RE: Ford Focus ST | UK Drive

RE: Ford Focus ST | UK Drive

Author
Discussion

Limpet

6,310 posts

161 months

Tuesday 10th September 2019
quotequote all
s m said:
The old Focus ST ( and 5-pot Focus RS ) was faster for the 30-70 sprint than the 4wd Focus RS so I cant see the new ST being slower

It’ll be the standing start runs where the ST will be slower than the 4wd RS - can’t see it beating the front wheel drive Focus RS times by more than the odd tenth either - both similar weight and power
I agree.

In terms of acceleration, 4wd is a disadvantage once rolling, due to the extra drag, friction and drivetrain losses (however small they may be, they are still there). In any reasonably powerful car, it gives a big advantage off the line, but once rolling, I would expect a 2wd car to be quicker, all other things (weight, power etc) being equal. This would also apply to in gear acceleration, or indeed any measure where the 2wd car isn't limited by traction.

If you take typical quarter mile drag timing, 4wd will only help in the first 60ft, and will hinder for the remainder of the run. Hence why the formula of choice for drag racing is 2WD (RWD) with sticky tyres.


s m

23,225 posts

203 months

Tuesday 10th September 2019
quotequote all
IanJ9375 said:
s m said:
I wondered where that claim had come from too and suggested that they maybe meant the old ‘old RS’ - I.e the 5-pot front wheel drive one.
That would seem to be more of a possibility as it weighed 1480kg and had 300bhp - turned in a 14.2 ss1/4 @101.
The last ST with 247bhp managed a 14.8@ 99

Both were quicker 30-70 than the last RS ( the 4wd one which was tested in the wet incidentally )

Autocar’s test of the new ST is out in a couple of days
Ford claim the in gear times for the MK4 ST are quicker than the MK3 RS - it's nothing to do with the MK2 5-pot.
I am in agreement with that - it was the quarter mile claim in the article I found suspect .
The same applied for the last ST (247bhp ) against the 4wd RS - it was quicker for most in-gear increments.
An extra 30bhp in the new one is only going to reinforce the advantage

IanJ9375

1,468 posts

216 months

Tuesday 10th September 2019
quotequote all
s m said:
I am in agreement with that - it was the quarter mile claim in the article I found suspect .
The same applied for the last ST (247bhp ) against the 4wd RS - it was quicker for most in-gear increments.
An extra 30bhp in the new one is only going to reinforce the advantage
With you now!
I'd suggest the torque figure might be more relevant as it's about 50lbft up at least and I'd not be surprised if when they test them there's more torque than claimed. The Mustang 2.3 version now gets 350lbft, the MK3 RS was running 324lbft before overboosting to 350lbft.

s m

23,225 posts

203 months

Wednesday 11th September 2019
quotequote all
stevesingo said:
1508kg. Porky!
Autocar test is out

Actual weight is 1433kg with a sunroof fitted ( old model 1505kg with sunroof )

Second quicker to 100 than the old model ( 14.1 seconds )

nickfrog

21,160 posts

217 months

Wednesday 11th September 2019
quotequote all
s m said:
Actual weight is 1433kg with a sunroof fitted ( old model 1505kg with sunroof )
Is that DIN or EU equivalent ? In other words with or without a 75kg driver ? I assume without, which would make the weight consistent with a Megane RS mk4.

s m

23,225 posts

203 months

Wednesday 11th September 2019
quotequote all
nickfrog said:
Is that DIN or EU equivalent ? In other words with or without a 75kg driver ? I assume without, which would make the weight consistent with a Megane RS mk4.
No driver - half a tank