Discussion
I really like these. I've never bought a new car before, but am seriously considering ordering one. Apparently, there is a year's wait for delivery, which I don't particularly mind as we will have a house sale and purchase in that time (I hope, what a nightmare that is proving). What sort of deposit is required to place an order?
rb5er said:
Driver101 said:
rb5er said:
Not fast enough standard?
The performance they produce is miles off what you would expect for 350bhp.I was suprised how honest a Cupra 290 can keep a focus RS. A couple of tenths slower to 130mph. Alot of mk2 RS foci didn't make their stated power. They do seem a bit 'slow' for 350.
rb5er said:
Driver101 said:
rb5er said:
Not fast enough standard?
The performance they produce is miles off what you would expect for 350bhp.I remember how far short the RS MK2 fell short of the claimed 163mph top speed. I take Ford's claims with a pinch of salt.
This MK3 only manages an indicated 150mph on the speedo and they normally exaggerate. https://youtu.be/fkbLxi2ACF0
They are fast cars, just not 350bhp fast.
I have driven one and seen them racing at Santa Pod as well as on YouTube videos. I'm yet to see a slow one. Yes a lighter car with dsg and "only" 300bhp can keep up. No surprise to me at all. I have seen them doing 1/4miles at Santa Pod of anything from 12.5seconds to 14.5seconds which I think is pretty quick personally although obviously not supercar performance.
Also all the dyno figures for the mk3 seem to backup the manufacturer claims.
Also all the dyno figures for the mk3 seem to backup the manufacturer claims.
rb5er said:
I have driven one and seen them racing at Santa Pod as well as on YouTube videos. I'm yet to see a slow one. Yes a lighter car with dsg and "only" 300bhp can keep up. No surprise to me at all. I have seen them doing 1/4miles at Santa Pod of anything from 12.5seconds to 14.5seconds which I think is pretty quick personally although obviously not supercar performance.
Also all the dyno figures for the mk3 seem to backup the manufacturer claims.
There's a few on Youtube recorded from Santa Pod only managing 97mph. That's slow and miles off where rival cars are. Even the tuned ones aren't producing good numbers for the power. Also all the dyno figures for the mk3 seem to backup the manufacturer claims.
rb5er said:
I'm personally not surprised that a lighter car with only 45bhp less can pretty much keep up in a straight line especially one with an auto gearbox.
Surprised anyone would think there would be a gulf between them perhaps.
Just surprised at both road and track results the focus was least preferred and slowest. Don't get me back dont have a downer on the car or Fords(a white one at the dealers near Stewarts garden centre near Christchurch looked spanking) just not sure of its raison d'etre, if it can't win road tests for the road section. Old ones USP was thr five pot engine I suppose if you want a 4wd hatch.Surprised anyone would think there would be a gulf between them perhaps.
Driver101 said:
There's a few on Youtube recorded from Santa Pod only managing 97mph. That's slow and miles off where rival cars are. Even the tuned ones aren't producing good numbers for the power.
Poorly driven/missed gearshifts? I'm sure there are some of those for every car you can think of. All the ones I have seen at Santa Pod (been there 4 times this year) have been between 12.5 and 14.8seconds.Anyway is 100mph in 13 or 14 seconds bad?
RemyMartin said:
rb5er said:
I'm personally not surprised that a lighter car with only 45bhp less can pretty much keep up in a straight line especially one with an auto gearbox.
Surprised anyone would think there would be a gulf between them perhaps.
Just surprised at both road and track results the focus was least preferred and slowest. Don't get me back dont have a downer on the car or Fords(a white one at the dealers near Stewarts garden centre near Christchurch looked spanking) just not sure of its raison d'etre, if it can't win road tests for the road section. Old ones USP was thr five pot engine I suppose if you want a 4wd hatch.Surprised anyone would think there would be a gulf between them perhaps.
rb5er said:
Poorly driven/missed gearshifts? I'm sure there are some of those for every car you can think of. All the ones I have seen at Santa Pod (been there 4 times this year) have been between 12.5 and 14.8seconds.
Anyway is 100mph in 13 or 14 seconds bad?
It's not hard to drive in a straight line and change gear twice. Even a duff gear change doesn't actually impact your terminal speed by that much. Anyway is 100mph in 13 or 14 seconds bad?
100mph in 13-14 seconds isn't good for 4wd and 350bhp. Look how much faster the Audi RS3 is for example. Even a Golf R with a manual box is quicker.
Driver101 said:
It's not hard to drive in a straight line and change gear twice. Even a duff gear change doesn't actually impact your terminal speed by that much.
100mph in 13-14 seconds isn't good for 4wd and 350bhp. Look how much faster the Audi RS3 is for example. Even a Golf R with a manual box is quicker.
Imo a car that does 100mph or 1/4 of a mile a couple of tenths of a second slower than a Golf R or RS3 (both pretty quick in my book) does not make it a slow car but each to their own. Dynamically it's apples and oranges with the focus being much more fun in my opinion.100mph in 13-14 seconds isn't good for 4wd and 350bhp. Look how much faster the Audi RS3 is for example. Even a Golf R with a manual box is quicker.
Out of curiosity (as you say it's not good) which awd cars do you think are much faster with 345bhp or less? I'd say 2seconds quicker would be a fair bit faster. If you find some,let me know if they are more fun to drive and are the residuals any good......if so they sound quite desirable so I'm quite interested.
rb5er said:
Imo a car that does 100mph or 1/4 of a mile a couple of tenths of a second slower than a Golf R or RS3 (both pretty quick in my book) does not make it a slow car but each to their own. Dynamically it's apples and oranges with the focus being much more fun in my opinion.
Out of curiosity (as you say it's not good) which awd cars do you think are much faster with 345bhp or less? I'd say 2seconds quicker would be a fair bit faster. If you find some,let me know if they are more fun to drive and are the residuals any good......if so they sound quite desirable so I'm quite interested.
Stock v. Stock there's much more than a couple of tenths in it. The fastest tuned RS I have seen is still slower than a stock RS3. 1 second down a drag strip is a huge margin in 12-13 second cars.Out of curiosity (as you say it's not good) which awd cars do you think are much faster with 345bhp or less? I'd say 2seconds quicker would be a fair bit faster. If you find some,let me know if they are more fun to drive and are the residuals any good......if so they sound quite desirable so I'm quite interested.
The original question you asked was if the car was "not fast enough standard?" Residual values and fun wasn't the question asked. Both are very strong on the Focus, but that's a different argument.
If the question about speed matters, it won't beat any of the current breed of hot hatches with near 300bhp on the move. The mega hatches are miles faster.
My original opinion is the car isn't anywhere near as fast as the 350bhp power suggests. That's all my point is. There's plenty of evidence out there to back that up. I'll leave it at this as I didn't want to get into a long argument about it.
I'm not sure what you mean by "miles faster" and which are these "mega hatches"? I'd say within 10% is in the same ballpark personally and 1 second over 13 makes little difference to me.
I wasn't asking about performance figures I was asking about a guy that owns one and how it actually feels performance wise. I have seen plenty at Santa pod to know the 1/4miles they run. I heard they loosen up considerably with a few miles on them and am interested in how they feel then.
I wasn't asking about performance figures I was asking about a guy that owns one and how it actually feels performance wise. I have seen plenty at Santa pod to know the 1/4miles they run. I heard they loosen up considerably with a few miles on them and am interested in how they feel then.
Stevenr said:
Wasn't sure on these for a start but they're much better looking in the flesh.
Went in to our local dealer to have a look at their demo a few weeks ago,had my mk1 RS and the salesman didn't have a clue what it was.
Quite disappointing at the same time though,it's only 13 years old.
The Mk1 is a gorgeous/stunning/magnificent car! For anybody who doesn't know what it is; I don't need that sort of negativity in my life! Although I have to say, I'm not the impressed with the knowledge my dealer has about the RS. Pretty much winging it. Went in to our local dealer to have a look at their demo a few weeks ago,had my mk1 RS and the salesman didn't have a clue what it was.
Quite disappointing at the same time though,it's only 13 years old.
Mark83 said:
rb5er said:
I heard they loosen up considerably with a few miles on them and am interested in how they feel then.
I was a little underwhelmed at first and it didn't want to rev. It felt better after 1000 miles, now on 3000 miles it feels how it should.Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff