RE: Ford Fiesta ST150 | Shed of the Week
Discussion
Robmarriott said:
Technically both wrong anyway as the mk2 was a mk1 facelift so the mark 3 was really mk2, the mk4 was mk3, meaning the ST150 should probably only be mk4.
The different Fiesta models are blurry to say the least, but there have only been 4 platforms used in the last 43 years. The various platforms were used as follows:
1976-1989
1989-2002 (itself a rework of the 1976 platform)
2002-2008
2008-present
The Mrs had a red 05 plate for nearly 5 years. Bought it for £4800 on 19k and sold it for £3500 on 60k.
Above normal maintenance it needed a battery, wheel bearing and exhaust in all that time, was very cheap to run. Fuel economy was bad though, high 20’s. As people have said it needs a 6th gear.
The engine was a little gruff and harsh when wound out but has plenty of mid range and I wouldn’t say it felt slow. As I understand Ford kept the power down to keep the insurance somewhat affordable to their target market.
It felt surprisingly well screwed together for what was a cheap car when new.
Above normal maintenance it needed a battery, wheel bearing and exhaust in all that time, was very cheap to run. Fuel economy was bad though, high 20’s. As people have said it needs a 6th gear.
The engine was a little gruff and harsh when wound out but has plenty of mid range and I wouldn’t say it felt slow. As I understand Ford kept the power down to keep the insurance somewhat affordable to their target market.
It felt surprisingly well screwed together for what was a cheap car when new.
I didn't realise they were as cheap as this now.
They look like a bit of a bargain, but I always hated how Fiesta seats always seemed too high (my Mum had 3) so that puts me off a bit.
Mind you if in years to come they do what every other fast Ford has done so far I might regret that!
They look like a bit of a bargain, but I always hated how Fiesta seats always seemed too high (my Mum had 3) so that puts me off a bit.
Mind you if in years to come they do what every other fast Ford has done so far I might regret that!
I've had 2. Fun little cars, and never actually went wrong for me. Fuel was mid 30's, mixed use, but, yes, you did feel perched on rather than sat in them. Still, I like them.
One thing: they were never actually called 'ST150'. Just ST. The numbers were dropped after the Focus ST170, until the runout models in 2008.
One thing: they were never actually called 'ST150'. Just ST. The numbers were dropped after the Focus ST170, until the runout models in 2008.
Top shed.
I've always liked these, yes they are a little down on power compared to the 172/182 however you gain way more in space, comfort and it just feels like a better built car. Good chassis like most Ford cars and a zippy engine to propel it with decent pace on the back roads.
Corrosion is a killer, mine went on the door seams and the paint is so thin it'll get stone chipped to death, these cars suit a set of rally mudflaps, some spotlights and a set of rally wheels than being a garage queen.
I've always liked these, yes they are a little down on power compared to the 172/182 however you gain way more in space, comfort and it just feels like a better built car. Good chassis like most Ford cars and a zippy engine to propel it with decent pace on the back roads.
Corrosion is a killer, mine went on the door seams and the paint is so thin it'll get stone chipped to death, these cars suit a set of rally mudflaps, some spotlights and a set of rally wheels than being a garage queen.
XRMike said:
Top shed.
I've always liked these, yes they are a little down on power compared to the 172/182 however you gain way more in space, comfort and it just feels like a better built car. Good chassis like most Ford cars and a zippy engine to propel it with decent pace on the back roads.
Corrosion is a killer, mine went on the door seams and the paint is so thin it'll get stone chipped to death, these cars suit a set of rally mudflaps, some spotlights and a set of rally wheels than being a garage queen.
Our Fiesta paint seems OK. There is a small bit of developing rust on one sill, which I will sort out (the other side is fine, so I suspect a blocked drain hole or damage somewhere).I've always liked these, yes they are a little down on power compared to the 172/182 however you gain way more in space, comfort and it just feels like a better built car. Good chassis like most Ford cars and a zippy engine to propel it with decent pace on the back roads.
Corrosion is a killer, mine went on the door seams and the paint is so thin it'll get stone chipped to death, these cars suit a set of rally mudflaps, some spotlights and a set of rally wheels than being a garage queen.
All cars should be in rally spec and driven with gusto on tight, twisty back roads.
Don Roque said:
I drove one of these at work a few years ago and couldn't believe how high the seat position was. I know Ford's hatchbacks have never been particularly 'low seated' and even having owned a Mk1 Focus Zetec Ebony in years gone by, this one seemed to have a seat like a perch. The engine was quite responsive but overall it felt pretty slow, even when revved out.
I had a mk5 Fiesta Zetec S as my first car (type pictured below). It was a great car and much more fun than this type of Fiesta ST.
As a Fiesta this model is so much better looking than the following ST models.I had a mk5 Fiesta Zetec S as my first car (type pictured below). It was a great car and much more fun than this type of Fiesta ST.
legless said:
Robmarriott said:
Technically both wrong anyway as the mk2 was a mk1 facelift so the mark 3 was really mk2, the mk4 was mk3, meaning the ST150 should probably only be mk4.
