I found myself wanting to rip out the speed limit function was generally incorrect and the whole system just felt cheap. - The cabin looks OK in pictures but the ergonomics are s
t when you come to use it. Really st. Visibility, alignment and position of controls is all wrong from the drivers seat. It's nice and tidy to look at in a review picture from the back seat but not much good when you want to use it in anger.- Interior materials aren't exactly an improvement either. It might look better at a glance (maybe) but to me on contact it felt cost engineered compared to what came out 5 years ago from the same team.
- The instrument cluster is from a 90s Japanese Christmas cracker, all flat black featureless plastic. Putting a screen into it doesn't make up for the rest. Nasty.
- Rear visibility is utter crap, first car I've used that really demanded a reversing camera. And I've tried a few. I have better memories of a long wheelbase Sprinter than I do of the Fiesta.
- Forward visibility is crap too; really noticeably bad when you're on a roundabout and realise you have no real clue where the kerb is.
- The controls for the infotainment etc on the dash and steering wheel are illogical and prioritise the wrong things. They also don't match the slightly older layouts for the same systems (Sync3) or indeed any other flow or feature set from anyone else.
Kit isn't too bad if you have the right options, but miss one or two off and certain features don't make much sense. Like still having steering wheel controls for cruise features when only the limiter is actually there so you have all the buttons except the enable.
I was seriously disappointed. The way it drives isn't good enough to make up for the endless annoyances of using it.
And the worst part is that the new Focus seems to be just a big version of the Fiesta in many ways so no escape if you go for that.
Usability was basic basic stuff at Ford for the past 25 years but someone has utterly lost their grip on it.
Styling isn’t bad but I think the mk7 is better and I saw a mk6 the other day and I think that was the model they nailed the looks on and also the size was exactly what you want a hot hatch to be.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQfND8jOtJ8
the new one appears to be hugely quicker despite having the same amount of bhp, perhaps it dynos higher than it's stated output?
the new one appears to be hugely quicker despite having the same amount of bhp, perhaps it dynos higher than it's stated output?
mrnoisy78 said:
Just looks horrible.
The previous incarnation wasn’t bad but this just looks like they’ve softened and dulled everything down.
In an age of 350-400bhp hot hatches if 200 is the best they can manage its pretty disappointing. Also WAY too big. It’s supposed to be a hatchback not a barge.
What Fiesta-sized hot hatches are pumping out 350-400bhp from the factory?The previous incarnation wasn’t bad but this just looks like they’ve softened and dulled everything down.
In an age of 350-400bhp hot hatches if 200 is the best they can manage its pretty disappointing. Also WAY too big. It’s supposed to be a hatchback not a barge.
They dont need it, my son has an ST and its ace, prob more fun than my M135i to be fair, could handle a bit more and not fall apart though.
There is a perception that the good old 4 cyl never breaks when tuned but this 3 cyl will definitely break ?
Is there any basis in engineering that says a 3 cyl is less robust, after all its near enough the same capacity, isnt it mainly down to how the engine is constructed and cooled and not the number of cylinders ?
The only reason we havent had lower cylinder counts in the past was as they werent as smooth but as they have sorted that out (mostly) or realised people dont care I dont see it as an issue, after all, it wasnt like 5 cyl engines used to break more than sixes due to having one less cylinder ?
There is a perception that the good old 4 cyl never breaks when tuned but this 3 cyl will definitely break ?
Is there any basis in engineering that says a 3 cyl is less robust, after all its near enough the same capacity, isnt it mainly down to how the engine is constructed and cooled and not the number of cylinders ?
The only reason we havent had lower cylinder counts in the past was as they werent as smooth but as they have sorted that out (mostly) or realised people dont care I dont see it as an issue, after all, it wasnt like 5 cyl engines used to break more than sixes due to having one less cylinder ?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff