RE: Ford Fiesta ST

[pbirkett]

patmy said:

If i was paying the full 13.5K for a fiesta then maybe i'd consider a frog but the reality is that if you pay more than 11.5K for a fiesta your a mug, think its a great car for what you pay, and I would like to see renault make a car as good for the same money and one that wont cost a fortune to fix when the warranty runs out.

I paid about £10k for a nearly new Clio 182 with 5000 miles on the clock, they really were cheap as chips.

Thing is, I can actually believe you kept up with a mates 182 on the twisties, because the twisties are a great leveller of many cars. Unless you are both seriously skilled drivers with the ability of the late Colin McRae, your average people in similar powered cars are only going to get so far on a twisty road.

When I was out with the NEPHers I had no problems keeping up in my 182 with more powerful cars. That doesnt mean to say the 182 has some kind of otherworldly ability, just that you can only go so far on a road. The kind of cars I am talking about keeping up with, would have torn me a new ringpiece on a track.

I'm not going to slag the Fiesta off, because in a way, it doesnt really have the 182 as a competitor any more as the 197 has priced itself out of its reach (despite actually being slightly slower than the car it replaced), but I dont like it, just looks like an ordinary fiesta (which i dont like either) with big wheels and a big, heavy, but not particularly powerful engine from a Mondeo.

I actually read a review somewhere on the internet where they actually claimed the Zetec S was actually a better driving car, with its smaller wheels, more forgiving ride, and smaller engines, which in a way suited the car better. Cant remember where I read it though.

Truth is if I was buying a new car now, I dont know which car which is a competitor I would buy... I dunno, I'd be tempted to buy a Panda 100HP I think because its a lot cheaper, a lot lighter, I dare say just as much, if not more fun, and seeing as neither are particularly quick, I might as well save a few quid in the process.

Each to their own though, I've never really "got" Fiesta's ever though, so take my views with a pinch of salt

[jonjay]

Seat Ibiza Cupra is a much better car in my opinion than the fiesta and the 182 clio.

There is no denying that the VAG engines are powerful and easily tunable. Your talking about a remap for £300 quid that gets you 200bhp / 300lbs of torque. You have to spend silly amounts of money to do the same in either car. Then you have the reliability and build quality which we know Renault is poor for. Bang for buck you get a lot more in the Ibiza...brembo brakes being one.

Edited by jonjay on Saturday 29th December 17:42

[patmy]

THe fiesta has 140 LB/ft of torque and the clio 182 has 147, so theres not too much in it when you look at it that way. In my opinion torque is what really counts on the road anyway.

[pbirkett]

jonjay, some people care more than just about speed though. The standard Cupra was undoubtedly quick enough, but it felt boring to drive, it had no engine note worthy of speaking of, and to be honest, you would need to remap it just to make it half way interesting, and even then the only thrill you would get is the speed, which not only loses its appeal fairly quickly (you get used to whatever speed your car goes), but is also fairly pointless in todays climate, as a road car.

I'll grant you the brakes are good, but all the clio really needed on that score was some better pads and brake lines, and they were just as good for every day use.

The Cupra was a "nice" car, but it just plain failed to interest me, one of the most boring hot hatches i've driven. I'd rather have the TDI model, incidentally.

patmy, so the fiesta is only 7 lb ft behind the clio, so what? Neither of them are exactly endowed with lots of torque are they? Your argument may have held some water had the fiesta had about 200 lb ft, but as it is, it holds no water, because neither car is torquey. But you dont need torque to have fun, I've got even less than the Fiesta in my car, and yet my car would rip it a new arsehole, same goes for the likes of the Elise etc....

All IMO of course

[Steve2005]

Welshbeef said:

Does the steering wheel adj for helight as well as reach in the 182? Im 6'2" tall and the Mk1 172 steering wheel was fixed for height which meant my legs were jammed tight by it so I didnt buy it.

Is that the only reason you didnt buy a ph1 172? If so you've missed out there, because the steering wheel definately adjusts for height.

Edited by Steve2005 on Sunday 30th December 17:46

[chris_w666]

I bought a fiesta zetec tdci to stop me using as much fuel in my focus. Have driven an st fez and my st 170 foucs was a much better car (no quicker on paper) but in real world is a much better car at being driven hard, (like comparing an st170 to a ctr). The fiesta does have a great chassis but imho if i was looking at the st fez id pick the tdci zetec s and a cheap gti or big fast machine for weekends.

[pbirkett]

Chris, at least one, maybe more of the car mags rated the "Zetec S" model a better drive than the ST, with its more compliant ride and smaller wheels, lighter engine gave better handling characteristics. Also the TDCI is MUCH cheaper to insure, and if chipped, probably not much slower in the majority of situations... frankly from what I read of the 2.0 lump in the ST, its not one that particularly likes to be thrashed as much as the old ST170 lump.

Actually if I was going after a warmish Ford HH, the ST170 seems to make a lot more sense than the Fiesta ST as its bigger, more comfortable, faster, probably handles better, and certainly looks better, probably costs less too.

[adycav]

pbirkett said:

I actually read a review somewhere on the internet where they actually claimed the Zetec S was actually a better driving car, with its smaller wheels, more forgiving ride, and smaller engines, which in a way suited the car better. Cant remember where I read it though.

It was probably this from 4car mate, page 3 is where the author praises the Zetec S.

http://www.channel4.com/4car/di/ford/fiesta/1087/

[Polarbert]

patmy said:

THe fiesta has 140 LB/ft of torque and the clio 182 has 147, so theres not too much in it when you look at it that way. In my opinion torque is what really counts on the road anyway.

Right, and the Clio has more, so whats your point? It also weighs 100kgs less as well, and weight is what really counts on the road anyway.

[Cabinet Enforcer]

pbirkett said:

I'm not going to slag the Fiesta off, because in a way, it doesnt really have the 182 as a competitor any more as the 197 has priced itself out of its reach (despite actually being slightly slower than the car it replaced), but I dont like it, just looks like an ordinary fiesta (which i dont like either) with big wheels and a big, heavy, but not particularly powerful engine from a Mondeo.

A point to note, the engine in the fez is niether big nor heavy, infact the 2.0l duratec used in the fiesta is the current de-facto choice in the kit-car industry (including caterham) due to its excellent tunability.

Edited by Cabinet Enforcer on Sunday 30th December 23:41

[pbirkett]

Thats fine in a Caterham, or Westy, that weighs 500 kg, but in a near 1200 kg supermini, not so hot.

Why no Fiesta RS anyway, something properly interesting.

[SlowMo]

£13,000 is "cheap thrills"?

No wonder people are in so much debt

[Baldylocks]

Polarbert said:

patmy said:

THe fiesta has 140 LB/ft of torque and the clio 182 has 147, so theres not too much in it when you look at it that way. In my opinion torque is what really counts on the road anyway.

Right, and the Clio has more, so whats your point? It also weighs 100kgs less as well, and weight is what really counts on the road anyway.

When I conducted a 'comparison' between my 172 Cup and a Fiesta ST there was'nt much in it off the mark or once rolling.....with two mates in the car with me of course

Ford could have made a 182/197/CTR rival if they wanted. But they did'nt, instead aiming at a different market with less performance and lower insurance. They are not really competitors IMO.

[pbirkett]

£13,622, actually

Although as already said, you wont pay full price for one of these.

Even so, hardly cheap, especially when £2k would buy a mint 205 GTI that would be 10x more fun.

[FWDRacer]

The car is backward step from the previous generation Fiesta platform in both Puma and Zetec-S Fiesta guise. I've driven the new ST back to back, and aside from the extra capacity offering a little more in the way of torque, the chassis has neither the pliancy or benign breakaway charcteristics of the Puma. No fun at all

[patmy]

FWDRacer said:

The car is backward step from the previous generation Fiesta platform in both Puma and Zetec-S Fiesta guise. I've driven the new ST back to back, and aside from the extra capacity offering a little more in the way of torque, the chassis has neither the pliancy or benign breakaway charcteristics of the Puma. No fun at all

You obviously havent driven one properly!

[SlowMo]

patmy said:

FWDRacer said:

The car is backward step from the previous generation Fiesta platform in both Puma and Zetec-S Fiesta guise. I've driven the new ST back to back, and aside from the extra capacity offering a little more in the way of torque, the chassis has neither the pliancy or benign breakaway charcteristics of the Puma. No fun at all

You obviously havent driven one properly!

You're obviously trying to justify spending money on a wet fish

[eddy_hyde]

adycav said:

pbirkett said:

I actually read a review somewhere on the internet where they actually claimed the Zetec S was actually a better driving car, with its smaller wheels, more forgiving ride, and smaller engines, which in a way suited the car better. Cant remember where I read it though.

It was probably this from 4car mate, page 3 is where the author praises the Zetec S.

http://www.channel4.com/4car/di/ford/fiesta/1087/

Tis rubish, we own both, and the ST is way more fun in every way, makes you want to thrape it frome the second you turn the key, and drives way better too, especially steering and brakes. Only the mpg and noisy motor on mway are major stopers as a daily driver. If you can afford the ST get it, the ZS is a nearly car, or get the ST170 which is better than all

But the fiesta is a great car to live with, though the interior isnt the classiest its better built than most, and full of big car gadgets and neat features, do like it, but need somat bigger now

[luthor]

Hi there,

I bought a 55 plate ST after test driving the Cupra with the brembo brakes, and various other hot hatches. I paid £8k for a Dec05 model with 10k miles on it. The Cupra in the same garage, with 5k miles in the same year was £12,995. After driving the Cupra, the handling was completely awful, uninspiring and so completely understeery it left me cold. Sure it pelted up to xxx mph easily, but sounded boring.

The French cars are not comparable in build quality IMHO and Ford have de-tuned the ST engine to make it come in at group 13 insurance. They've done this with a diamete restriction in the exhaust connector pipe and a massively restricted air-box design. Spending £190 on replacement air box and exhaust flexi-section releases the engine up to 160bhp, and further restrictions in the exhaust once removed take the car to over 170bhp. Cams, ECU and headwork can yield 200+bhp quite easily in this little motor, so it's a shame compare it to the 180-200bhp bracket cars when it's so much cheaper. Civic TypeR comes in at £18,000!! Not the same league is it?

The ST is a lovely car to own and drive daily, it does love being thrown round corners, although this could be improved extemely easily with smaller 16" alloys with appropriate tyres and 10mm lower springs.

Overall an easy car to live with, with ALL the features you need these days - just add your own TomTom

[Welshbeef]

luthor said:

Hi there,

I bought a 55 plate ST after test driving the Cupra with the brembo brakes, and various other hot hatches. I paid £8k for a Dec05 model with 10k miles on it. The Cupra in the same garage, with 5k miles in the same year was £12,995. After driving the Cupra, the handling was completely awful, uninspiring and so completely understeery it left me cold. Sure it pelted up to xxx mph easily, but sounded boring.

The French cars are not comparable in build quality IMHO and Ford have de-tuned the ST engine to make it come in at group 13 insurance. They've done this with a diamete restriction in the exhaust connector pipe and a massively restricted air-box design. Spending £190 on replacement air box and exhaust flexi-section releases the engine up to 160bhp, and further restrictions in the exhaust once removed take the car to over 170bhp. Cams, ECU and headwork can yield 200+bhp quite easily in this little motor, so it's a shame compare it to the 180-200bhp bracket cars when it's so much cheaper. Civic TypeR comes in at £18,000!! Not the same league is it?

The ST is a lovely car to own and drive daily, it does love being thrown round corners, although this could be improved extemely easily with smaller 16" alloys with appropriate tyres and 10mm lower springs.

Overall an easy car to live with, with ALL the features you need these days - just add your own TomTom

Anyone in their right mind would not replace a non blowing exhaust with a chav jobbie, changin the cams/gas flowing etc all on a car that isnt coked up totally nuts. Kids these days seem to have more £ than sense.

If you want a fast car buy a fast car in the first place.