The different Fiesta models are blurry to say the least, but there have only been 4 platforms used in the last 43 years. The various platforms were used as follows:
1976-1989
1989-2002 (itself a rework of the 1976 platform)
2002-2008
2008-present
Remembering reading an article on Richard Parry-Jones who stated when developing the Mk4 they evaluated the Mk3 chassis to identify where to improve it and discovered that under load some of the metal suspension components deformed more than the rubber ones !!
The Mk2 was really just a heavy facelift of the Mk1 (I'm sure the tailgates were interchangeable!). But it is universally referred to as the Mk2.
The main reason for the confusion is referring to the Mk4 facelift / Mk4.5 as the Mk5 and then all the marks are one out after that! The Mk4.5 was a face lift in the truest sense of the word ! It really just had a new face and was pretty much mechanically identical to the Mk4!
The Ford Fiesta section on Wikipedia gets it right with the different Generations/Mks.
I do find it amusing that on a thread for a Fiesta Mk5 (we all agree its a Mk5 ?!) ST that is Shed of the Week, we're arguing over Mk1 - Mk4s !! Isn't there a classic car section this should be in ?!
GhiaInjection said:
Agree that if you base it on platforms, then it is 4 marks. However it's slightly unfair on the Mk4 (1995) that shared it's platform with the Mk3 (1989), but was a vastly superior car (although with identical cabin dimensions!) and spawned the Puma (just compare Mk3 XR2i and Puma reviews!).
Remembering reading an article on Richard Parry-Jones who stated when developing the Mk4 they evaluated the Mk3 chassis to identify where to improve it and discovered that under load some of the metal suspension components deformed more than the rubber ones !!
The Mk2 was really just a heavy facelift of the Mk1 (I'm sure the tailgates were interchangeable!). But it is universally referred to as the Mk2.
The main reason for the confusion is referring to the Mk4 facelift / Mk4.5 as the Mk5 and then all the marks are one out after that! The Mk4.5 was a face lift in the truest sense of the word ! It really just had a new face and was pretty much mechanically identical to the Mk4!
The Ford Fiesta section on Wikipedia gets it right with the different Generations/Mks.
I do find it amusing that on a thread for a Fiesta Mk5 (we all agree its a Mk5 ?!) ST that is Shed of the Week, we're arguing over Mk1 - Mk4s !! Isn't there a classic car section this should be in ?!
I thought the Mk4 was a fine car, particularly in 1.25 guise. A really great ride and handling balance that was totally lost with the Mk5 with some tiny gutless diesel engine I drove when they were new, which was rode extremely harshly; also that Mk5 had the worst rev hang of any car I've ever driven.Remembering reading an article on Richard Parry-Jones who stated when developing the Mk4 they evaluated the Mk3 chassis to identify where to improve it and discovered that under load some of the metal suspension components deformed more than the rubber ones !!
The Mk2 was really just a heavy facelift of the Mk1 (I'm sure the tailgates were interchangeable!). But it is universally referred to as the Mk2.
The main reason for the confusion is referring to the Mk4 facelift / Mk4.5 as the Mk5 and then all the marks are one out after that! The Mk4.5 was a face lift in the truest sense of the word ! It really just had a new face and was pretty much mechanically identical to the Mk4!
The Ford Fiesta section on Wikipedia gets it right with the different Generations/Mks.
I do find it amusing that on a thread for a Fiesta Mk5 (we all agree its a Mk5 ?!) ST that is Shed of the Week, we're arguing over Mk1 - Mk4s !! Isn't there a classic car section this should be in ?!
GhiaInjection said:
I do find it amusing that on a thread for a Fiesta Mk5 (we all agree its a Mk5 ?!)
No. Mk8 is the current fiesta with the range topper being the 1.5 3cylinder ST.
Mk 7 was the first turbocharged fiesta ST.
Mk 6 was the first fiesta ST (2.0) as per the article.
Mk5 was the first fiesta zetec-S.
Mk 4 range topper was the was the 1.4 ghia I believe.
Mk3.5 was the later mk3 with the fuel filler flap best in RS1800 format.
Mk3 was the RS Turbo.
MK2 the most recognisable shape of XR2 with rectangular headlights.
Mk1 XR2 with round headlights.
Much like many other manufacturers include a facelift as a next generation car. Next you will be telling us there were only 3 marks of Escort (no there were 6).
Arsecati said:
For the love of jehovah, please don't tell me this place is becoming one of them forums, where absolute morons can't help themselves from rabidly thumping at their keyboards 'first comment', just so they can tell everyone they have made the 'first comment'??? Seriously?? Surely there has to be some legal basis here to just shoot this imbeciles and remove them from society???
(Is the shooting thing a bit much??)
Not really, no.(Is the shooting thing a bit much??)
Elatino1 said:
No.
Mk8 is the current fiesta with the range topper being the 1.5 3cylinder ST.
