RE: Focus RS: More Details
Thursday 29th January 2009
Ford has released more tantalising details of the forthcoming Focus RS, and the headline figures are looking mighty impressive.
Focus RS: More Details
Stats suggest RS to be very... er... focussed?
Set to be one of the fastest - if not the fastest - production hatchbacks ever, the new RS will have a top speed of 163mph, and will climb 0-62mph in just 5.9 seconds, which easily eclipses the manic Sierra RS500 of the 1980s.
But perhaps the most impressive stats are in the midrange, where the RS thrusts from 30 - 60mph in just 5.3 seconds in fourth gear.
This comes in-part thanks to the RS's Borg Warner K16 turbocharger, designed to minimise lag and keep the maximum 324lb ft of torque accessible all the way from 2300 to 4500 rpm, and keeping above 240lb ft all the way up to its 6500rpm red line.
Interestingly, Ford has revealed that the R&D group that created the RS had only set out to fine-tune the current ST, but discovered that the Focus chassis had the potential to cope with more power, and the RS was the eventual result.
Judging by these exotica-bothering stats, we're glad they kept on going.
Discussion
Does anyone else think this is very over priced? At £25k plus options its atleast £3/4k too much imo. Big fan of the ST and last RS but this is way too much money.
RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
LeeThePeople said:
Does anyone else think this is very over priced? At £25k plus options its atleast £3/4k too much imo. Big fan of the ST and last RS but this is way too much money.
RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
did he really tell you thats how they fitted the engine? did you really believe it?RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
anyway this car will be faster than the daddy rs500 that was built with only performance in mind, quite an achievment for a fully laden road car i think.
and if it is £3-4k more expensive than it should be how much do you think they should be charging for a brand new st?
"0-62mph in just 5.9 seconds, which easily eclipses the manic Sierra RS500 of the 1980s.
But perhaps the most impressive stats are in the midrange, where the RS thrusts from 30 - 60mph in just 5.3 seconds in fourth gear."
So does that do 0-30 in < 0.6 seconds? I wonder how good it is at cornering
But perhaps the most impressive stats are in the midrange, where the RS thrusts from 30 - 60mph in just 5.3 seconds in fourth gear."
So does that do 0-30 in < 0.6 seconds? I wonder how good it is at cornering
"0-62mph in just 5.9 seconds, which easily eclipses the manic Sierra RS500 of the 1980s."
Pushing the point a bit with "easily eclipses" RS500 is what 6.2 seconds??
0.3 of a second is not exactly a country mile.
Excuse the cynic in me but doesn't this marketing have the slightest hint of desparation in it's voice?
I'll run for cover.
Pushing the point a bit with "easily eclipses" RS500 is what 6.2 seconds??
0.3 of a second is not exactly a country mile.
Excuse the cynic in me but doesn't this marketing have the slightest hint of desparation in it's voice?
I'll run for cover.
rsstman said:
anyway this car will be faster than the daddy rs500 that was built with only performance in mind, quite an achievment for a fully laden road car i think.
A car which was built 21 years ago.. And lets remember that the road going RS500 only existed for homologation purposes and in standard form wasn't very good. It had a 2nd row of injectors which weren't switched on, only produced about 20bhp over the standard 'Cossie' (in standard trim) and had a bigger turbo to suit its power potential which meant more lag.My neighbour had one. Did look rather smashing.
rsstman said:
LeeThePeople said:
Does anyone else think this is very over priced? At £25k plus options its atleast £3/4k too much imo. Big fan of the ST and last RS but this is way too much money.
RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
did he really tell you thats how they fitted the engine? did you really believe it?RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
anyway this car will be faster than the daddy rs500 that was built with only performance in mind, quite an achievment for a fully laden road car i think.
and if it is £3-4k more expensive than it should be how much do you think they should be charging for a brand new st?
God.
rsstman said:
LeeThePeople said:
Does anyone else think this is very over priced? At £25k plus options its atleast £3/4k too much imo. Big fan of the ST and last RS but this is way too much money.
RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
did he really tell you thats how they fitted the engine? did you really believe it?RS500 is the daddy, totally different car. It was made with only performance in mind, my mums neighbours dad was part of the team that hand built the original RS500 and he stood on the car, hitting the engine in with a sledge hammer to make it fit - you just dont get that sort of hands on approach anymore.
anyway this car will be faster than the daddy rs500 that was built with only performance in mind, quite an achievment for a fully laden road car i think.
and if it is £3-4k more expensive than it should be how much do you think they should be charging for a brand new st?
Not sure how they should price the ST but £25k for a focus is too much imo, dont care if it comes in exclusive colours not available on other focus or that its faster than a 3 door. Its still too much imo.
PhilJames said:
"0-62mph in just 5.9 seconds, which easily eclipses the manic Sierra RS500 of the 1980s.
But perhaps the most impressive stats are in the midrange, where the RS thrusts from 30 - 60mph in just 5.3 seconds in fourth gear."
So does that do 0-30 in < 0.6 seconds? I wonder how good it is at cornering
0-60 in 5.9 is using optimum gears. The 30-60 time is in 4th only.But perhaps the most impressive stats are in the midrange, where the RS thrusts from 30 - 60mph in just 5.3 seconds in fourth gear."
So does that do 0-30 in < 0.6 seconds? I wonder how good it is at cornering
btdk5 said:
Why would you be in 4th if you were doing 30???
strange stat.
Very worrying. All you should need to know is how quickly it can do it in its best gear and whether it *can* do it in top gear for everyday flexibility.strange stat.
It's very diesel'esk to start quoting performance figures for a random gear that happens to match its torque characterists.
btdk5 said:
Why would you be in 4th if you were doing 30???
strange stat.
i go into 4th doing 30mph in my car, thats pulling not very many revs i give you that. perhaps 1600-1700rpm or so, it's certainly drivable at that rpm though, but certainly not in 5th gear. what gear would you be in...3rd? strange stat.
i don't think it's a useless stat; although generally if your in hurry you won't be in 4th...
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff