# The new Focus RS up close - what do we all think?



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

I'm personally not sure...

Firstly we all know that Ford are in financial limbo, hence the lack of 4WD, but no menage of electronic trickery is going to keep those front wheels from spinning! Secondly, I love the 'Rally Slag' look to an extent, but I think perhaps it's a little OTT for everyday road use? The front bumper looks very 'aftermarket' IMO! :?


----------



## thebears (Jan 14, 2006)

The whole car looks aftermarket, it is a ford and designed for Chavin! :wink:


----------



## J55TTC (Apr 25, 2005)

I saw this before you posted it and thought the green looked terrible!

I think in some stealthy colours like white, silver or black it would look really nice. I know its a ford and the build quality wont be fantastic but once its taken its depreciation hit it could make for an interesting buy.


----------



## senwar (Apr 21, 2003)

In a word, rank.

Just don't like it


----------



## M T Pickering (Aug 11, 2004)

Blue Oval :?

Shove it off a cliff :lol:


----------



## ResB (Apr 17, 2005)

thebears said:


> The whole car looks aftermarket, it is a ford and designed for Chavin! :wink:


absolutely, my thoughts exactly. [smiley=thumbsup.gif] It's all chav'd up and ready to go.


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

It's all very obvious. Ford know their customers. :wink:

I am sure it will be great on track - for a fwd hatch.

I'd be embarrassed to be seen in one though.


----------



## qooqiiu (Oct 12, 2007)

I caught a brief glimpse of one going around the track in Basildon the other day. I like it!

But then i would wouldn't i.


----------



## drjam (Apr 7, 2006)

It's hideous.


----------



## ADB (May 7, 2002)

Just short of 300bhp through the front wheels - erm great idea :roll:


----------



## der_horst (Apr 29, 2006)

fugly boyracer for people who don't want to pimp their compact car themselves


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

300 ponies through the front wheels is just crazy, even 200 is too much.

Don't mind the looks so much though. The chavs are going to love it.


----------



## stephengreen (May 6, 2002)

Seems the original question has prompted answers reflecting the looks of the car its self and ford products in general.
I think it looks fantastic. If it goes as well as Autocar are suggesting (as quick as an 911c2 around the ring) then it's going to be a performance bargain. For a car that's fast enough to thrill but cheap enough to not worry over much where its parked it can make a lot of sense as a second fun car. In my opinion, as an example of a car fulfilling the criteria it was designed for, it's ticked all the boxes so far.


----------



## stephengreen (May 6, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> 300 ponies through the front wheels is just crazy, even 200 is too much.


I reckon you should have given Ford a ring six months ago, your expert opinion would have saved them a lot of development money :lol: 
Since when did technology advances in engineering stop? With your version of logic we wouldnt have progressed beyond the saab 900 turbo! :roll:


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

There is a write up in this months Auto Express testing the New Focus RS against the old Escort RS cosworth


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

stephengreen said:


> Wondermikie said:
> 
> 
> > 300 ponies through the front wheels is just crazy, even 200 is too much.
> ...


To be honest SG I kinda agree with him to an extent. IMO I think the absolute *max* is around 220-230bhp. My MCS is pushing out a smidgen under 200 horses and I have the LSD fitted whcih I specced from new - if it's damp and I have it in 'sport' mode the LSD _just_ about copes in keeping the power down (a very disconcerting feeling when you aren't used to LSD, I tell thee!), but it is a struggle and will spin like buggery if I press to hard on the loud pedal. Even in the dry it can sometimes be a tricky little blighter with the combination of 'sport' and a the free revving engine, so god only knows what 300 horses would be like in that Focus. Yes technology has moved on, but I can't believe for one minute all those 300 quoted horses are 'usable'?!?


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

stephengreen said:


> Wondermikie said:
> 
> 
> > 300 ponies through the front wheels is just crazy, even 200 is too much.
> ...











Are you being serious :? How many performance road cars have 300bhp going through the front wheels?

When I floor it, I prefer to go forwards, not torque-steering into the nearest hedge. No differential or technology can change the laws of physics.


----------



## stephengreen (May 6, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> stephengreen said:
> 
> 
> > Wondermikie said:
> ...


 But thats my point really. How many fwd cars in the early nineties had more than 150bhp? I'm old enough to remember people like yourself and mags of the time saying 150 was the max. A little later it was 200bhp then when the likes of the alfa 147 gta was released the ceiling was 250bhp. See a pattern emerging here?


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Nah the GTA was never the last word in handling finesse, I don't recall it re-writing the rule book on FWD handling. IIRC, round the Topgear track it wheel-spinned and understeered it's way round like a four-poster bed. There have been plenty cars with well over 200 ponies and FWD, but it doesn't mean they're any good.

I'm not knocking the RS, I did say earlier that I liked the look of it, but there's only one reason why Ford never engineered it for 4WD - cash.


----------



## stephengreen (May 6, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> Nah the GTA was never the last word in handling finesse, I don't recall it re-writing the rule book on FWD handling. IIRC, round the Topgear track it wheel-spinned and understeered it's way round like a four-poster bed. There have been plenty cars with well over 200 ponies and FWD, but it doesn't mean they're any good.
> 
> I'm not knocking the RS, I did say earlier that I liked the look of it, but there's only one reason why Ford never engineered it for 4WD - cash.


 Its difficult to debate with someone who keeps changing the topic. We are not talking handling. Understeer is a completely different subject to torque steer. Since you mention 4wd, I'm of the opinion that its advantages in road driving is questionable at best. It has a small benefit out of bends more in the wet but carries a weight penalty and ends up making the car handle like a front driver anyway.


----------



## ADB (May 7, 2002)

stephengreen said:


> ....then when the likes of the alfa 147 gta was released the ceiling was 250bhp. See a pattern emerging here?


Not really, no. Manufacturers constantly produce models that are faster and more powerful than the models they are replacing. Improvements happen it is inevitable, however the laws of physics remain and I think Saab did hit it at 200Bhp, anything more and it's just pushing your luck.

Not wanting to be stereotypical here but can you imagine the 'average' Focus RS buyer - and their life expectancy in this atrocity? We'll be peeling them off the walls on every corner.

All IMO obviously....

Andy


----------



## stephengreen (May 6, 2002)

kmpowell said:


> stephengreen said:
> 
> 
> > Wondermikie said:
> ...


 I don't doubt what you say for a moment but I'll refer you to my reply to wondermike somewhere above. Technology has moved on from when the mini's transmission was conceived. According to Jost Capito they have solved the problem by a revo knuckle solution whatever that is. I dont know if that's true or not. But based on historical advances already mentioned together with doubting that he would lie when a simple test drive would expose him as a liar, i'm inclined to think its hello to the next level.


----------



## Wondermikie (Apr 14, 2006)

Have a read through some of the posts made in the MK2 forum by Arne. He was one of the biggest defenders of the 2.0T for months, yet what has he just done - chopped it in for a TTS, citing a lack of traction in his chipped 2.0T as one of the main reasons.

It's pointless getting into a big debate with you because you will always believe in what car you drive now, so I will bow out gracefully


----------



## stephengreen (May 6, 2002)

Wondermikie said:


> Have a read through some of the posts made in the MK2 forum by Arne. He was one of the biggest defenders of the 2.0T for months, yet what has he just done - chopped it in for a TTS, citing a lack of traction in his chipped 2.0T as one of the main reasons.
> 
> It's pointless getting into a big debate with you because you will always believe in what car you drive now, so I will bow out gracefully


 But did it torque steer? Again lack of traction doesnt define torque steer. You can get a spinning wheel because of to much power being applied in any powerful car regardless of it being front or rear wheel drive. In the early days of powerful fwd, torque steer was experienced under hard accleration, and not so much if a wheel was spinning. Nowadays it seems to afflict LSD equipped cars in particular.


----------



## drjam (Apr 7, 2006)

On the "can't have 300bhp through the front wheels" debate, surely this depends when/how this bhp is delivered? 
e.g. If it's all at the top of a high rev range, then why shouldn't it be put down if it comes in progressively when the car's already on the move?
The "getting off the line" debate and torque-steer issue is surely - clue in the name - about low-down _torque _not bhp?
Perfectly possible to have a revvy engine that develops high bhp at big revs but is low on torque low down when starting off.
No idea if that is or isn't how the Focus will get round the issue (probably not - after all the trend these days seems to be that people like lots of low-down grunt), just making the point that you can't just pick a bhp figure and say it's impossible to put it onto the road through two-wheels.

Anyway, irrelevant really - it still looks hideous


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

drjam said:


> On the "can't have 300bhp through the front wheels" debate, surely this depends when/how this bhp is delivered?
> e.g. If it's all at the top of a high rev range, then why shouldn't it be put down if it comes in progressively when the car's already on the move?
> The "getting off the line" debate and torque-steer issue is surely - clue in the name - about low-down _torque _not bhp?
> Perfectly possible to have a revvy engine that develops high bhp at big revs but is low on torque low down when starting off.
> ...


Absolutely on the money there drjam.

The 300hp engine neednt produce that much more torque (and it is torque not power that affect fwd steering under power) than the 225 engine already does in the ST Focus, and not too many people are whining about torque steer in current model. Ford may do as they did in last FRS, and limit torque in first two gears, then raise boost in upper gears. The first car with FWD launch control, would not be a surprise with the new FRS

Technology (equal length driveshafts, clever diffs, electronics systems, tyre technology) has progressed. I remember GTi engineering emphatically stating that 150hp n/aspirated power was max for fwd. And we passed 200, 250, now 300. Standing starts are alaways a challenge for fwd.

I passed a mki 1FRS just now, and it still looks neat and low key - unlike its bloated OTT new brother. But i am sure that the car will deliver the goods (doubtful about trouncing Stuttgart at the Ring) and sell well to a certain type of customer who may otherwise buy a subaru or mitsubishi.

But of course we all know that rwd delievers more driver satisfaction. :wink:


----------



## BAMTT (Feb 22, 2004)

garyc said:


> Technology (equal length driveshafts, clever diffs, electronics systems, tyre technology) has progressed. I remember GTi engineering emphatically stating that 150hp n/aspirated power was max for fwd. And we passed 200, 250, now 300. Standing starts are alaways a challenge for fwd.
> 
> I passed a mki 1FRS just now, and it still looks neat and low key - unlike its bloated OTT new brother. But i am sure that the car will deliver the goods (doubtful about trouncing Stuttgart at the Ring) and sell well to a certain type of customer who may otherwise buy a subaru or mitsubishi.
> 
> But of course we all know that rwd delievers more driver satisfaction. :wink:


Although the pug weighed about as much as yer nan !!

Most of the Subaru guys would flock to it if was 4WD


----------



## starski4578 (Aug 24, 2007)

I never would have entertained the idea of buying a ford let alone a new one but i must admit when i heard there was a strong chance of the new RS being 300bhp standard and 4 wheel drive, i must admit i considered it, mainly beacause my brother in law works as a car sales man for ford and could have got me a very good price.

Now ive seen the fugly thing in all its chavtastic glory and found out all that power will be running through the front wheels  I've decided to give it a wide birth. If only he worked for VW or Audi :?


----------



## Matt B (Apr 8, 2007)

I love it, and wots not to love.
I bet its really great to drive and I love the green, but then again I love the bright orange ST's as well.

You can already get an ST with a wolf conversion that will pack more punch though so I would expect the loony tuners to get onto this soon.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Stunning, just not in that colour.

Ford have all but eliminated wheel spin and torque steer using LSD and something called revo-knuckle.
Ford Europe are making shed loads of money, think some are confused with Ford US.

I'd rather have a good car than a bad car with a 'perceived' better Audi or VW badge slapped on either end of the car.


----------



## anty1985 (Oct 5, 2007)

having driven the old RS 215bhp was enough to give torque-steering to the level that it put me off! Good nows how 300bhp will work! :? Styling leave alot to be desired aswell! :x


----------



## kmpowell (May 6, 2002)

Toshiba said:


> Ford have all but eliminated wheel spin and torque steer using LSD and something called revo-knuckle.


I look forward to seeing this being demonstrated, 'cos IMO there isn't a cat in hells chance of of them 'all but eliminating' the wheel spin.

:?


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Cracks me up, people complain about the styling - but the whole of the MKI forum seems to be devoted to how to chav up your car and stick or bolt on as much as possible. MKII forum - how can i retro fit the twin pipes or TTS headlights :lol:

200bhp max for FWD - try the MKII forum!


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

Of course Ford could have made it 4wd had they really wanted. The same platform already provides AWD to the V50 T5 AWD.


----------



## GARYMENACE (Jul 8, 2007)

Really dont like the colour but would like to see the car in black or white, styling is a little ott for me though. 
300bhp!!!! Found On Road Dead!


----------



## R5T (Apr 24, 2008)

I think Ford have sattled for FWD because it's not possible to fit a transverse inline 5 with 4WD in the Focus body.

Hans.


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

I got REALLY up close & personal with a test mule RS that a friend of mine working for Team RS had this weekend. My opinions?

Looks: It looks aggressive in the metal, even though the test mule had a lot of holes in the body panels as it had been running with plastic disguise panels screwed to the body work until the official pictures came out. It is very "boy racer" but so is the ST and this one had to be more to catch the attention.

Sound: Sounds impressive. That engine sounds really good at full throttle.

Handling: Very good for a FWD hatchback. It has a limited slip-diff in the front, so torque steer is not a problem. It will spin wheels but not any more than my 2.0T FSI TT used to. Handling is far more focused.

Cabin: Lots of things in the cabin weren't production grade materials, so it's difficult to tell about quality. Fit and finish out of question as many of the panels were hanging with cables and wires coming from behind to connect all the diagnostics equipment that the car had fitted, but it does look quite good.

All in all I was impressed. The chassis has been pushed to what I believe is its limit and it performs very well. All Focus, even the lower models handle very well and this car will not be an exception.

Lack of 4WD? You could say so (and the guy that lent me the test-mule agrees that he would like to see 4WD fitted), but the car still does well with the LSD in the front. He said that the 4WD was removed to cut costs, but they had 4WD test mules up to early this year.

Also it is not after the coupe buyer that looks for elegant, stylish design: it's after the hot-hatch guys that want big spoilers, massive wheels and loud exhaust. It does a great job in that department.

BTW, also had a drive in a test-mule new Fiesta. Very nice car, even though the guy was sitting by my side constantly disabling cylinders and/or introducing engine misfiring to show me how they can control the whole car from their ECU programming.


----------



## Toshiba (Jul 8, 2004)

Are these the development cars they have in hounslow, you've been playing with?


----------



## tehdarkstar (Jul 24, 2006)

Toshiba said:


> Are these the development cars they have in hounslow, you've been playing with?


It may be. The guy had them (the ST and the Fiesta) at his home in North London and as he wanted to have a play with some diagnostics tools we're developing for my car he called me to go to his place.


----------