Mk 7 was the first turbocharged fiesta ST.
Mk 6 was the first fiesta ST (2.0) as per the article.
Mk5 was the first fiesta zetec-S.
Mk 4 range topper was the was the 1.4 ghia I believe.
Mk3.5 was the later mk3 with the fuel filler flap best in RS1800 format.
Mk3 was the RS Turbo.
MK2 the most recognisable shape of XR2 with rectangular headlights.
Mk1 XR2 with round headlights.
Much like many other manufacturers include a facelift as a next generation car. Next you will be telling us there were only 3 marks of Escort (no there were 6).
I think we need to agree on what constitutes a new "Mk" and what constitutes a refresh / face-lift. I'm coming at it from an engineering point of view where a new "Mk" is a (or practically) new model with extensive changes. (I doubt when the Ford engineers sat down to discuss refreshing the Mk4 anyone thought they were designing a new model!).Mk8 is the current fiesta with the range topper being the 1.5 3cylinder ST.
Mk 7 was the first turbocharged fiesta ST.
Mk 6 was the first fiesta ST (2.0) as per the article.
Mk5 was the first fiesta zetec-S.
Mk 4 range topper was the was the 1.4 ghia I believe.
Mk3.5 was the later mk3 with the fuel filler flap best in RS1800 format.
Mk3 was the RS Turbo.
MK2 the most recognisable shape of XR2 with rectangular headlights.
Mk1 XR2 with round headlights.
Much like many other manufacturers include a facelift as a next generation car. Next you will be telling us there were only 3 marks of Escort (no there were 6).
I accept its tricky with the Fiesta. As the combination of it being a low profit margin super mini and Ford's policy during the 80's/early 90's to re-use as much as possible, to maximize profit, has resulted in versions that skirt a fine line between new Model and refresh/face-lift.
The other factor is the marketing/sales effect. Ford don't actually refer to "Mk" or face lift in any sales literature (you will only hear it if you read stuff written by the engineers). The Sales stuff will just say "New" Fiesta and as long as this "New" Fiesta looks different to the previous one everyone just adds 1 to the Mk number in their head! In addition if a number of years have passed, it feels right for there to be a New Fiesta..
Your list does this and them compounds it by only focusing on the Performance versions! The Performance versions are effectively just trim levels built on the base car with additional chassis tweaks and introduction of a new engine or larger version of an existing engine. This doesn't influence whether its considered a New "Mk" or face-lift.
What you refer to as a Mk5 Zetec-S was just an additional trim they introduced when they refreshed the Mk4. It introduced the 1.6 Sigma engine, but seeing as the Mk4 was already fitted with the 1.25 & 1.4 Sigma engines, it hardly required much engineering effort. (There wasn't really a performance version of the Mk4 as they didn't want to take sales from the Puma. At the face-lift/refresh they re-thought that, but still resisted fitting the 1.7 Sigma)
If you compared your 1995 Mk4 "1.4 ghia" with the equivalent 1999 Mk4.5 1.4 Ghia you'd find there is < 10% difference between them. So I'm not sure how you can argue it's a new model / Mk.
I know the Zetec-S is much loved and I agree it was a great little car, but that doesn't mean the face-lift/refresh that introduced it should be upgraded to new model/Mk status ! Its no more that 10-15% different from the Mk4 its based on.
The ST 1.6T didn't appear until the Mk6 facelift (or Mk 6.5) in 2013. From 2008 til that point the Mk6 performance version (Zetec-S) used the 1.6 VCT-Ti.
Mk3 is an interesting one (no really!) as its appearance didn't really change throughout its life (dashboard and headlights didn't change - a key point!). But underneath there some quite drastic changes towards the end of its life: 1.6 & 1.8 Zetec engines, PAS, upgrades to safety cell inc. Airbags etc. But because Ford never pushed it as "New" and it never looked different, nobody incremented the Mk number in their heads or even consider it for face-lift status! (but i'd agree referring to it as Mk 3.5 feels right - although how do you reflect the dropping of the XR2i and introduction of the Si ? Mk 3.75?!!!)
I didn't want to bring the Escort into this... but you had to mention it !!!
I'd generally agree that there are 6 Mks, but Ford wouldn't !! If you use the "platform" method, then there are 4 (1967, 1974, 1980 & 1990). What is referred to as the Mk4 was internally referred to as the Mk3 facelift and if look into it from an engineering perspective that's clearly what it is. But if you look at the extended lifetimes of platforms back then, Ford wouldn't have sold any if they'd kept referring to it as the Mk3 throughout the 80's! A lot of engineering effort went into the Mk6 to bring it up to scratch, so content with that (although a fair proportion of that work was done on the 1992 Mk5.5 face-lift)
At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter. Cars are constantly being updated and the new Model/Facelift are only snapshots. If you went into a parts dept and asked for a part based on MkX / X.X you'd unlikely to get the right part ! Referring to the year is the best way to identify the models (actually Reg/Chassis No. for parts!).
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff