# First inside look of the new Focus RS



## Soul boy 68

Check out this video of the first inside look at the Focus RS, not to sure about the exhaust note, the jury is still out on it. What are your first impressions?


----------



## MDC250

Meh, not the nicest of colours and the interior doesn't float my boat. Only thing I like so far are the stats.


----------



## Daffy

Like all recent RS fords will drive superbly but looks like a teenage wet dream that sucked up the accessory bin at Halfords. So will probably sell well


----------



## turbosnoop

Loved the mk1 focus rs , struggled to get excited about any other foci since. Its as if the marketing team, bored of cmax's and the like, have spent too long on them. Big spoilers, chavvy wheels, lairy paintjobs, drift button! 
I prefer the Motorsport approach that the mk1 focus rs had, you wouldn't see ford putting parking sensors on one of those in the factory!


----------



## SteveTDCi

I don't care, it's a ford and it's an rs and that's enough for me.


----------



## PugIain

Undoubtedly fast, but the interior is as dull as Stoke on Trent on a wet thursday and it sounds a bit dreary too.


----------



## davies20

Really never ever ever been a Ford fan....

However, these new Fords are really getting my attention, this RS looks superb!


----------



## Soul boy 68

^^^ My thoughts were that the interior doesn't say £29,995.


----------



## Andyg_TSi

Mk1 Focus RS was the car Ford needed after the iconic Sierra and Escort RS Cosworths.

This latest one is trying far too hard. As has already been mentioned, it looks like the designers have read far too many Max Power magazines from the 90's/00's and took inspiration of what was 'cool'.
I just wonder if that stems from trying to impress the American market, as this will be sold all over the world.
If this was for the European market/UK market, it would surely have been more subtly styled.

It's a shame Ford won't do anything with the current Mondeo......A 350 - 400bhp 4x4 Mondeo RS to hark back to the Sierra Sapphire 4x4 would be awesome!


----------



## Dazzel81

Was thinking the interior would be a bit more special than that (reminds me of being in the GF's diesel :wall seats look good but surprised no fake carbon fibre affect in there but does look the nuts from the outside :driver:


----------



## andy665

Sounds as good as you can make a 4 pot, like it more than I thought I would


----------



## Caledoniandream

It's a Ford, so what is not to like?
I am not to keen on the colour, but I think it's a lot of car for the money.
All the toys are there, like the seats.
It's not practical enough for me, and it's a shame they don't do anything in diesel like this.
Like the sound, is a bit like the old racing cars ( when racing cars where tuned by real people and not computers) 
10/10 for me!


----------



## RisingPower

It just sounds like a boring small turbo'd engine. Dull as.

God only knows what is rs about it.

Didn't the previous one only have 3drs and not ugly as f 5?


----------



## RisingPower

How can you go from a 5 pot like this to that boringness.


----------



## andyedge

The new RS looks great, but what about the classic Fords also shown in that video :doublesho
Pity that they don't reveal exactly where that 'top secret' location is unlike Top Gear used to do 
I'd love to see all the classic Fords :argie:

Anyone know where that lockup is?


----------



## scoobyboy1

andyedge said:


> The new RS looks great, but what about the classic Fords also shown in that video :doublesho
> Pity that they don't reveal exactly where that 'top secret' location is unlike Top Gear used to do
> I'd love to see all the classic Fords :argie:
> 
> Anyone know where that lockup is?


Dagenham Ford plant!!:thumb:
https://www.carthrottle.com/post/fords-heritage-collection-is-a-treasure-trove-of-petrolhead-porn/


----------



## scoobyboy1

Dream job working there!! working with the rarest Ford RS cars in history!!!

If Carlsberg did jobs, this would be the best job in the world!!!


----------



## Rowan83

Something about Fords am just not keen on, the seats look good though.


----------



## Willows-dad

Sounds rubbish, too zingy. And I hate the manga catfish front end. Seats look nice though. What really kills it for me is the fact that it's only a 5 door and the body styling from the bumper back is just too conservative. The stats are impressive, but I did read a rumour that they've really had to squeeze the power out of the lump which doesn't bode well for ford enthusiasts that like to tune their engines.


----------



## Brian1612

Stats are impressive but everything else isn't. Curious to know what is actually standard kit also as I wouldn't be surprised if the seats are an optional extra. To spec one of those up properly your looking at 35-37k for a ford. A lot of money for a car that really lacks a lot when looking at it. As an engineering piece and value though it has to be praised, no doubt this will be a beast but it doesn't look good enough for me to buy one.


----------



## possul

If that is a Halfords special with its lairy black wheels (like every other manufacturer) and it's chavvy looks with its drift button (which can let you have some fun in it) 
Then I've been looking at cars all wrong.
Nothing wrong with that what so ever. Doesn't look 29k inside, what does that mean, not vag enough


----------



## SteveTDCi

The recaro shell seats are a £1145 option, the blue paint is £745 and the gloss black wheels £545, nav is £460. I'd have a base car in grey with painted calipers £100, nav, £460 and recaros £1145. So just over 32k.


----------



## alan hanson

pretty much yeah except the seats my golfs interior is way better than that, i quite like the styling wheels not keen on but overall its a decent motor. Has been said though to get what's standard on other hot hatches will no doubt be a massive increase in price. ford fans will love it and it will do well, though i doubt it will become a collector due to the number of manufacturers bringing hot hatches out


----------



## RisingPower

possul said:


> If that is a Halfords special with its lairy black wheels (like every other manufacturer) and it's chavvy looks with its drift button (which can let you have some fun in it)
> Then I've been looking at cars all wrong.
> Nothing wrong with that what so ever. Doesn't look 29k inside, what does that mean, not vag enough


How do you drift a fwd car?


----------



## Delboy_Trotter

See im going to stick my neck out and say i like it

For me styling wise this harks back to the Mk1 FRS, the Mk2 looked like it should have had an asbo, where as this has the right level of mean looks, take away the spoiler and it looks like any Focus - and I like that, but thats what floats my boat, i like cars that are understated but go like the brown stuff off the proverbial shovel

Internally its a Focus - but it does what it says on the time without shouting about it

For me it looks on paper and what i have seen an awesome car, ill reserve final judgement till I see one in the flesh though

The million dollar question is would i own one - which at the moment is yes, but.....i'll propbaly never be able to afford one (and i can't afford a VAG either!)


----------



## possul

RisingPower said:


> How do you drift a fwd car?


It's not fwd


----------



## alan hanson

Delboy_Trotter said:


> See im going to stick my neck out and say i like it
> 
> For me styling wise this harks back to the Mk1 FRS, the Mk2 looked like it should have had an asbo, where as this has the right level of mean looks, take away the spoiler and it looks like any Focus - and I like that, but thats what floats my boat, i like cars that are understated but go like the brown stuff off the proverbial shovel
> 
> Internally its a Focus - but it does what it says on the time without shouting about it
> 
> For me it looks on paper and what i have seen an awesome car, ill reserve final judgement till I see one in the flesh though
> 
> The million dollar question is would i own one - which at the moment is yes, but.....i'll propbaly never be able to afford one (and i can't afford a VAG either!)


think thats one issue once specced out price wise you have to start considering what else is out there, plus its a shame but you know in a year or two there going to be flying around driven by chavs racing everything that moves (there will be exceptions)


----------



## great gonzo

I wouldn't drive it 











Steering wheel is on the wrong bloody side!! 

Gonz.


----------



## justina3

think the noise suits the rest of the styling sure it will be a hit for Ford, maybe 15 years ago for me but these days give me a stock 911

Very impressive engine figures though, just shame the days of using it are long long gone


----------



## Alex_225

It looks ok, but I'd say ok is as good as I see it. 

It's like all hot hatches, a modified version of a normal car. The interior on the current Focus is nicely put together and looks decent enough so whack in some gauges and sporty seats and it'll be pretty good. A hot hatch interior will never quite match up to the likes of an M car or AMG for example but then it's not the same cost as one either. 

For me the biggest problem with the new RS is the looks of the car it's based on. I really don't like the way the current Focus looks overall. The shape makes it look oafish and ungainly. They drive brilliantly, even in non-sporty guise but they don't look all that. The first Focus RS looked great, the second suited the almost WRC looks but this one doesn't float my boat even in a nice colour. 

When you look at the current Astra VXR, which is a genuinely great looking motor this doesn't compare looks wise.


----------



## SBM

Jeez the same BHP as my V8 S4!!! my V8 does sound soooo much nicer but this is incredible performance for the money.. Love the colour :thumb:

Thanks SB for this :thumb:


----------



## Simz

Still waiting for a RWD RS, you remember don't you? Yeah that's right the proper RS built by AVO........


----------



## SteveTDCi

I think it will hold its money pretty well, the mk1 and mk2 both have strong prices. Yes you could strip some of the bits back and it's a focus but the same can be said of any hot hatch, although there is more bespoke bodywork on the focus than the car it's based on. Ford have thrown money at the bits that matter, the mechanical bits and it is recognisable from a 1.5tdci where as I find most vag products look very similar inside and out. The same can be said for BMW too the m4 we have at the minute does look similar to a 420d side on.

The focus runs the 4wd system from the Kuga with a few tweeks


----------



## robertdon777

I'd keep the standard wheels over the optional ones in the Video.

Don't think I'd spec the seats either as the standard ones are very very good.

I'd powder coat the standard multispokes in gunmetal and it in either White or Black.

£30K max for a 350bhp 4WD Hot Hatch...whats not to like?...oh and its 5drs which is ideal for me.


----------



## Kriminal

Looks a bundle of fun. 

Not sure if those seats will do any good for my piles


----------



## 182_Blue

If they gave it a good Dual clutch auto i would be tempted, or would i ?, i am torn between sanity and .....


----------



## fot0

I would delete the drift option. 350bhp from a 2.3 is impressive though on a road car.


----------



## robertdon777

182_Blue said:


> If they gave it a good Dual clutch auto i would be tempted, or would i ?, i am torn between sanity and .....


Probably touch cloth when in drift mode.


----------



## Alex_225

I must admit that 'drift mode' made me raise a grown up eyebrow.

Maybe because I've never seen the fascination with it!


----------



## RisingPower

possul said:


> It's not fwd


Ahh I see :thumb: Still, a focus.. drifting...


----------



## possul

What does that mean. No different than an evo drifting. Sends x amount of power to the rear wheels meaning more slip meaning it will drift, Powerslide or what ever.


----------



## RisingPower

possul said:


> What does that mean. No different than an evo drifting. Sends x amount of power to the rear wheels meaning more slip meaning it will drift, Powerslide or what ever.


It means the idea of a focus drifting doesn't compute. For me.


----------



## robertdon777

RisingPower said:


> It means the idea of a focus drifting doesn't compute. For me.


Can you not imagine popping to Tesco and drifting all the way back, shopping flying every where, kids screaming.... Other road users giving hand gesture's..... But drifting is the in thing lol.


----------



## Alex_225

robertdon777 said:


> Can you not imagine popping to Tesco and drifting all the way back, shopping flying every where, kids screaming.... Other road users giving hand gesture's..... But drifting is the in thing lol.


Those hand gestures signalling how cool you are. People would ask for autographs, women would want to touch you etc

I suppose in a hatch of this sort drifting is kind of novel but you could go sideways in a diesel 3 series...


----------



## RisingPower

robertdon777 said:


> Can you not imagine popping to Tesco and drifting all the way back, shopping flying every where, kids screaming.... Other road users giving hand gesture's..... But drifting is the in thing lol.


I can imagine a focus doing a j turn, but drifting, no.

I'm still wondering how controllable it'd be too. Just the proportions... odd..


----------



## ffrs1444

RisingPower said:


> I can imagine a focus doing a j turn, but drifting, no.
> 
> I'm still wondering how controllable it'd be too. Just the proportions... odd..


You can do a J and Y turn in any car


----------



## Alex_225

RisingPower said:


> I'm still wondering how controllable it'd be too. Just the proportions... odd..


We'll find out when we start hearing about them stuffed into lamposts in carparks somewhere in Essex! :lol:


----------



## robertdon777

Alex_225 said:


> We'll find out when we start hearing about them stuffed into lamposts in carparks somewhere in Essex! :lol:


Can already see a new generation of Dump Valve buyers:car:


----------



## scoobyboy1

Alex_225 said:


> When you look at the current Astra VXR, which is a genuinely great looking motor this doesn't compare looks wise.


When you look at the price of the Focus RS with the Recaro seats/sat nav etc etc, id rather have the new 306bhp Civic Type R, I think the new Civic is a great looking car.


----------



## Alex_225

scoobyboy1 said:


> When you look at the price of the Focus RS with the Recaro seats/sat nav etc etc, id rather have the new 306bhp Civic Type R, I think the new Civic is a great looking car.


Totally agree with you, I'm not into Hondas as such but that Type-R certainly stands out.

Certainly prefer it to the RS. It will be interesting seeing how other brands respond to the RS though.

RenaultSport released the R26.R Megane to compete with the MKII RS so let's see what is released.


----------



## Chris92VAG

Does nothing for me really, can't believe people think this new one is lairy it's not at all. Are we looking at the same car? Looks crap, colour choices are boring I want red, green and yellow rs's!! Also where are my bonnet vents :doublesho 

Love the mk1 and 2 but the whole mk3 range is just terrible only the face lift st looks decent.


----------



## aligtwood

Must agree with the above post I think the styling is very subtle and subdued and the interior for me is a let down , I think they have missed a trick with the interior.

However in saying that it's a high powered all wheel drive RS so I am sure it will be a superb drive. The noise this 4 pot engine makes is perfect lots of pops and bangs.


----------



## robertdon777

This quite bland, but may attract more buyers because of that. Needs bonnet vents though as mentioned.


----------



## turbosnoop

The new focus RS is like a curry - you can make it hot hot hot ! 
But that alone doesn't make it a great curry


----------



## scoobyboy1

Alex_225 said:


> Totally agree with you, I'm not into Hondas as such but that Type-R certainly stands out.
> 
> Certainly prefer it to the RS. It will be interesting seeing how other brands respond to the RS though.
> 
> RenaultSport released the R26.R Megane to compete with the MKII RS so let's see what is released.


Its hard to compare FWD hatches to a 4wd hatch, but the new Focus RS is not as cheap as Ford advertise it, there doing what Audi/BMW are good at where the base car is an attractive price, but the options make it a expensive car, and when you start adding those sexy parts(Recaro/forged wheels/sat nav etc) it starts to get close to A45 AMG territory, and sorry but Id rather be driving a Mercedes then a Ford when im spending close to £40k on a car, no matter how fast it can go round a certain track in germany and its low 0-60mph times!!!


----------



## Alex_225

scoobyboy1 said:


> Its hard to compare FWD hatches to a 4wd hatch, but the new Focus RS is not as cheap as Ford advertise it, there doing what Audi/BMW are good at where the base car is an attractive price, but the options make it a expensive car, and when you start adding those sexy parts(Recaro/forged wheels/sat nav etc) it starts to get close to A45 AMG territory, and sorry but Id rather be driving a Mercedes then a Ford when im spending close to £40k on a car, no matter how fast it can go round a certain track in germany and its low 0-60mph times!!!


True but I guess I look at it that regardless of driven wheels, they are hot versions of the models they're based on. Albeit we've ended up with them being 4wd hyperhatches I guess.

Totally agree with you though I'd prefer an AMG over an RS Ford any day. Then again for £40k I'd take a lightly used M5 for equivalent for similar money.


----------



## SteveTDCi

Having driven the m5 I wouldn't I'd have an m4. But you would have to tick every single on the rs to get to 40k. It it will lose less money than the a45 to.


----------



## John74

Every option picked on the RS and it comes out to £34.5K last time I looked. Still a good bit lower than £40k for an A45 AMG and a huge amount lower once you add options.

I would love to own either car but sadly that's never likely.


----------



## 182_Blue

Still resisting ......


----------



## Soul boy 68

182_Blue said:


> Still resisting ......


Could you give up your R for the RS? Can you hold out? You really want one? Aw go on, you know you want too.


----------



## 182_Blue

Soul boy 68 said:


> Could you give up your R for the RS? Can you hold out? You really want one? Aw go on, you know you want too.


R is coming up to two years old, time for a change but i don't know with what, have looked at the 235i but i would struggle to own one especially with the M2 coming out, i am a tad stuck LOL, would be pretty tempted with a RS if it had DSG, but as i have feared in the past i reckon it would only last 6 months to a year like some of my other cars i didn't get on with.


----------



## Soul boy 68

182_Blue said:


> R is coming up to two years old, time for a change but i don't know with what, have looked at the 235i but i would struggle to own one especially with the M2 coming out, i am a tad stuck LOL, would be pretty tempted with a RS if it had DSG, but as i have feared in the past i reckon it would only last 6 months to a year like some of my other cars i didn't get on with.


I'll make that bit easier for you, I've put a deposit on the M2 with DCT, why not join me and do the same


----------



## muzzer

Soul boy 68 said:


> I'll make that bit easier for you, I've put a deposit on the M2 with DCT, why not join me and do the same


Get....out.....


----------



## 182_Blue

Soul boy 68 said:


> I'll make that bit easier for you, I've put a deposit on the M2 with DCT, why not join me and do the same


Do they do 4x4 yet :lol:


----------



## Soul boy 68

182_Blue said:


> Do they do 4x4 yet :lol:


I test drove the M235i and was sold, it was so much fun to drive when compared to my S1 so I am convinced the M version will be nuts. Anyway back on topic now for others to contribute to the OP.


----------



## Clarkey-88

I think it's a great car. Ford have taken it up into the 'Hyper Hatch' category, in which its main rivals are the Audi Rs3 and the A45 Amg. Yes it may lack the interior quality that you get from Audi and Mercedes, but you've got to remember that it is just a Ford Focus, and it's about 10k cheaper (base price) and I'd imagine a hell of a lot cheaper fully loaded compared to a fully loaded Rs3. In terms of performance I think it's definitely up there with the Rs3 and Amg. It might be a tad slower to 60 then the Rs3, but I bet it'll make up for it in the twistys, epecially with its all new 4wd system. I hear they are already talking about bringing out a special version of the Focus Rs with a 0-62 time of sub 4 seconds! That's super car territory... from a Ford Focus


----------



## Clarkey-88




----------



## robertdon777

Bloody good video that. Interesting to see them testing it against the Evo and STI as well as the usual German hatches.

For the money and for any car enthusiasts this looks like its going to be an epic car.


----------



## John74

Very interesting video for anyone thinking about getting the RS .


----------



## robertdon777

Good lease deals already.

£439 inc VAT with £1300 down.

8000 mileage allowance


----------



## Kerr

robertdon777 said:


> Good lease deals already.
> 
> £439 inc VAT with £1300 down.
> 
> 8000 mileage allowance


£22.5k to lease a £30k car is expensive in my book. The car will hold its value too well to consider losses that big.


----------



## 182_Blue

Kerr said:


> £22.5k to lease a £30k car is expensive in my book. The car will hold its value too well to consider losses that big.


Maybe just me but how do you get the 22.5k figure ?


----------



## Kerr

182_Blue said:


> Maybe just me but how do you get the 22.5k figure ?


439x48=21072 +1300=22372

The direct link to the quote is in the lease PCP thread. It's based on 4 years at 8000 miles.

http://www.jgleasing.co.uk/personal-lease-cars/ford/focus-rs-hatchback/23-ecoboost-5dr-52088535

Take £439 off as you only pay 47 instalments. So just under £22k. That's still expensive in my opinion.

Judging by previous Focus RSs, residual values should be very strong.


----------



## 182_Blue

Didn't see the link in your post (well i wouldn't because it wasn't there LOL) so just assumed 24 months lease.


----------



## Ben.

Why would anyone lease over 4 years?


----------



## Kerr

Ben. said:


> Why would anyone lease over 4 years?


Some people like to keep cars longer.

Also the longer you lease it, the smaller the monthly payments should be as depreciation has settled over a longer period.

If they want £439 per month over a 4 year lease, a 2 year lease will likely be very expensive.


----------



## Soul boy 68

IMO it's a kind of car you want to keep out right, not a radio rentals style lease, it's a performance version of a family car so it should be special, PCP could be more popular as it would give the person the chance to pay it off and keep the car.


----------



## robertdon777

Yeah looking at that you'd be better to finance yourself, like Kerr says its an RS so will hold its value better than any of the competition.


----------



## Soul boy 68

robertdon777 said:


> Yeah looking at that you'd be better to finance yourself, like Kerr says its an RS so will hold its value better than any of the competition.


Maybe I am wrong but if the market gets flooded with the new Focus RS all over the place and a common as muck sight then should it hold its value ?I mean the previous incarnations weren't a common sight to me, they were a once on a while sight for me, and by competition, what would they be? The usual German suspects, the Astra VXR? Would the Focus RS hold its value better than an M car or AMG or RS3, I am not so sure.


----------



## robertdon777

The RS brand always seems to hold value better than any other performance brand. It may lose money faster than the previous 2 but still not as much as say a BMW 135i, or S3.


----------



## Soul boy 68

robertdon777 said:


> The RS brand always seems to hold value better than any other performance brand. It may lose money faster than the previous 2 but still not as much as say a BMW 135i, or S3.


Oh, I thought the Focus RS was competing with a full blown M2, A45AMG and RS3 and not the M135i or S3, all brilliant cars never the less.


----------



## SteveTDCi

I think the rs will hold its value better than the s3, r, Amg and the m2.


----------



## robertdon777

Soul boy 68 said:


> Oh, I thought the Focus RS was competing with a full blown M2, A45AMG and RS3 and not the M135i or S3, all brilliant cars never the less.


Personally if I was buying an RS3, A45 or M2 I wouldn't look at the RS, even though its probably just as good and maybe better in some aspects.

Its pricing puts it right in Golf R, S3, M135i territory... It will hold value better than these easily.

I think it will punch well above its weight in the price category its in and will make the hyper hatches look over priced. But some people would rather the badge and better trim etc that the German brands offer.


----------



## Soul boy 68

SteveTDCi said:


> I think the rs will hold its value better than the s3, r, Amg and the m2.


Really, that's interesting, is that fact or just an opinion?


----------



## Kerr

SteveTDCi said:


> I think the rs will hold its value better than the s3, r, Amg and the m2.


I guess it depends how many they sell and how good it is.

I wonder how strong initial demand will be. There's a lot of choice in the hot hatch market at the moment and a lot of people tied into deals.

I think the M2 will be fine as long as they don't sell too many, which I don't think will be the case.

There's a few 1Ms for higher £40k, a couple in the £50k mark and a dealer asking for £60k for a low mileage car.

The cheapest on the market is £38k and it's a LHD. Not bad for 4 year old cars.

There's always an argument about spending £30k on a Ford rather than £40-45k for an M2 or A45, but if the market stabilises and depreciation brings the costs closer, I couldn't choose a Focus over them.


----------



## Soul boy 68

robertdon777 said:


> Personally if I was buying an RS3, A45 or M2 I wouldn't look at the RS, even though its probably just as good and maybe better in some aspects.
> 
> Its pricing puts it right in Golf R, S3, M135i territory... It will hold value better than these easily.


It's competing on a pricing point but on performance stats, bhp, 0 to 60 times etc it's closer to AMG, RS3 and M2, in which I thought that's what's the whole point in a competition sense.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Kerr said:


> I guess it depends how many they sell and how good it is.
> 
> I wonder how strong initial demand will be. There's a lot of choice in the hot hatch market at the moment and a lot of people tied into deals.
> 
> I think the M2 will be fine as long as they don't sell too many, which I don't think will be the case.
> 
> There's a few 1Ms for higher £40k, a couple in the £50k mark and a dealer asking for £60k for a low mileage car.
> 
> The cheapest on the market is £38k and it's a LHD. Not bad for 4 year old cars.
> 
> There's always an argument about spending £30k on a Ford rather than £40-45k for an M2 or A45, but if the market stabilises and depreciation brings the costs closer, I couldn't choose a Focus over them.


I agree, cars that have a limited run just like the 1M go for really good money which brings me back to my earlier point about if Ford flood the market with their RS, will it hold its value just as well as a 1M or any other limited run car.


----------



## SteveTDCi

I could quite happily choose the focus over all of them but then I'm a ford boy.

I believe production on the rs is limited and there is quite a demand, ford rs cars have always held strong money, the mk2 sits between 10k and 15k or more, the mk2 is 18k up to 25k and the black rs edition even more.

Most m cars shed money, the m5 we had lost near enough 50k, the m4 fares a bit better but still loses money and with BMW offering big discounts on them it won't help. I think your right in that the m2 will fare better but it needs BMW to restrict supply.

M135's seem to sell around the 22k mark but do need sat nav as they struggle without. White is the most popular.

We have a 1m in at the moment and I believe its up for 45k ....


----------



## Kerr

Soul boy 68 said:


> It's competing on a pricing point but on performance stats, bhp 0 to 60 times etc it's closer to AMG, RS3 and M2, in which I thought that's what's the whole point in a competition sense.


I bet the Ford isn't as Fast as those cars.

The Ford was tested at 4.7secs. The A45 and RS3 tested 3.9/4.0 seconds which is a big margin. The M135i with RWD does 4.8secs.

The lack of DCT will account for a couple of tenths, but not much.

I'd be surprised if the RS can keep up with the A45.

The last couple of RSs weren't as fast as people suggested. My old 335i could leave the similarly powered Focus with ease.


----------



## Soul boy 68

SteveTDCi said:


> I could quite happily choose the focus over all of them but then I'm a ford boy.
> 
> I believe production on the rs is limited and there is quite a demand, ford rs cars have always held strong money, the mk2 sits between 10k and 15k or more, the mk2 is 18k up to 25k and the black rs edition even more.
> 
> Most m cars shed money, the m5 we had lost near enough 50k, the m4 fares a bit better but still loses money and with BMW offering big discounts on them it won't help. I think your right in that the m2 will fare better but it needs BMW to restrict supply.
> 
> M135's seem to sell around the 22k mark but do need sat nav as they struggle without. White is the most popular.
> 
> We have a 1m in at the moment and I believe its up for 45k ....


Good points there, the trouble with me is that I am not loyal to any badge, if I like a car and can afford it then I will buy it. I have owned most badges in my time including Fords, a VW car is so far the only make I haven't owned, but technically speaking I am, with an Audi


----------



## SteveTDCi

And that's the best way to be, buy something you like, not what the press say is good and not what people on the internet tell you.


----------



## robertdon777

The M2 should hold value well. Purely down to numbers sold.

I can't see many people who are looking at A45's, RS3's or M2's etc buying a Focus RS.

Yes it may compete on performance terms but I think its aimed at upsetting Golf R's, S3's, 135is etc.


----------



## Clarkey-88

From reading the current write ups and watching videos, I think round a track it will be quicker then it's rivals. And if not quicker then it'll be damn close.

Top Gear gave it a pretty good write up and gave more info on how the Drive System works

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/hot-hatch/we-rode-shotgun-new-345bhp-ford-focus-rs-yes-it-drifts


----------



## possul

Surprised I havent seen RP saying it's all wrong. A focus drifting, come on now


----------



## RisingPower

possul said:


> Surprised I havent seen RP saying it's all wrong. A focus drifting, come on now


But it's not really drifting in ken blocks video is it? Handbrake turn sure.


----------



## possul

The drive system can put stupid amounts just to back wheels.
Just have to get used to a 4 door hatchback drifting from now on 😊


----------



## RisingPower

possul said:


> The drive system can put stupid amounts just to back wheels.
> Just have to get used to a 4 door hatchback drifting from now on ��


If they can get it as sideways as this and for as long, I'd be impressed.


----------



## possul

Don't set the bar to high will you 😂


----------



## Clarkey-88

FORD 

Found-On-Road-Drifting :lol:


----------



## robertdon777

RisingPower said:


> If they can get it as sideways as this and for as long, I'd be impressed.
> 
> RED BULL TIANMENSHAN MOUNTAIN DRIFT KING BATTLE FULL VERSION - YouTube


I think the Focus RS will do that but just in multi storey car parks.

From my understanding of the system used by ford though, it will power oversteer. Not something many 4WD hot hatches or 4WD cars usually do......no handbrake needed.


----------



## RisingPower

robertdon777 said:


> I think the Focus RS will do that but just in multi storey car parks.
> 
> From my understanding of the system used by ford though, it will power oversteer. Not something many 4WD hot hatches or 4WD cars usually do......no handbrake needed.


Isn't the subaru impreza 4wd with option of pretty much putting all the power to the rear?


----------



## robertdon777

RisingPower said:


> Isn't the subaru impreza 4wd with option of pretty much putting all the power to the rear?


Maybe, but they just seem to under steer unless they are provoked heavily. Plus no one buys them anymore.


----------



## 182_Blue

Are these available to view at a dealers yet?


----------



## Soul boy 68

182_Blue said:


> Are these available to view at a dealers yet?


I think around April time. you are tempted, aren't you?


----------



## Kerr

Seen a LHD one in the flesh.





It's very understated in black. If it wasn't for the RS on the bumper, or the blue brakes, most people wouldn't look twice. I like this one much better than the older one.

It seems they've really shifted away from the older RSs with the external appearance. They've not done the same with the interior though. It's brash and a bit tacky looking.

I'm not understanding what they've tried to do. It always appeared to me that Focus owners always liked the exterior of the old RSs, but universally nobody was the biggest fan of the interior. Now Ford have toned down the styling to suit more people, but not addressed inside.

I thought it was a bit odd.


----------



## robertdon777

Got a bit cheaper on Lease now.

24 month deals at £370 with £2300 down inc VAT.

Do like how discreet it looks.


----------



## Ashtray

That really doesn't look any thing special at all


----------



## alan hanson

by god it does look standard, no tints, cheap wing mirrors, little bits tlike the plastic covers on front of the wing mirros all look cheap. I swapped my focus for a golf last summer so i know what my focus was like and that has very similar parts external wise, compared to me golf, well it doesnt! not even close


----------



## wylie coyote

I also saw it at the NEC. Agree the black makes it looks bland - can't help thinking a nice metallic Grey (not the primer colour they're offering:doublesho) would give the best blend of subtlety and agression...


----------



## robertdon777

Would go under the radar of car thieves in Black on Black though, minus the painted calipers (an option).

I prefer the standard multispoke wheels too, not keen on the lightweight option. 

Grey with Standard wheels (finished in gunmetal), standard seats with Lux Pack and Sunroof. Yes Please for under 32K. (saying that I'd rather a second hand C63 AMG Estate)


----------



## Soul boy 68

Very surprised how the black colour makes the car look ordinary and uninspirering, I think they could have given the exterior more road presence, but let's not forget that this RS is to be sold world wide so it will appeal to some markets over others, blue suits it best though.


----------



## Kerr

That's the reviews being published now. I read they were allowed to publish after 4pm today.

http://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/ford/focus-st/23-rs/first-drive


----------



## knightstemplar

A game changer? I'm waiting for it to be tested side by side with the other big boys in its class, going to be interesting. I think they may have missed a trick not offering an auto as well as the manual.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Interesting review, funny how some of us have commented on the boring interior, the optional seats are a surprise in that the driver sits high in them but they are being revised. What's been noted in the review is that the car didn't feel any faster than the Type R considering the power advantage and all wheel drive caperbilities over the Honda. Like I said on my previous post, the RS doesn't really have road presence where I think the type R has.


----------



## 182_Blue

Soul boy 68 said:


> I think around April time. you are tempted, aren't you?


Not really, just wanted a play, the wife/ friends can stop hating it now :lol:


----------



## robertdon777

TBH there wouldn't be a massive sense of speed difference in any of these Hot Hatches.

Its hard to Feel an extra 40bhp when you are talking 300+bhp.

Step up to something with 450+ bhp and yes the difference will be marked.


----------



## Kriminal

I'm still really unsure on this one.

Totally agree with you Soulboy, on the black colour; it just doesn't seem to do anything at all for the exterior looks.

I think I'd like to see one in the flesh to see if my mind can be changed to a more excited type feeling. :thumb:


----------



## Kerr

robertdon777 said:


> TBH there wouldn't be a massive sense of speed difference in any of these Hot Hatches.
> 
> Its hard to Feel an extra 40bhp when you are talking 300+bhp.
> 
> Step up to something with 450+ bhp and yes the difference will be marked.


Obviously 300 to 450bhp is a huge leap that anyone would notice.

The actual difference in performance between a lot of the hot hatches is actually quite large. Remap most of the hot hatches and you'll obviously feel a bit leap in performance. More often than not that leap in performance will only be 5-6mph at the end of a 1/4 mile drag race.

Some of the hot hatches already have a larger speed gap than that. 5-6mph is a bigger margin that it reads.

I've had a shot in a lot of cars in this class since buying the A45 and M235i over the last 10 months. I've felt quite a difference between some.


----------



## Bristle Hound

The looks are something only its mother would love ...

The mk2 RS Focus is way nicer looking IMO :argie:


----------



## robertdon777

Kerr said:


> Obviously 300 to 450bhp is a huge leap that anyone would notice.
> 
> The actual difference in performance between a lot of the hot hatches is actually quite large. Remap most of the hot hatches and you'll obviously feel a bit leap in performance. More often than not that leap in performance will only be 5-6mph at the end of a 1/4 mile drag race.
> 
> Some of the hot hatches already have a larger speed gap than that. 5-6mph is a bigger margin that it reads.
> 
> I've had a shot in a lot of cars in this class since buying the A45 and M235i over the last 10 months. I've felt quite a difference between some.


Just going off the mag comment in which they say it doesn't feel much faster than the Civic.

Who would think it should feel faster? 40bhp more, 200 odd KGS more. So a 370bhp RS3 vs a 345bhp car won't have a huge difference. Rolling from 30mph be interesting when they test them on GTBoard.


----------



## Kerr

robertdon777 said:


> Just going off the mag comment in which they say it doesn't feel much faster than the Civic.
> 
> Who would think it should feel faster? 40bhp more, 200 odd KGS more. So a 370bhp RS3 vs a 345bhp car won't have a huge difference. Rolling from 30mph be interesting when they test them on GTBoard.


The Civic is actually a fast car according to tests I've read. It has been fractions off the RS3 on straights and has always been within tenths on the track, losing some and winning others.

It'll be interesting to see how the Focus gets on.


----------



## robertdon777

Will be interesting when the Montune packs come out from Ford, Surely 375bhp?

Not sure I could pick one over a M135i though, but I'm 40 and I've done the 4 pot Turbo thing too many times.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Now that the reviews are coming thick and fast, by all accounts from what I have read the drift mode seems to be a bit of a gimmick as for people who have driven rear - wheel drive sports cars would be able to tell the difference and it all seems a bit unsatisfying. Also the ride is very hard and firm so for everyday use on our UK roads you'll only ever be using the normal drive mode which will make the sport,drift and track modes useless, that's unless you intend to use the RS for track days and lets be honest, how many of us who may end up owning the RS will ever take the car to track days?


----------



## robertdon777

Looks good by the reviews, shaken the Hot Hatch market up again at that Price point.

Looks like it brings much more fun to the table than the German Big Guns (and for 10K less).

Obviously it won't suit some because of the interior quality, but Ford has never offered this anyway and the depreciation on the RS will be better than an RS3 etc so its swings and roundabouts.

Well done Ford for having probably the 2 Best Hot Hatches in their Categories.


----------



## alan hanson

i'd take the focus over the civic any day the civic is way too much for me, i'd still have an R over the focus though, for me 300bhp is enough for what you want and can use, its how it delivers and drives, plus id swap some bhp for interior quality and build confidence. its still a nice car (in the right outfit) but paying 32k i'd want to get in and feel at home and comfortable something for me ford interiors dont compared to others (seat being even worse)


----------



## Kerr

What I find a bit odd is all the magazines all identify various flaws, yet still conclude it's a 5 star car. 

If the seating position is as bad as they say, they all identify the interior as being a bit rubbish, how can you score a perfect 5? That's two very significant things that you are going to notice and have to live with on a daily basis. 

The interior quality of the competition isn't that high to start with, so to identify it falls a long way short highlights that it's not up to scratch. 

People always get worked up about the quality of the interior on German cars, and as soon as it doesn't reach the perceived levels, that's a mark down. The get scored on interior as much as many other aspects. With Ford although standards don't reach a high standard, it appears it doesn't matter. 

On one side of the coin they want to compare the car directly to the competition, then allow huge allowances when the argument doesn't suit. 

It just appears all the journalists want to run out and award the latest shiny thing 5 stars. Everyone will then run out and buy their magazine and they'll be quids in and get an invite to the next car launch too. Reviews often don't appear balanced to me.

If a car is going to receive a perfect score, it has to be perfect, yet they identify it's far from it.


----------



## SteveTDCi

But what are they comparing the focus to for interior quality ? Really you gave the Honda which does look plasticky inside, the Astra which looks similar and the golf which in r form looks ok but has seats that look like they have been made out of the off cuts of the reflective patches on a high viz jacket. It's unfair to class it in the same group as the amg, s3 and m235 as they are all from the class above.

The seating position might be high but for me the only manufactures that can get a low seating position is Mercedes and BMW, the s3 is awful for its driving position. I believe you can have a couple of flaws and still get 5 stars if everything else about the car is perfect and in reality you don't buy a hot hatch for its plastics you buy it because of how it drives.


----------



## Alex_225

I can only assume they're marking it based in the price being s factor so there's elements of forgiving flaws. Your point still stands regardless of that Kerr. 

Personally I seem to be in the minority who aren't fussed about the new RS.

Ok so the price is good but the 350bhp+, 4wd hot hatch is not new or a novelty now. (A45/RS3) 

I can only conclude its because it's got that working class hero status but then again so did the likes of Imprezas and Evos. 

I can't say it's good I'm sure it's a great hot hatch but I'm sure Honda, Vauxhaul, RenaultSport etc will release something to compete and we'll see if that steps up the game in this price bracket.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Alex_225 said:


> I can only assume they're marking it based in the price being s factor so there's elements of forgiving flaws. Your point still stands regardless of that Kerr.
> 
> Personally I seem to be in the minority who aren't fussed about the new RS.
> 
> Ok so the price is good but the 350bhp+, 4wd hot hatch is not new or a novelty now. (A45/RS3)
> 
> I can only conclude its because it's got that working class hero status but then again so did the likes of Imprezas and Evos.
> 
> I can't say it's good I'm sure it's a great hot hatch but I'm sure Honda, Vauxhaul, RenaultSport etc will release something to compete and we'll see if that steps up the game in this price bracket.


That's just the thing, wait until the Rs main rivals bring out their performance versions, the new VXR and Renault Sport Megane will have something to say about it, could well match the RS or even beat it.


----------



## Kerr

SteveTDCi said:


> But what are they comparing the focus to for interior quality ? Really you gave the Honda which does look plasticky inside, the Astra which looks similar and the golf which in r form looks ok but has seats that look like they have been made out of the off cuts of the reflective patches on a high viz jacket. It's unfair to class it in the same group as the amg, s3 and m235 as they are all from the class above.
> 
> The seating position might be high but for me the only manufactures that can get a low seating position is Mercedes and BMW, the s3 is awful for its driving position. I believe you can have a couple of flaws and still get 5 stars if everything else about the car is perfect and in reality you don't buy a hot hatch for its plastics you buy it because of how it drives.


They are comparing it against the other 4wd cars. They have commented how it falls short of even the Golf R cabin. The A45 isn't that high on quality other than having the nice seats, wheel and gearknob.

I seen the Focus RS and the Civic at the weekend. The Focus looks worse on the inside than the Civic, by a margin too. Those high viz strips in the Golf are replaced with tacky blue flashes in the Ford. I'd guess people will spec the upgraded seats, but I read they sit wrongly too.

I don't know Steve. In recent years more people are looking for a hot hatch to have performance and quality. The market appears to have moved on a lot in recent years where quality is high on the list of must haves. People are willing to pay a premium for these things.



Alex_225 said:


> I can only assume they're marking it based in the price being s factor so there's elements of forgiving flaws. Your point still stands regardless of that Kerr.
> 
> Personally I seem to be in the minority who aren't fussed about the new RS.
> 
> Ok so the price is good but the 350bhp+, 4wd hot hatch is not new or a novelty now. (A45/RS3)
> 
> I can only conclude its because it's got that working class hero status but then again so did the likes of Imprezas and Evos.
> 
> I can't say it's good I'm sure it's a great hot hatch but I'm sure Honda, Vauxhaul, RenaultSport etc will release something to compete and we'll see if that steps up the game in this price bracket.


How much allowance do you allow for the cost, and how can you measure value?

The Focus is a good bit cheaper than the A45 for example. However you've neither got the quality, the same power or performance and miss out on expensive options like a DCT box. Things like heated Recaro seats are standard in the A45 as is Sat Nav, cruise and parking sensors. These are all cost option on the RS and I can't even see front sensors.

If people are going to add all these options, then the cost difference closes up.

The movement for quite a while is a DCT auto box was a must. A lot of people are paying £1500-2000 for having this option over a manual on all the other hot hatches that have the choice. The RS doesn't have the option of one.

So although the car is, on paper, a good bit cheaper, you can easily find reasons it is a good bit cheaper. Being cheaper and offering less doesn't make it a bargain as such.

If it drives as well as the reviews say, and with the following the RS brand has, none of the above will really matter to the people that want an RS. I think it will sell very well, but I don't see it dragging that many people away the Audi, BMW and Merc.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Kerr said:


> They are comparing it against the other 4wd cars. They have commented how it falls short of even the Golf R cabin. The A45 isn't that high on quality other than having the nice seats, wheel and gearknob.
> 
> I seen the Focus RS and the Civic at the weekend. The Focus looks worse on the inside than the Civic, by a margin too. Those high viz strips in the Golf are replaced with tacky blue flashes in the Ford. I'd guess people will spec the upgraded seats, but I read they sit wrongly too.
> 
> I don't know Steve. In recent years more people are looking for a hot hatch to have performance and quality. The market appears to have moved on a lot in recent years where quality is high on the list of must haves. People are willing to pay a premium for these things.
> 
> How much allowance do you allow for the cost, and how can you measure value?
> 
> The Focus is a good bit cheaper than the A45 for example. However you've neither got the quality, the same power or performance and miss out on expensive options like a DCT box. Things like heated Recaro seats are standard in the A45 as is Sat Nav, cruise and parking sensors. These are all cost option on the RS and I can't even see front sensors.
> 
> If people are going to add all these options, then the cost difference closes up.
> 
> The movement for quite a while is a DCT auto box was a must. A lot of people are paying £1500-2000 for having this option over a manual on all the other hot hatches that have the choice. The RS doesn't have the option of one.
> 
> So although the car is, on paper, a good bit cheaper, you can easily find reasons it is a good bit cheaper. Being cheaper and offering less doesn't make it a bargain as such.
> 
> If it drives as well as the reviews say, and with the following the RS brand has, none of the above will really matter to the people that want an RS. I think it will sell very well, but I don't see it dragging that many people away the Audi, BMW and Merc.


I have to agree being that I have driven fords in the past and have test driven BM's, Mercs and own an Audi, I have to say I would struggle to go back to driving a ford. No doubt about it that the RS will do very well but a guess a large % of buyers will already own a ford and will be loyal to the brand.


----------



## Alex_225

Soul boy 68 said:


> That's just the thing, wait until the Rs main rivals bring out their performance versions, the new VXR and Renault Sport Megane will have something to say about it, could well match the RS or even beat it.


Exactly, this could make for an interesting time for hot hatches. I mean lets face it, the Megane R26.R appeared to be a direct result of the Focus RS and that has become a classic that is still holds it's own (especially on track!).



Kerr said:


> How much allowance do you allow for the cost, and how can you measure value?
> 
> The Focus is a good bit cheaper than the A45 for example. However you've neither got the quality, the same power or performance and miss out on expensive options like a DCT box. Things like heated Recaro seats are standard in the A45 as is Sat Nav, cruise and parking sensors. These are all cost option on the RS and I can't even see front sensors.
> 
> If people are going to add all these options, then the cost difference closes up.


It's a very good question, I suppose there will be a percentage of RS buyers that will want it predominantly because it is a fair bit cheaper than it's direct rivals and will compromise the quality for the performance.

Don't get me wrong I can value performance and fun over a lot of elements but also I guess it comes down to what exposure to cars you've had.

Up until last year I'd only really owned fast Renaults and yes the interior on them is adequate, not mind blowing but in certain specifications a nice place to be sat but it was all about how they looked and how much fun they were. I bought an AMG in August and the quality of the interior and my expectations have gone up somewhat, so to look at the new RS the interior is a little 'meh!'.

For me personally I'd accept the interior as a bit average if the exterior made me think, 'Wow that looks awesome' but it simply doesn't so I'd take an A45 AMG over the Focus RS any day, that said I'd rather buy a used car that has more of everything than either car but that is a totally different can of worms!! haha :lol:

Ultimately every hot hatch will have a modified version of the car it's based on so none will blow your socks off, it's just that Audi and Mercedes offer 'premium' cars for more money so a fast Ford, Renault etc wouldn't offer the same feel. Performance is similar but build quality wouldn't be comparable.

A hot hatch is a lot about compromises when you think about it though.


----------



## alan hanson

end of the day to me the focus is aimed at people who just want figures and tbh thats all, look my car has 4wd and 350bhp.

old billy big balls down the pub will buy one.............. and in conversation it will be its got 4wd and 350bhp, thats sounds good but.....................

what about interior? my car has 4wd and 350bhp

what about build quality? my car has 4wd 350bhp

what about spec? my car has 4wd and 350bhp

i might create a window sticker my car has 4wd and 350bhp i recon they would sell well


----------



## Dal3D

^^That looks like your perception, not necessarily others.

I had a Mk2 ST and loved it (wish I'd never sold it)

If I was in the market for a fun hot hatch then the statistics can say anything - I'd still look at a new Focus RS because of the way it drives. The "interior" "build quality" that you quote are secondary _to me_ compared to how it goes and makes me feel whilst driving it.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Dal3D said:


> ^^That looks like your perception, not necessarily others.
> 
> I had a Mk2 ST and loved it (wish I'd never sold it)
> 
> If I was in the market for a fun hot hatch then the statistics can say anything - I'd still look at a new Focus RS because of the way it drives. The "interior" "build quality" that you quote are secondary _to me_ compared to how it goes and makes me feel whilst driving it.


Would the new focus RS sway you away from your M3?


----------



## Dal3D

Sold the M3 last summer....


----------



## Alex_225

alan hanson said:


> end of the day to me the focus is aimed at people who just want figures and tbh thats all, look my car has 4wd and 350bhp.
> 
> old billy big balls down the pub will buy one.............. and in conversation it will be its got 4wd and 350bhp, thats sounds good but.....................
> 
> what about interior? my car has 4wd and 350bhp
> 
> what about build quality? my car has 4wd 350bhp
> 
> what about spec? my car has 4wd and 350bhp
> 
> i might create a window sticker my car has 4wd and 350bhp i recon they would sell well


That post did make me chuckle I must admit!

There will definitely be an element of people that buy a car for those performance figures as pub bragging is all about that to many. I work in department full of lads who like cars and rarely does refinement, handling or features come up it's all about POWEEERRRR!!! This element of petrolhead will spaff in their pants over the performance figures of the RS.

That's not all RS fans by any means but it's enough for some.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Dal3D said:


> Sold the M3 last summer....


So the question is..... Would you consider the RS as a replacement for your M3?


----------



## robertdon777

I think the actual Build Quality will be fine.

Material Quality is obviously lower. 

Standard seats can be plain black leather rather than the in your face strip of Blue.

TBF, car mags reviews are flawed as soon as they rate out of 5 stars.

A 5 star car wouldn't always be a 10/10 car. Why not rate to 10. If they did I think it would read something like this.

A45 9/10....just the cost and maybe looks let it down.
RS3 8/10....cost and dull handling
RS Focus 8.5/10....interior and image.
Golf R 8.5/10....Lacks some sparkle next to others/rubbish seats.
Civic 8/10....no 4WD, to halfords looking.

But the current crop are all GOOD cars and good choice s to have for hot hatch fans. Still the best segment for performance cars some 20+ years on.


----------



## Alex_225

robertdon777 said:


> But the current crop are all GOOD cars and good choice s to have for hot hatch fans. Still the best segment for performance cars some 20+ years on.


:thumb::thumb::thumb::thumb:

Doubt you can go wrong with any of the cars you've mentioned mate. All have their positives and negatives. The performance difference in reality is marginal in the real world as I'm sure they're all a good drive. :thumb:


----------



## SteveTDCi

Soul boy 68 said:


> Would the new focus RS sway you away from your M3?


If I had an m3 it would, I would quite happily take one over the m4 too, in fact I would take a 435i over the m4 but then I would probably consider a 3 year old Audi A8 over the 435i but I would take a focus rs over all of them. It's ford and says rs and that's enough for me.

Ps the best value hot hatch on the market is a 2 year old m135i


----------



## robertdon777

I forgot the M135i

I'd give that a 9/10....just looks let it down for many.

You can add in

Astra VXR
Leon Cupra
Megane RS
S3

The current crop of 270+bhp hot hatches is amazing.

Just to think the segment was being killed off by many in the late 90's early 00's

Spoilt for choice....let the battles commence.


----------



## SteveTDCi

I forgot about the underdog that is the Leon Cupra, BMW need to release a mk3 1 series where it has the older style rear and the new style front.

I'd still have an rs and if you want to jump the que there are 3 on an auction site at 40k each. Not many golfs or s3's get that kind of demand.


----------



## Dal3D

Soul boy 68 said:


> So the question is..... Would you consider the RS as a replacement for your M3?


Well someone offered me £2k more than I paid for it the year earlier so it went.

To be perfectly honest, it was in too good a condition for me to feel comfortable in thrashing it about as it deserved. I should have bought a ropey one and had it's "bottom" out on every roundabout.

We'll see if anything replaces it in a couple of months....


----------



## Soul boy 68

Dal3D said:


> Well someone offered me £2k more than I paid for it the year earlier so it went.
> 
> To be perfectly honest, it was in too good a condition for me to feel comfortable in thrashing it about as it deserved. I should have bought a ropey one and had it's "bottom" out on every roundabout.
> 
> We'll see if anything replaces it in a couple of months....


Look forward to seeing your replacement, do post up pics when you get the car.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Here is one of the first video reviews to be released.






Better have your wallet to hand as from what I have read on another review the replacement tyers made for track days go for £300 each, not a cheap day out on the track with this thing.


----------



## Kerr

The internal sound is fine, externally it doesn't sound good. It's got a sound generator inside like a lot of other cars these days. 

I guess all the times for the car are going to be proven on sticky tyres that few people will have. That's a bit unfair and Seat got slated for doing the same with their Cupra. 

I wonder about the trick diff too? I wonder how the servicing works when he's talking about oil changes when you over do it?


----------



## robertdon777

Track days are always expensive.....sounds a good idea, the reality of canning your pride and joy whilst destroying its tyres and brakes is somewhat painful.

No hot hatch is really track focused...maybe Renault with the R26R, but that never sold in big numbers. Better of with a GT86, older Cayman if you want track fun with a usable road car.


----------



## Soul boy 68

robertdon777 said:


> Track days are always expensive.....sounds a good idea, the reality of canning your pride and joy whilst destroying its tyres and brakes is somewhat painful.
> 
> No hot hatch is really track focused...maybe Renault with the R26R, but that never sold in big numbers. Better of with a GT86, older Cayman if you want track fun with a usable road car.


Judging by the video you seen, do you not think the RS is a true track car that's built for the road too?


----------



## SteveTDCi

This for the track


----------



## robertdon777

No doubt its the best of the hatch bunch for track us (maybe M135i too), but like mentioned by others I wouldn't like the bills after

Can be done for less, whilst having more fun. I think the RS drift mode and track mode are great but the reality will be most never see the track or do any drifting.

I wouldn't buy one with the intention its going to be a track car. I'd rather go go-karting than use a road car on track.


----------



## Stirks

It has all the crackling from the exhaust like the older 5 cylinder but without that deep growl. Its alright suppose. Looks the part though imo


----------



## Kerr

Some of the first perfomance comparisons are coming out and it's not good.

One of my gripes about the old RS is it wasn't anywhere near as fast as people made out. We've heard about this RS for long enough and the anticipation was it would wipe the floor with everything at £30k and run the A45 and RS3 close in terms of performance.






There's a lot of upset people out there now. Drag races and 0-60mph are no longer a measurement of performance.

The Focus RS actually makes the best start, but the A45 absolutely wipes the floor with with both cars. It goes flying passed with a huge advantage. Even the Golf R with a 50bhp deficit catches and walks ahead of the RS.

The DSG does make for a little advantage, but not that great especially once on the move.

Brand new technology and an extra 50bhp against a near 3 year old Golf R. That's a very disappointing outcome in my opinion.


----------



## Crafty

Like he said probably down to the gearbox. Ford and Vauxhall (with the next version if there is one) need a semi auto box. 

The Ford will sell easily because of the RS badge, take that way and very few would buy it imho.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Some would argue that for £30,000, it has the best value compared to the other two, there is a lot of hype surrounding this car and the reviews were positive, however some people could look else where as it lacks that premium feel and quality, would an auto gear box on the RS be any better then it's German counterparts?


----------



## 182_Blue

Soul boy 68 said:


> Some would argue that for £30,000, it has the best value compared to the other two, there is a lot of hype surrounding this car and the reviews were positive, however some people could look else where as it lacks that premium feel and quality, would an auto gear box on the RS be any better then it's German counterparts?
> 
> View attachment 45697


With the complete lack of discounts on the RS it works out more than a Golf R by quite a few K, with a nice spec added it puts it under 2k shy of a AMG through Carwow (believe me I have tried lol), it will hold its value well if it's anything like the last one though, (possibly the best cars for residuals in this sector for years) , the RS really does need A DSG style box option though IMO.

As you say magazines have put it slower than others but still rated it higher for enjoyment, i actually expected it to be slower than the R, the RS3 was beaten around a track by the R so it's not great suprise, the 1 year waiting list is a bit of a killer though!!, i had kind of come round to the RS until I saw the waiting list!.

It's a bit shoutier than the other two but to some that's a good thing, it's certainly a exciting time in the hot hatch market.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Lets not forget Vauxhall's up coming VXR, they will have something to say in all of this and it's rumored the next VXR could also go all - wheel drive.


----------



## 182_Blue

Soul boy 68 said:


> Lets not forget Vauxhall's up coming VXR, they will have something to say in all of this and it's rumored the next VXR could also go all - wheel drive.


I don't know why but in the last 15 years or so vauxhalls haven't interested me.


----------



## alan hanson

though i'd want to get in the car and feel like its a 30k car golf, merc, audi do i bet being in that focus doesn't. how many rattles, fake looks materials etc... how long will the car last if its treated to a hard life? little details for me make big differences which looking over the focus ford haven't gone to the effort of doing so. and for it then to get beat........


----------



## alan hanson

Soul boy 68 said:


> Lets not forget Vauxhall's up coming VXR, they will have something to say in all of this and it's rumored the next VXR could also go all - wheel drive.


if they could shake the name tag (hard when you look at most of those who drive them in a burberry or aquascutum (spelling) baseball cap. i think they make one of the best looking hot hatches each time, the VXR for me is one of the best looking


----------



## Crafty

The astra H vxr was a good car, much maligned by idiots who cling on to every word Clarkson says.
The J was a pretty much a failure because they tried to address all the criticisms. It was too wide, too heavy, repairs cost too much (£1200 for front discs and pads), had stupid 20" wheels and just wasn't as much fun. It wasn't particularly cheap (28k list, lets say 25k with a few options). They also took far too long to bring it to market after the J was launched.

Out of the three on the video I'd have to go A45. The RS is bizarre, pretty much the same body as the rest of the range with a gopping front bumper. Reminds me of all the kids bolting 'evo look' bumpers to 1.2 corsas/novas.

The golf is competent but dull, it never feels like 280lb/ft and the seats look cheap. Wanted to like it but it just didn't add up.

The alternative is a M135i. More spec for the same money (or maybe less), straight six noise, fantastic auto box. Yes it's rwd and yes that means it's slower on a wet, greasy day but what are you doing driving at 10/10ths on the road in those conditions anyway? 

I wonder how the new mazda 3 mps will do against these three?


----------



## Kerr

Crafty said:


> Like he said probably down to the gearbox. Ford and Vauxhall (with the next version if there is one) need a semi auto box.
> 
> The Ford will sell easily because of the RS badge, take that way and very few would buy it imho.


The DCT doesn't make that much of a difference, especially when you nail the start. There is only 0.2 sec between the same cars that offer DCT and manual boxes between 0-60mph.

Take the standing start out(huge Fwd disadvantage) and the new Civic Type R with a manual gearbox is faster than both cars. There's also a few videos of the Golf R v Subaru STI with 300bhp with a manual box and that's usually close. The Golf always wins, but the Subaru is no further back than the Focus RS.

50bhp is a significant power advantage. Ford also say that the RS should do 0-60mph in 4.7sec, which is actually 0.2sec faster than the Golf is with DSG. If the manual car can hit 60mph at the same time, it shouldn't really lose after that, but it did.

Ford's 4wd system sounds more advanced than the FWD biased haldex systems. I'm wondering if it's actually very inefficient and is sapping lots of power like some of the full time 4wd drivetrains do?

Either way with a 50bhp advantage and getting a better start, I really wouldn't expect the Focus to lose. I don't think many people anticipated that either as people were hoping to be close to the A45 and RS3 in the sub 10sec 0-100mph barrier. Trailing that distance to the Golf is going to make it probably in the 13 second window.


----------



## Soul boy 68

You'll get people arguing that it's a manual against the autos and it's not a fair comparison, you can't win.


----------



## robertdon777

Looking at the Market a pre-reg Mk1 A45 seems to be the best bet at £32K from a fair few places, some with great spec too.

Or just save 10K and buy a 1 or 2 year old still in warranty (and extendable) m135i (and just don't look at those headlights)


----------



## Crafty

You'd get a very well specced brand new facelift m135i for that, better looking than the earlier version and has more kit as standard.

The A45 needs a 3 door option IMHO.


----------



## 182_Blue

robertdon777 said:


> Looking at the Market a pre-reg Mk1 A45 seems to be the best bet at £32K from a fair few places, some with great spec too.
> 
> Or just save 10K and buy a 1 or 2 year old still in warranty (and extendable) m135i (and just don't look at those headlights)


I worry about the ongoing costs on the A45, i was just reading on the Golf R forum where a A45 owner has paid £450 for his first service and the golf owners were paying £135, it makes you wonder what parts will cost if things go wrong, it's not a biggy at this price point but still a consideration for some.


----------



## robertdon777

Yeah Mercs aren't cheap when it comes to servicing.

It all points to the m135i....Just need the rear lights from the MK1 and the Headlights from the MK2


----------



## 182_Blue

robertdon777 said:


> Yeah Mercs aren't cheap when it comes to servicing.
> 
> It all points to the m135i....Just need the rear lights from the MK1 and the Headlights from the MK2


235i not float your boat?


----------



## robertdon777

182_Blue said:


> 235i not float your boat?


Not with 2 small kids (2 + 5) no. 5dr for me.


----------



## wylie coyote

I've got a A45 on order and will be getting the service plan to spread the cost and avoid the big servicing bills..It's quite good value when you look at the service costs.:thumb:


----------



## Soul boy 68

wylie coyote said:


> I've got a A45 on order and will be getting the service plan to spread the cost and avoid the big servicing bills..It's quite good value when you look at the service costs.:thumb:


You know what to do fella, post up some pictures when you get it. :thumb:


----------



## 182_Blue

wylie coyote said:


> I've got a A45 on order and will be getting the service plan to spread the cost and avoid the big servicing bills..It's quite good value when you look at the service costs.:thumb:


How much is the service plan?


----------



## wylie coyote

182_Blue said:


> How much is the service plan?


£36 a month, so £1,296 for 3 years. Full cost of the services during that time: @£1,680.
Whatever you think about Merc servicing charges, seems like a decent saving...


----------



## footfistart

It looks good but engine just sounds like another 2ltr turbo IE vxr, golf R, Audi's. All sounds the same. I much prefer the mk1 and 2 RS.


----------



## SteveTDCi

Mercedes servicing varies. The third service is the most expensive as it's usually an a service and gearbox fluid change at around £650.


----------



## 182_Blue

wylie coyote said:


> £36 a month, so £1,296 for 3 years. Full cost of the services during that time: @£1,680.
> Whatever you think about Merc servicing charges, seems like a decent saving...


Ouch, that makes the £250 for 3 years Golf R one they originally threw in for me look cheap?!, still you don't have much choice, what kind of deal did you get ?, Carwow have seen offers of over 4k off list for me ?


----------



## wylie coyote

Used Buyacar in the end as they were willing to underwrite my GolfR for p/x. Sold it privately in the end.
PM me if you want any details on the deal...:thumb:


----------



## robertdon777

Kerr said:


> Some of the first perfomance comparisons are coming out and it's not good.
> 
> One of my gripes about the old RS is it wasn't anywhere near as fast as people made out. We've heard about this RS for long enough and the anticipation was it would wipe the floor with everything at £30k and run the A45 and RS3 close in terms of performance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There's a lot of upset people out there now. Drag races and 0-60mph are no longer a measurement of performance.
> 
> The Focus RS actually makes the best start, but the A45 absolutely wipes the floor with with both cars. It goes flying passed with a huge advantage. Even the Golf R with a 50bhp deficit catches and walks ahead of the RS.
> 
> The DSG does make for a little advantage, but not that great especially once on the move.
> 
> Brand new technology and an extra 50bhp against a near 3 year old Golf R. That's a very disappointing outcome in my opinion.


TBF, drag racing isn't what a hot hatch should be about.

No doubt it don't feel slow but yeah it should DO an R straight line if its got 350bhp....

I suspect many R's produce over 300 standard and with the DSG box it makes a big difference.

Remember when the mk5 Gti DSG came out and it blitzed more powerful hot hatches in a similar drag race but then got whooped round a track by a 5dr Astra H SRi Turbo 200.


----------



## Kerr

robertdon777 said:


> TBF, drag racing isn't what a hot hatch should be about.
> 
> No doubt it don't feel slow but yeah it should DO an R straight line if its got 350bhp....
> 
> I suspect many R's produce over 300 standard and with the DSG box it makes a big difference.
> 
> Remember when the mk5 Gti DSG came out and it blitzed more powerful hot hatches in a similar drag race but then got whooped round a track by a 5dr Astra H SRi Turbo 200.


It's where most of the 4wd hot hatches will be tested though. They are the most popular cars at the local drag strips.

More people will explore the acceleration than will understand or be able to use the handling.

The DSG boxes make a bit of a difference, but obviously make zero difference when you're in gear. The Golf reversed the Focus' superior start, which is difficult to do after a worse start. Nowhere after that was the Focus quicker. The Golf was always moving away. Once you are over the initial quick burst of acceleration, raw power should take over. That's not what happens in that video.

To make a car just a few MPH faster down the drag strip takes more power than people think. Remap a lot of the hot hatches and the car will feel much faster. In real terms down the drag strip it's probably only 5-6mph faster.

I really don't think any of the DSG boxes make that much of a difference over a manual.

I was reading on another site that the claims of 350bhp are a bit strong. There is doubts if this is actually genuine.

I also didn't realise that it isn't a new engine. It's a reworked Mazda engine from the MPS models.


----------



## robertdon777

Yeah its an older engine, but then again I think you will find most engines are just mainly updates to existing units in some form or another.

Will be interesting to see some more drag races.

R vs DSG R


----------



## RisingPower

Kerr said:


> It's where most of the 4wd hot hatches will be tested though. They are the most popular cars at the local drag strips.
> 
> More people will explore the acceleration than will understand or be able to use the handling.
> 
> The DSG boxes make a bit of a difference, but obviously make zero difference when you're in gear. The Golf reversed the Focus' superior start, which is difficult to do after a worse start. Nowhere after that was the Focus quicker. The Golf was always moving away. Once you are over the initial quick burst of acceleration, raw power should take over. That's not what happens in that video.
> 
> To make a car just a few MPH faster down the drag strip takes more power than people think. Remap a lot of the hot hatches and the car will feel much faster. In real terms down the drag strip it's probably only 5-6mph faster.
> 
> I really don't think any of the DSG boxes make that much of a difference over a manual.
> 
> I was reading on another site that the claims of 350bhp are a bit strong. There is doubts if this is actually genuine.
> 
> I also didn't realise that it isn't a new engine. It's a reworked Mazda engine from the MPS models.


Why not the new mustang gt for the drag strip?

I cannot get my head around how the mustang gt is pretty much the same price as the focus rs.


----------



## Kerr

robertdon777 said:


> Yeah its an older engine, but then again I think you will find most engines are just mainly updates to existing units in some form or another.
> 
> Will be interesting to see some more drag races.
> 
> R vs DSG R


It does look like the other car bogged down.

The launch starts of the DSG are foolproof after a setting it. Starting a manual 4wd car takes a bit of skill, or completely lack of mechanical sympathy.

I used to go to Crail a lot with my old Astra GSI. If the Subaru and Evo boys were happy to put their clutch at risk, I'd lose. If they didn't get the start right I was off. I still probably won more than I lost as so many people couldn't start.

They all did what that Golf did, move off then bog down when the clutch fully engages.

The Focus has launch control even though it is a manual. The start was excellent probably due to more power at the rear wheels.

Here's the same Golf R driver. This manual has no issues with him. 





He's got a couple of manual v DSG and both races are over after just a few meters. Neither car makes a good start.


----------



## 182_Blue

robertdon777 said:


> Yeah its an older engine, but then again I think you will find most engines are just mainly updates to existing units in some form or another.
> 
> Will be interesting to see some more drag races.
> 
> R vs DSG R


DSG just gets away quicker than a manual R, many users on the Golf R forum have 4.5 / 4.6 O-60's on the standard DSG R's

There is a old video of the MK6 R below, it's clearly quicker every time and consistent.

The Fiat coupe in the video above had well over 600 BHP by the way http://www.torquestats.com/modified/index.php?car_id=261


----------



## DrEskimo

Have you seen a video of the DSG from a standstill without LC though? Like the S3, not being able to build the revs and having a large turbo means a considerable amount of lag. 

I think many would prefer the manual in everyday use in this scenario.


----------



## 182_Blue

DrEskimo said:


> Have you seen a video of the DSG from a standstill without LC though? Like the S3, not being able to build the revs and having a large turbo means a considerable amount of lag.
> 
> I think many would prefer the manual in everyday use in this scenario.


I don't know about LC, i have never used it or read how to, i don't think its needed with DSG though as you just plant your foot and its off, i have tried it with another owner with a manual R and the DSG was quicker all three times, i love it from the lights and day to day, i get people don't but i really rate it.

Trying to drag it back to the RS (yes i am as guilty as the rest LOL), here is the Autoexpress review (i don't think its been posted).





Evo seem to love it






http://www.evo.co.uk/ford/focus-rs


----------



## Kerr

The DSG stops the car bogging down. Again it sounds as if he bogs down on those runs. 3-4000rpm is not enough to side step the clutch.

Watch the fastest launches of manual 4wd on YouTube and they are banging off the Rev limiter and side step the clutch. It's far more violent and puts way more strain on the drivetrain. It does make for the very best starts.

This is a fast car, but you get the idea. 




7000rpm and dump the clutch. A little bit of wheelspin are it's gone. Not many people are going to do that though. I'm not too sure a Haldex system could cope with that either.

Old Subarus and Evos with manual boxes make amazing 0-60mph figures if they have the bottle to do that. If they don't they aren't that quick off the line as they bog down.

Even with him not making great starts he's 0.6sec back with cars with the same power. The Ford made the best start, which is the hardest part, but still lost to a car 50bhp down which really should not happen, unless one much lighter or something.

The thing about drag racing a DSG car is there is absolutely no skill involved. I used to enjoy going to Crail in my boy racer years and it was good fun. There was a whole heap of different cars racing.

The results were a bit random with such a varied bunch of cars and with driver errors losing races.

Now many of the cars are 4wd dsg cars. Their times are so reptitive and you know the result before the starts.

Crail actually log all their times on their website. I'll have a look and see if I can see some real times.


----------



## alan hanson

The more I see the focus the more I like it's looks, however everytime i read and watch a review the points it wins on are purely what you'd appreciate on a track not roads, and if you wanted a track car I'm not sure you'd but this either.


----------



## 182_Blue

alan hanson said:


> The more I see the focus the more I like it's looks, however everytime i read and each a review the points it wins on are purely what you'd appreciate on a track not rads, and if you wanted a track car I'm not sure you'd but this either.


Hopefully we will see more proper road reviews soon.


----------



## robertdon777

Yeah it all points to it not being a drag car bit more hot hatch than the others.

What's a m135i like on the QTR in the dry next to these?


----------



## Crafty

M135i will be at a disadvantage off the line due to traction I would have thought.

To be honest I'm not really sure what they do in the quarter, I'd assume the auto box and extra displacement would be a benefit top end.

This is all a world away from a stock car - owner clams 540hp and I don't doubt it but watch the way he pulls away at high speed. All rolling starts, I think traction is quite an issue in this thing at very low speed: https://www.youtube.com/user/darkiedm4/videos

This is the same car : 




He wants a 10 second quarter this year and the way he's going he might just get there.


----------



## Kerr

robertdon777 said:


> Yeah it all points to it not being a drag car bit more hot hatch than the others.
> 
> What's a m135i like on the QTR in the dry next to these?


It should be low/mid 13s if there is good grip. It will do terminal speeds of 109mph.

The launch control on the auto is pretty awful unless I'm doing it wrong. I find it an awful thing to use. Brake boosting appears to be the best way.

There is more skill involved as there is loads of dreadful times out there. Some of the 60ft times are miles off what they should be making the time awful.

I'm not sure what the new A45 is, but the old one was mid 12s at 111mph. My M235i does feel faster than my A45 on the move. The engine has got more punch.

It's got no chance on the drag strip against the 4wd DCT boys.


----------



## Kerr

Some tested times coming through now.

12.2 secs for 0-100mph with 4wd drive and 350bhp is poor.

That's only 2 tenths up on the E92 335i which is a 10 year old car and RWD and that's after hitting 60mph in 4.6sec. I'd imagine the 335i is still faster on the move.

Straight line speed isn't everything, but all the performance tests so far have been really disappointing.

I seem to have cropped off the top of the page.

First car is the Focus, then the Subaru and the Golf R.


----------



## robertdon777

0-110mph is impressive though against the Golf

Golf takes nearly 4 seconds to get from 100-110

Focus just over 2, I think with all these 300-350 hatches it will be swings and roundabouts.

The Focus the best at the roundabouts.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Has anyone seen this yet? It's a great video


----------



## adamb87

Ye I watched that the other night. Was quite a good watch although not sure how accurate the results were


----------



## Clarkey-88

Here's the 0-62 results and the lap times for those who can't be bothered to watch it all lol


----------



## Kerr

The Focus was on the optional Michelin Super Sport tyres. Take them off and it wouldn't be near the A45. If the A45 had the LSD the gap would have been higher too.

It was a good video, but they are too hung up on the a A45 price again. They kept knocking it for its price, but then stating the Renault was a £24k car even though the one they used for the test had very expensive options. 

Yes the A45 is £9000 more than the Ford, but as the video points out, there is a big quality difference. You pay more, but you get more. More power, more quality, faster, a handbuilt fully forged engine all costs money. It's also an AMG. 

The A45 won every test they did, but they still concluded the Ford won.


----------



## SBM

Thanks for this!

Interesting to see the Seat is the only car who's tested 0-60 is faster than quoted.

Stunning performance by the Focus RS. I would like to see the M2's performance in this line up - I have a sneaky feeling it might just steal the crown


----------



## Kerr

SBM said:


> Thanks for this!
> 
> Interesting to see the Seat is the only car who's tested 0-60 is faster than quoted.
> 
> Stunning performance by the Focus RS. I would like to see the M2's performance in this line up - I have a sneaky feeling it might just steal the crown


The Seat is slower than claimed too. 5.9sec claimed and it managed 6.1sec.

The conditions were damp, so that does explain why the cars were down a bit. I think most of those cars have proven on numerous occasions that'll they will go a lot quicker.

The M2 is a bit pricier again, but it is a coupe rather than a hatch. I doubt it'd have too much issues being the fastest on the track.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> The Focus was on the optional Michelin Super Sport tyres. Take them off and it wouldn't be near the A45. If the A45 had the LSD the gap would have been higher too.
> 
> It was a good video, but they are too hung up on the a A45 price again. They kept knocking it for its price, but then stating the Renault was a £24k car even though the one they used for the test had very expensive options.
> 
> Yes the A45 is £9000 more than the Ford, but as the video points out, there is a big quality difference. You pay more, but you get more. More power, more quality, faster, a handbuilt fully forged engine all costs money. It's also an AMG.
> 
> The A45 won every test they did, but they still concluded the Ford won.


I think they gave it to the Ford as Hot Hatches are supposed to be fun as well as good at everything else, and it was the car that offered the most fun out of the lot. That's why the RS3 didn't make the top 3, they thought it was quite boring.

Ok yeah, the Focus had the better tyres, but the Merc has the quicker (better?) gearbox. You can lose a lot of time and speed if your gear changes are naff. The AMG changes gear almost instantly where as the focus will only change as quick as the person driving it, which will never be as quick as a computer. If thy were both manual and had the same tyres, I think the Focus would be quicker then the Merc easily


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> I think they gave it to the Ford as Hot Hatches are supposed to be fun as well as good at everything else, and it was the car that offered the most fun out of the lot. That's why the RS3 didn't make the top 3, they thought it was quite boring.
> 
> Ok yeah, the focus had the better tyres, but the Merc has the quicker (better?) gearbox. You can lose a lot of time and speed if your gear changes are naff. The AMG changes gear almost instantly where as the focus will only change as quick as the person driving it, (which will never be as quick as a computer. If thy were both manual and had the same tyres, I think the Focus would be quicker then the Merc


DCT boxes don't make much difference on the move. They are excellent for rapid gear changes from a standing start when you're shifting really fast. There's been a few head to heads with the same cars, but different boxes, and the times have been very close. Drag races and 0-60mph suit the DCT.

A good driver will use a manual box the shift the weight of the car and make it move as they want.

I still find it odd Ford went for a manual. Look at the rest of the hot hatch market and DCT/Autos outsell manuals by a huge margin even when they are an expensive option. Read the threads on here for manual v. Auto/DCT and DCT boxes appeared to be the future.

I'm guessing Ford didn't have a gearbox? Mazda don't offer one either with the same engine in the Mazda 3 MPS.

Adding a DCT box would close the price up a bit to the A45 as well. It'd also add even more weight.

Sticky tyres make a huge difference on the track. We've seen that before with some manufacturers posting laptimes on optional tyres.

The AMG didn't have the optional LSD. That's an option worth ticking and makes the car quicker.

The RS3 is a dull drive. It was only a few months ago certain magazines were telling us how great it was. There has been quite a few changing their tunes now. Same with the Golf R. For long enough magazines were telling us it was groundbreaking, but now they are pointing out shortcomings.

It's all too common with magazines now. Big up the latest things as the greatest ever, bump up sales, then change your tune.

A hot hatch does have to do everything. Sit in the A45 seat and hold the steering wheel and it feels special. The Focus RS doesn't.

Interior quality, toys and gadgets are important on an everyday car. You're going to have to put up with that everyday, but only take advantage of the handling a tiny percentage of the time.

Most people buy 4wd cars for the traction and ability to point and squirt. The Focus does seem interesting with the the tail happy characteristics. A tail happy car and a manual box is going to test some people.

If you desire a car you'll overlook the issues. If you don't like a car, you'll find fault.

The A45 is the only hatch I'd buy, but having had one I'm not sure I'd revisit again.

I'd just feel so out of place in the RS. I just couldn't live with the interior either.


----------



## SBM

Kerr said:


> If you desire a car you'll overlook the issues. If you don't like a car, you'll find fault.


Many, many good points Kerr :thumb:, the above is the cream of the crop :thumb: Spot on


----------



## 182_Blue

In case anyone is interested in ordering a RS it's worth noting they now start at 31k and have less spec than a Golf R so in reality they aren't the bargain hatch they were originally as Ford have upped the price by 2.5k since opening the order books.
I test drove one at the weekend and it felt no quicker than my current car, maybe even a tad slower?, i did like it though, it certainly got more looks than my car did and the A45 I tried also (both of which nobody even took a second glance at LOL).


----------



## donnyboy

182_Blue said:


> In case anyone is interested in ordering a RS it's worth noting they now start at 31k and have less spec than a Golf R so in reality they aren't the bargain hatch they were originally as Ford have upped the price by 2.5k since opening the order books.
> I test drove one at the weekend and it felt no quicker than my current car, maybe even a tad slower?, i did like it though, it certainly got more looks than my car did and the A45 I tried also (both of which nobody even took a second glance at LOL).
> 
> 2016 Ford Focus RS vs A45AMG vs Golf R - YouTube


Would like to see this redone, but giving the Golf R a remap to bring its power up to similar level as the other 2 cars.

I know they're comparing standard cars, but it would be interesting after seeing 0-60 times of 3.7 for remapped R's.


----------



## 182_Blue

donnyboy said:


> Would like to see this redone, but giving the Golf R a remap to bring its power up to similar level as the other 2 cars.
> 
> I know they're comparing standard cars, but it would be interesting after seeing 0-60 times of 3.7 for remapped R's.


It's wouldn't be fair LOL, remapped R's are very quick though.


----------



## alan hanson

182_Blue said:


> In case anyone is interested in ordering a RS it's worth noting they now start at 31k and have less spec than a Golf R so in reality they aren't the bargain hatch they were originally as Ford have upped the price by 2.5k since opening the order books.
> I test drove one at the weekend and it felt no quicker than my current car, maybe even a tad slower?, i did like it though, it certainly got more looks than my car did and the A45 I tried also (both of which nobody even took a second glance at LOL).
> 
> 2016 Ford Focus RS vs A45AMG vs Golf R - YouTube


Just the way id want it, still powerful but you can go about your business, without idiots trying it on staring. Leaving it somewhere worrying about it


----------



## wylie coyote

alan hanson said:


> Just the way id want it, still powerful but you can go about your business, without idiots trying it on staring. Leaving it somewhere worrying about it


Agree with this. Picked up my A45 2 weeks ago and getting plenty of looks - maybe it's the noise of the performance exhaust though. A must tick option!:thumb:


----------



## Soul boy 68

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/ford-focus-rs-mountune-upgrade-kit-launched

How about this then, 400 BHP in the making.


----------



## Alan W

There's a full road test of the Focus RS in Autocar this week where it gets a maximum 5 Star rating and they state:

*"The most fun you can currently have in a hot hatch, on road or track."*

Alan W


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> Sticky tyres make a huge difference on the track. We've seen that before with some manufacturers posting laptimes on optional tyres.


In the video he says that it had the optional tyres, but then went on and said they were Pilot Super Sports. Pilot Super Sports come as standard, it's the Cup Sport 2's that are the option. He could've got the names muddled up though. Or did he?? :lol:



Kerr said:


> A hot hatch does have to do everything. Sit in the A45 seat and hold the steering wheel and it feels special. The Focus RS doesn't


The interior of the AMG will definitely be of better quality then the focus. I'd say it will feel more expensive, I don't know about special?



Kerr said:


> Most people buy 4wd cars for the traction and ability to point and squirt. The Focus does seem interesting with the the tail happy characteristics. A tail happy car and a manual box is going to test some people.


But that's what makes it exciting to drive! It's all well and good having a car that does things quickly and easily, but if there's no challenge you don't feel as involved and it'll get boring after a while.



Kerr said:


> If you desire a car you'll overlook the issues. If you don't like a car, you'll find fault.


Yes, this is very true :lol:



Kerr said:


> I'd just feel so out of place in the RS. I just couldn't live with the interior either.


Oh come on, it's not that bad is it?


----------



## Clarkey-88

alan hanson said:


> Just the way id want it, still powerful but you can go about your business, without idiots trying it on staring. Leaving it somewhere worrying about it


 Really? For me that's what owning a Hot Hatch is about. Something that stands out and attracts attention, and especially people trying it on  If I wanted to try and blend in without getting noticed, but wanted a bit of poke then I'd buy a Deisel


----------



## wylie coyote

Thing is it's the colour that makes the RS look special and attract attention not the bodykit/spoiler. My brother in law got his last week and I was surprised how subtle it was, would be very very low key in black or grey. But the blue (which he got) - you'd know what it was behind you alright!!


----------



## Clarkey-88

182_Blue said:


> In case anyone is interested in ordering a RS it's worth noting they now start at 31k and have less spec than a Golf R so in reality they aren't the bargain hatch they were originally as Ford have upped the price by 2.5k


Buuut, If the previous Focus Rs resale values are anything to go by, it actually makes it hell of a lot cheaper then the Golf R and maybe even the Renault... now that really would be a bargain lol


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> In the video he says that it had the optional tyres, but then went on and said they were Pilot Super Sports. Pilot Super Sports come as standard, it's the Cup Sport 2's that are the option. He could've got the names muddled up though. Or did he?? :lol:
> 
> The interior of the AMG will definitely be of better quality then the focus. I'd say it will feel more expensive, I don't know about special?
> 
> But that's what makes it exciting to drive! It's all well and good having a car that does things quickly and easily, but if there's no challenge you don't feel as involved and it'll get boring after a while.
> 
> Yes, this is very true :lol:
> 
> Oh come on, it's not that bad is it?


It was me that said Pilot Super Sports. My mistake for getting the tyres crossed up. The few reviews I've read all had the optional tyres to showcase the car.

The A45 does has shortfalls inside and out, but the seats are excellent and as is the performance wheel. It does hug you in and does have a good feel good factor and has some nice touches. Sitting in the Focus feels like sitting in any Focus. That's perfectly fine for a normal family car, but it should be much better in the RS. The last two have also been slated for their interior, so clearly Ford are appeasing their customers with what they offer.

The amount of people that have the driving ability to even challenge a car's handling is tiny. They'll read what they read in a magazine and align their views to that without ever experiencing or understanding the car fully. It would make zero difference if they were driving a Focus RS or an Audi S3.

I've had a chuckle at reading a few in depth reviews by people recently who managed to sample handling magic on the road, with a salesman sitting next to them whilst keeping the revs down and not using full throttle as the cars were too new. The placebo effect was in full flow.

The interior is awful for a £31,000 car. It's very cheap looking. I've not driven one, but everyone bemoans the seats and the seating position as well. To me these are actually vital things for a car. If any German car had these major flaws they'd be lambasted for it.

Externally if you haven't got it painted blue, it doesn't stand out externally either. It was a charcoal one I seen and it was very understated. Something some people want, but not what people are saying about the RS. I guess that's why the majority will all be blue.

I've only ever seen blue ones reviewed so far and only blue ones on any forum so far.

He's the charcoal one I seen. If didn't say RS on the front and had blue brakes, most people would walk right passed.


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> Buuut, If the previous Focus Rs resale values are anything to go by, it actually makes it hell of a lot cheaper then the Golf R and maybe even the Renault... now that really would be a bargain lol


I've never understood why the MK2 values are so high. I nearly bought one when they were new and I was younger. I opted for a BMW 335i over it.

At that time I was offered a sizeable discounts and cars had been pregistered as they weren't selling. They then started depreciating as normal, before surging up. I'm sure I read somewhere about a few companies all trying to snap up the used cars and force prices up.

It's now an old car and there's plenty of them. I see quite a few everyday and there's always a large supply for sale. There's nothing rare about them to make them as expensive as they are. There's plenty of supply, but with the MK3 out now, demand will fall. Supply will probably go up to with people moving over to the MK3.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> It was me that said Pilot Super Sports. My mistake for getting the tyres crossed up. The few reviews I've read all had the optional tyres to showcase the car.


I'm 90% sure he says they are Super Sports, but it makes perfect sense for the press cars to have the optional tyres fitted :thumb:



Kerr said:


> The A45 does has shortfalls inside and out, but the seats are excellent and as is the performance wheel. It does hug you in and does have a good feel good factor and has some nice touches. Sitting in the Focus feels like sitting in any Focus. That's perfectly fine for a normal family car, but it should be much better in the RS. The last two have also been slated for their interior, so clearly Ford are appeasing their customers with what they offer.


I agree with you on the interior of the Mk1, I have one and what most people say is that it's very Halfords looking lol. I don't hate it, but I'm not a great lover of it either, it could've been a lot better. With the optional Recaros in the Mk3, they are what I'd expect to find in a Hot Hatch, I like them alot



Kerr said:


> The interior is awful for a £31,000 car. It's very cheap looking. I've not driven one, but everyone bemoans the seats and the seating position as well. To me these are actually vital things for a car. If any German car had these major flaws they'd be lambasted for it.
> 
> Externally if you haven't got it painted blue, it doesn't stand out externally either. It was a charcoal one I seen and it was very understated. Something some people want, but not what people are saying about the RS. I guess that's why the majority will all be blue.


I feel that you maybe overlooking the interior and its quality a little, I bet if you sat in one it wont be as bad as you think, ok it's not Mercedes, but it's not Mercedes money either. Looking at the car as a complete package for £32k (with the optional Recaros) the interior is what I'd expect for that price. What else can deliver what the Focus can an have a better interior at £32k?



Kerr said:


> He's the charcoal one I seen. If didn't say RS on the front and had blue brakes, most people would walk right passed..


I think that's the case with all of them if they were black (Merc, Golf & Rs3), none of them look lairy and stand out like the previous Focus's did with their wider arches ect. Ford went with the toned down look to make the car appeal to a wider market, as it's the first ever Rs to be sold around the world. I would've loved for it to have had the wider look of the Mk1 and Mk2, I think it would've been a hell of a lot more popular


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> I've never understood why the MK2 values are so high. I nearly bought one when they were new and I was younger. I opted for a BMW 335i over it.
> 
> At that time I was offered a sizeable discounts and cars had been pregistered as they weren't selling. They then started depreciating as normal, before surging up. I'm sure I read somewhere about a few companies all trying to snap up the used cars and force prices up.
> 
> It's now an old car and there's plenty of them. I see quite a few everyday and there's always a large supply for sale. There's nothing rare about them to make them as expensive as they are. There's plenty of supply, but with the MK3 out now, demand will fall. Supply will probably go up to with people moving over to the MK3.


It's a ford Rs thing lol They've always held on to their values extremely well.
The Mk1 Focus Rs values have appreciated over the last few years. I bought mine just at the right time - 4 years ago with 42k miles for £7800 and it was immaculate. If I wanted to buy one now with similar mileage and condition, I'd be looking to pay £13k +.

Its RSdirect that have apparently controlled the prices of the Mk2's. Like you say, they buy any that they can find cheaper then what they have in their showroom and then put them up for sale at whatever they want lol. I think the Values for the both the Mk2 and the Mk3 are going to be safe for at least a year, as there's a year waiting list if you want to order a new focus


----------



## 182_Blue

Clarkey-88 said:


> Buuut, If the previous Focus Rs resale values are anything to go by, it actually makes it hell of a lot cheaper then the Golf R and maybe even the Renault... now that really would be a bargain lol


I have always said the MK2 has amazing residuals, we will see if the MK3 goes the same way, they are certainly selling alot, whilst I waited for the demo car to come back from another test drive they sold three!, not sure what production figure are like compared to the MK2 but at a a guess they are building more?, if they sell too many it will possibly hit the future values.

I note that alot of the speculators have had to drop their silly asking prices too on their cars, some are even close to the new RRP due to them only paying the 28.5k of the original order price, although some have caught on to the most recent rise and added that to the price of their car!

I am not knocking the car if I could have got a white one with buckets within about three months I would have my name down, but I can't and therefore my hunt continues (not just with Ford LOL).


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> I'm 90% sure he says they are Super Sports, but it makes perfect sense for the press cars to have the optional tyres fitted :thumb:
> 
> I agree with you on the interior of the Mk1, I have one and what most people say is that it's very Halfords looking lol. I don't hate it, but I'm not a great lover of it either, it could've been a lot better. With the optional Recaros in the Mk3, they are what I'd expect to find in a Hot Hatch, I like them alot
> 
> I feel that you maybe overlooking the interior and its quality a little, I bet if you sat in one it wont be as bad as you think, ok it's not Mercedes, but it's not Mercedes money either. Looking at the car as a complete package for £32k (with the optional Recaros) the interior is what I'd expect for that price. What else can deliver what the Focus can an have a better interior at £32k?
> 
> I think that's the case with all of them if they were black (Merc, Golf & Rs3), none of them look lairy and stand out like the previous Focus's did with their wider arches ect. Ford went with the toned down look to make the car appeal to a wider market, as it's the first ever Rs to be sold around the world. I would've loved for it to have had the wider look of the Mk1 and Mk2, I think it would've been a hell of a lot more popular


You can have a Golf R for £26k an Audi S3 for a little more, a BMW M135i for £25-26k, you'll get an A45 for £35k, the Audi RS3 for about the same. You'll actually be surprised just how many options you have at £35k, there's plenty of performance hatches and other cars at this price. There has never been more options ever.

Like that video suggested, they picked the Focus RS over the A45 due to cost. The real cost is really close, but by the same logic there's a bigger difference in price between the A45 and the RS than there is between a RS and Megane.

The interior is bad for a £30k car. I've seen it in person. Every review flags this up too as it's obvious.

I keep reading about big waiting lists for cars due to their demand. I've read in the last couple of weeks people managing to secure the RS on even an M2 with little wait.

I looked at the Audi RS3 when they came out at two dealers after the first couldn't get their demo car in. Both started off with the patter about how you'll lucky to get one. I test drove it, didn't really like it and thought that was then end of it. Within weeks both dealers were on the phone desperately trying to sell cars they could get.

Not much different with the Golf R, the previous must have hot hatch. People were all talking about long waits, yet again other people had no issues securing a car fast and I could have too.

Same when I bought the A45 a while back. All the patter about waiting lists, they take time to build ad they are handbuilt and only built at certain times. No discount as they are so rare and so on.

I was able to find numerous cars without an issue with sizeable discounts.

I can't help but feel that there's too much hype and desire artificially created that people buy into far too easily. All the cars are mass produced and any sensible manufacturer will make sure they meet demand if there's money to be made.

People keeping saying the MK2 was rare and a limited production. It's not rare and didn't appear to be limited by production, more limited by customers. What was there, 11500 Mk2 Focus RS and currently about 4500 MK2 in the UK? That's big selling numbers for a hot hatch.

There's only 1600 Audi S1. There's only 2600 BMW M235i, there's only 1200 Mazda 3 MPS in total from both models over the years. There's only 2000 Mercedes A45AMG in total too from both editions, then same with both RS3 generations.

Back to the time of the MK2 RS, there is only about 1000 BMW 135i.

There's even more MK2 Focus RS than there is MK2 Astra VXR. It looks to be nearly double the amount.

People keep rolling out the rarity to justify the price, you've got companies artificially boosting the prices, which also pulled up MK1 prices. However if you look at real numbers Ford sold as many MK2s than most other hot hatches at the time. Yet other cars are common, but the RS rare? Doesn't quite work out like that.

The real sales success recently is the Golf R. There's 10,000 of them sold. Their sales dwarf most other hot hatches. I would expect the Focus RS to be up there with the Golf for sales.

It's not going to help future prices of all the Focus RS though.

There's so much supply of performance cars these days and so much PCP/finance/ lease options that more people than ever can get £30k cars. There's less demand for used cars due to this.


----------



## 182_Blue

wylie coyote said:


> Agree with this. Picked up my A45 2 weeks ago and getting plenty of looks - maybe it's the noise of the performance exhaust though. A must tick option!:thumb:


How is it going?, seeing as I have been looking at RS's at nearly 35k I have seen quite a few AMG's pop up at similar cost, i do like the look of the white ones with the spoiler on, i am all over the place with cars at the moment though, it goes from hatches to 4x4 audis lol.


----------



## wylie coyote

Good post Kerr. 10,000 Golf R's sold? So 9,500 of them will be back on the market over the next 2 years as their leases expire.....and the residuals will suffer. That's why I got rid of mine and I will take some convincing to go back to VW having stumped up my hard cash to buy a R only for it to become a commodity thanks to the cheap lease deals.


----------



## wylie coyote

182_Blue said:


> How is it going?, seeing as I have been looking at RS's at nearly 35k I have seen quite a few AMG's pop up at similar cost, i do like the look of the white ones with the spoiler on.


Pretty good at the moment. Really pleased with my decision to go for a A45, can see me keeping it for a few years......unless the next one is a huge step forward.
I was really surprised how subtle the body was on the RS, and the interior is only jazz'd up by the seats. But then that's what they are all about, and Ford seems to have hit their target market spot on - an affordable mega hatch. But as has been said, the discounts available on other cars compared to the RS do make things closer than they first appear..:thumb:


----------



## Kerr

wylie coyote said:


> Good post Kerr. 10,000 Golf R's sold? So 9,500 of them will be back on the market over the next 2 years as their leases expire.....and the residuals will suffer. That's why I got rid of mine and I will take some convincing to go back to VW having stumped up my hard cash to buy a R only for it to become a commodity thanks to the cheap lease deals.


I made a balls up adding old models in with new cars with the Golf.

There is 5300 DSG models registered after Q1 2014.

https://www.howmanyleft.co.uk/vehicle/volkswagen_golf_r_dsg#!tax

Manual cars includes the older model. So 4400 minus how many cars were MK6 or earlier, but that's only a few hundred..

https://www.howmanyleft.co.uk/vehicle/volkswagen_golf_r#!tax

So still 9000+ cars, but that's only up to the end of 2015.


----------



## 182_Blue

Anyway to drag us back onto topic, this is the one I drove, it looked quite subtle in this colour, they had a blue one which was a customer car and everyone was looking at that.


----------



## donnyboy

Is this all the colours available? https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/ford-focus-rs-colours-guide-and-prices-0402

Stealth Solid is free, but Frozen White solid is £250??

Shaun, is that one Stealth or Magnetic?


----------



## 182_Blue

donnyboy said:


> Is this all the colours available? https://www.carwow.co.uk/blog/ford-focus-rs-colours-guide-and-prices-0402
> 
> Stealth Solid is free, but Frozen White solid is £250??
> 
> Shaun, is that one Stealth or Magnetic?


That one is magnetic.


----------



## alan hanson

Clarkey-88 said:


> Really? For me that's what owning a Hot Hatch is about. Something that stands out and attracts attention, and especially people trying it on  If I wanted to try and blend in without getting noticed, but wanted a bit of poke then I'd buy a Deisel


id rather have a GTI than a new RS the R as said is cheaper and a better car all round. what exactly do you get as a whole package on the RS? yet to be convinced of its price. i had a mk2.5 normal focus and theres bits on the RS which are the same!

Im not an RS nut so its always going to be hard for me to see the extra appeal.

Gone are the days of wanting to stand out to show others - but understand some do and have nothing against them for it all different


----------



## possul

What bespoke bits do you get on a gti or golf R?


----------



## Kerr

On the topic of the benefit of the cup tyres and manual v auto gearbox, this popped up today.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/n...05.05.2016)::headarticle1&utm_source=20160505

The new Golf Clubsport S has taken the hot hatch laptime record from the Civic Type R.

Notice the tyres are again Pilot Sport Cup 2 tyres. There's some pretty big claims what these tyres are worth per lap.

VW also opted for a manual box saying that any advantage that would be gained by quicker shift times would be lost with the extra 20kg weight.


----------



## Clarkey-88

alan hanson said:


> id rather have a GTI than a new RS the R as said is cheaper and a better car all round. what exactly do you get as a whole package on the RS? yet to be convinced of its price. i had a mk2.5 normal focus and theres bits on the RS which are the same!
> 
> Im not an RS nut so its always going to be hard for me to see the extra appeal.
> 
> Gone are the days of wanting to stand out to show others - but understand some do and have nothing against them for it all different


Why have the Golf GTI when you can have a Golf 1.4 tsi? I mean it's the same car after all, but it's cheaper


----------



## turbosnoop

Kerr said:


> On the topic of the benefit of the cup tyres and manual v auto gearbox, this popped up today.
> 
> http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/n...05.05.2016)::headarticle1&utm_source=20160505
> 
> The new Golf Clubsport S has taken the hot hatch laptime record from the Civic Type R.
> 
> Notice the tyres are again Pilot Sport Cup 2 tyres. There's some pretty big claims what these tyres are worth per lap.
> 
> VW also opted for a manual box saying that any advantage that would be gained by quicker shift times would be lost with the extra 20kg weight.


I'd like to see what time the ctr could do with no rear seats and stripped out sound deadening like the golf. I'm sure it could regain its crown. 1.4 seconds on a lap that takes nearly 8 minutes isn't much of a winning margin. Also when the ctr took the crown a lot of journalists cried foul play. I wonder if that may happen again with the golf.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> You can have a Golf R for £26k an Audi S3 for a little more, a BMW M135i for £25-26k, you'll get an A45 for £35k, the Audi RS3 for about the same. You'll actually be surprised just how many options you have at £35k, there's plenty of performance hatches and other cars at this price. There has never been more options ever.
> 
> Like that video suggested, they picked the Focus RS over the A45 due to cost. The real cost is really close, but by the same logic there's a bigger difference in price between the A45 and the RS than there is between a RS and Megane.
> 
> The interior is bad for a £30k car. I've seen it in person. Every review flags this up too as it's obvious.


This could go on and on and on :lol: I suppose it all boils down to what you'd want to spend you money on at the end of the day. For me it would be the focus (obviously lol)

You've got to remember that the Focus started life as an affordable family hatchback, so it's cheaper then all the German cars to begin with. They aren't going to revamp the whole interior on the Rs model so that it's up to the standards of the German equivalents. When Ford designed the new Frs they wanted to take it up a level to take on the RS3 and the AMG in the Hot Hatch category. No doubt the Merc & Audi are better at being cars, but are they better then the Focus at being Hot Hatches?

Hot Hatches are supposed to be (or were originally) taking an everyday family car and give it sports car performance at an affordable price. They are supposed to give you a buzz and make you feel excited when you drive them. Looking back at previous hot hatches, they've had bits stripped off of them to make them more race car'ish. They aren't about smooth comfortable cars with lots of gadgets. The Audi is just a fast Audi, and the Merc is too expensive, Especially when you can have a Focus for 10k less, that performs just as good as it, but offers better driving thrills (which is what a hot hatch is about)


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> People keeping saying the MK2 was rare and a limited production. It's not rare and didn't appear to be limited by production, more limited by customers. What was there, 11500 Mk2 Focus RS and currently about 4500 MK2 in the UK? That's big selling numbers for a hot hatch.
> 
> There's only 1600 Audi S1. There's only 2600 BMW M235i, there's only 1200 Mazda 3 MPS in total from both models over the years. There's only 2000 Mercedes A45AMG in total too from both editions, then same with both RS3 generations.
> 
> Back to the time of the MK2 RS, there is only about 1000 BMW 135i.
> 
> There's even more MK2 Focus RS than there is MK2 Astra VXR. It looks to be nearly double the amount.
> 
> People keep rolling out the rarity to justify the price, you've got companies artificially boosting the prices, which also pulled up MK1 prices. However if you look at real numbers Ford sold as many MK2s than most other hot hatches at the time. Yet other cars are common, but the RS rare? Doesn't quite work out like that.
> 
> The real sales success recently is the Golf R. There's 10,000 of them sold. Their sales dwarf most other hot hatches. I would expect the Focus RS to be up there with the Golf for sales.
> 
> It's not going to help future prices of all the Focus RS though.


I've never heard of the Mk2 to be considered rare, I'm not sure the Mk2 was limited either. Are you sure you're not getting confused with the Mk1? In 2002/3 ford made a limited production run 4501 cars and of those cars 2200(ish) were sold in the uk. That was considered a rare car


----------



## turbosnoop

Clarkey-88 said:


> This could go on and on and on :lol: I suppose it all boils down to what you'd want to spend you money on at the end of the day. For me it would be the focus (obviously lol)
> 
> You've got to remember that the Focus started life as an affordable family hatchback, so it's cheaper then all the German cars to begin with. They aren't going to revamp the whole interior on the Rs model so that it's up to the standards of the German equivalents. When Ford designed the new Frs they wanted to take it up a level to take on the RS3 and the AMG in the Hot Hatch category. No doubt the Merc & Audi are better at being cars, but are they better then the Focus at being Hot Hatches?
> 
> Hot Hatches are supposed to be (or were originally) taking an everyday family car and give it sports car performance at an affordable price. They are supposed to give you a buzz and make you feel excited when you drive them. Looking back at previous hot hatches, they've had bits stripped off of them to make them more race car'ish. They aren't about smooth comfortable cars with lots of gadgets. The Audi is just a fast Audi, and the Merc is too expensive, Especially when you can have a Focus for 10k less, that performs just as good as it, but offers more fun and excitement (which is what a hot hatch is about)


I agree hot hatches should be exciting, they should feel racey, and that driving them is an event. Its for that reason that the rs interior is such a let down.  Bar the seats I've seen more exciting modern kia interiors. They don't need to revamp the whole interior, its all about little upgrades and changes here and there. However I'd probably completely bin the steering wheel and start again, is it off a cmax? It looks it


----------



## robertdon777

Deffo needs a better wheel, Ford wheels are very poor of late.


----------



## Andyg_TSi

I hope i dont get flamed for this....but here goes;

The only criticism, and it has been a bug bear since Ford introduced its 'world car' policy is that there is no 3 door variant for the Focus RS.

For me a hot hatchback should be a 3 door and for a Ford hatchback wearing the RS badge it should be 3 door only for the European market. 
Let the yanks have the 5 door.

The Ford Sierra Sapphire RS Cosworth aside; which was developed as a proper saloon car anyway All other RS cars based on a hatchback have been 3 doors.

If they wanted a 5 door car of this era to wear the RS badge, they should have developed a Mondeo 4x4 RS instead of introducing the Mondeo Vignale.


----------



## 182_Blue

Andyg_TSi said:


> I hope i dont get flamed for this....but here goes;
> 
> The only criticism, and it has been a bug bear since Ford introduced its 'world car' policy is that there is no 3 door variant for the Focus RS.
> 
> For me a hot hatchback should be a 3 door and for a Ford hatchback wearing the RS badge it should be 3 door only for the European market.
> Let the yanks have the 5 door.
> 
> The Ford Sierra Sapphire RS Cosworth aside; which was developed as a proper saloon car anyway All other RS cars based on a hatchback have been 3 doors.
> 
> If they wanted a 5 door car of this era to wear the RS badge, they should have developed a Mondeo 4x4 RS instead of introducing the Mondeo Vignale.


Does the 5 door policy have anything to do with the world car policy though or is it just cost cutting ?, personally it doesn't bother me and hasn't done so since the late 90s :thumb:


----------



## robertdon777

I think in general Manufacturers are trying to slim their product range down to 5dr hatches only. Like the Clio it makes sense on a manufacturing basis but maybe not on an enthusiasts view.

I would always pick 5dr though as I have kids, but can see why a 3dr is sometimes more desirable.


----------



## Andyg_TSi

182_Blue said:


> Does the 5 door policy have anything to do with the world car policy though or is it just cost cutting ?, personally it doesn't bother me and hasn't done so since the late 90s :thumb:


Possibly cost cutting. But I just think that they have missed a trick.
If the latest FRS had been 3 door only, it would stand apart from the rest of the Focus range and be unique in that respect.......sporty hatches look better in 3 door guise to me anyway 

There's always the ST if you want a 5 door


----------



## wylie coyote

Maybe 5 doors has more to do with how the market has changed.......more buyers will have families and the younger people who used to buy 3 door cars can't afford the insurance for hot/mega hatches these days..
I don't have a family but would still have gone for a 5 door because of the above when you go to trade it in. The larger market will be those who already have kids but with a bit of disposable income so it should be easier to sell..


----------



## 182_Blue

Andyg_TSi said:


> Possibly cost cutting. But I just think that they have missed a trick.
> If the latest FRS had been 3 door only, it would stand apart from the rest of the Focus range and be unique in that respect.......sporty hatches look better in 3 door guise to me anyway
> 
> There's always the ST if you want a 5 door


Well, from Fords point of view they aren't struggling to shift them so have they missed a trick ?, you might not buy one but there is a queue of people behind you who will.


----------



## robertdon777

Just to throw this into the debate.

One of these Turbo Hot Hatch group for £35K

or a 

Dealer supplied, with BMW warranty...6 year old e90 V8 M3....for £22-25K.

Simpler drivetrain with no Turbos to go wrong...parts not dissimilar in price for servicing etc. Especially using a specialist.

Once rolling its quicker than any of these hatches. Available in manual or dual clutch, 3dr/Cab/Saloon. Will do very similar mpg to the A45/RS3 give or take 5 or so mpg (no biggy if you do average of 12K)


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> This could go on and on and on :lol: I suppose it all boils down to what you'd want to spend you money on at the end of the day. For me it would be the focus (obviously lol)
> 
> You've got to remember that the Focus started life as an affordable family hatchback, so it's cheaper then all the German cars to begin with. They aren't going to revamp the whole interior on the Rs model so that it's up to the standards of the German equivalents. When Ford designed the new Frs they wanted to take it up a level to take on the RS3 and the AMG in the Hot Hatch category. No doubt the Merc & Audi are better at being cars, but are they better then the Focus at being Hot Hatches?
> 
> Hot Hatches are supposed to be (or were originally) taking an everyday family car and give it sports car performance at an affordable price. They are supposed to give you a buzz and make you feel excited when you drive them. Looking back at previous hot hatches, they've had bits stripped off of them to make them more race car'ish. They aren't about smooth comfortable cars with lots of gadgets. The Audi is just a fast Audi, and the Merc is too expensive, Especially when you can have a Focus for 10k less, that performs just as good as it, but offers better driving thrills (which is what a hot hatch is about)


List prices these days are irrelevant numbers. Firstly very few cars people pay list price, but also the vast majority of people now buy cars through PCP deals, or even lease.

Even at list a few of those cars all are the same price as the Focus. The Focus doesn't have the standard spec to match either.

Top Gear told the world the A45 was too expensive and the world repeat it. Nobody mentions the price of the Audi RS3, which is the same price almost, or the fact the RS3 has more expensive options. The average owner picks a further £8000 of options apparently.

The average salary in the UK is somewhere around £25k per year. If you earn £25k per year a £30-35k isn't really affordable. The value of your car shouldn't be near how much you earn per year.

I read Ford have set the GFMV at £15k after 3 years. So £31k to £15k is £16k down. You'll get the A45 for £35k and Merc set the GFMV at £21k. So it's actually £14k which makes the PCP cheaper on the Merc.

Looking at the Ford website, as soon as I add blue paint, sat nav, the wheels, the better seats and the pack that included rear parking sensors and cruise control the car costs £34,950. That's all kind of standard options and nothing outrageous.

The Ford PCP online...........

They only allow 2 years, they only allow 9000 miles per year. Based on that and putting in a down payment of £3000 guess how much a PCP deal is?????

This is genuine and you can check online yourself.........

£635.91 per month.:doublesho:doublesho They say £19,700 GFMV for this car.

Please tell me people aren't paying anywhere near that amount? People are driving £100,000 cars for that kind of money. That's truly mental for a Focus.

They haven't stripped much off the Focus, it's a proper heavyweight. I'm sure it is by a margin the heaviest and that's when they even miss out on standard equipment and fancy DCT boxes.

The rough ready hot hatches have all faded out. People want a one car does all. They drive well and refined when needed, fun and fast when needed ,but have a touch of class and image.

The current Honda Civic Type R is probably the most old school hot hatch. How many of them have you seen? The world has moved on and lairy hot hatches have a limited market. The last couple of generations of Civic Type Rs all sold really well.

Everyone has already conceded the Focus had gone all soft and 5 door to appeal to more.

The Focus is doing 0-60mph in 4.6-4.7sec and taking 12.2sec for 100mph. The A45 and RS3 are doing 3.9-4.0 for 60 and mid 9s for 100mph. That's MILES faster and not remotely close.

The Cup 2 tyres are tyres designed for the track. Michelin say they are 1.8-2.4 seconds per lap faster than the Cup 1 (still track tyres)tyres when tested on Porsches at Jerez. Even with the huge advatantge of track tyres on a track the RS was slower. Take the track tyres off and it will be one of the slowest cars on the test. The advantage track tyres have over normal road tyres is huge.

Add the LSD to the A45 and it'll be even further gone.

Most of the hot hatches will only really be tested on your local drag strip. The A45 and RS3 will beat the RS without any effort at all, they are so much faster.



Clarkey-88 said:


> I've never heard of the Mk2 to be considered rare, I'm not sure the Mk2 was limited either. Are you sure you're not getting confused with the Mk1? In 2002/3 ford made a limited production run 4501 cars and of those cars 2200(ish) were sold in the uk. That was considered a rare car


Lots of people claim the Mk2 was limited. I read the discussion about the MK2 v MK3 values and the concensus was the MK2 would do better as numbers were low and the car limited numbers.

Was the MK1 limited? I bought the Astra GSI Turbo brand new over one in the early 00s. The Focus was quite a few grand more and didn't merit it in my opinion.

In the early 00s the hot hatch market was dead. All the thefts of the 90s killed the hot hatch market.

Ford sold more Focus RSs than Vauxhall sold the GSI turbo. Vauxhall only sold 1400 of them and red ones are as rare as anything. That highlights just how dead the hot hatch world was back then.

Back then hot hatches were harder for people to afford too. The Focus was £20k and the Astra was £17k. There was no cheap leases or PCPs back then. If you wanted one of those cars the monthly fees were the same as people pay today and that was technically a lot more money back then.

Ford always have great sales and there will be plenty of MK3s coming. They've always been amongst the best seller if not the best seller in their class.. They are a big company and know how to supply the right numbers to suit the amount of customers.


----------



## alan hanson

Clarkey-88 said:


> Why have the Golf GTI when you can have a Golf 1.4 tsi? I mean it's the same car after all, but it's cheaper


Let me know what's the same except the word golf, 4 wheels and a steering wheel etc.....

Saw my first ever RS on the road going to work this morning just gone 5 so was pretty empty it looked nice in my rear mirror, is that a reverse light in the rear diffuser? Its a nice car but still didn't look anywhere near a 35k car. Oldish chap driving fair enough may be a RS nut or a boss with lots of money and it's his latest toy. As I said my circumstances with two kids around I want the whole package in one. I'd love to see the materials etc inside but doubt I ever will other than photos.

Audi Mercedes-Benz etc.... Top cars don't have to convince you to part with lots of cash ford have to work a little harder


----------



## Clarkey-88

alan hanson said:


> Let me know what's the same except the word golf, 4 wheels and a steering wheel etc.....


It was a sarcastic reply to this



alan hanson said:


> what exactly do you get as a whole package on the RS? yet to be convinced of its price. i had a mk2.5 normal focus and theres bits on the RS which are the same!
> 
> Im not an RS nut so its always going to be hard for me to see the extra appeal


What did you mean by that exactly?


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> Was the MK1 limited? I bought the Astra GSI Turbo brand new over one in the early 00s. The Focus was quite a few grand more and didn't merit it in my opinion.
> 
> In the early 00s the hot hatch market was dead. All the thefts of the 90s killed the hot hatch market.
> 
> Ford sold more Focus RSs than Vauxhall sold the GSI turbo. Vauxhall only sold 1400 of them and red ones are as rare as anything. That highlights just how dead the hot hatch world was back then.
> 
> Back then hot hatches were harder for people to afford too. The Focus was £20k and the Astra was £17k. There was no cheap leases or PCPs back then. If you wanted one of those cars the monthly fees were the same as people pay today and that was technically a lot more money back then.
> 
> .


So because Vauxhall only shifted 1400 GSI's that indicates that the Hot Hatch Market was dead back then? lol. I suppose it was so dead that Honda didn't sell that many Civic Type R's either? They are still everywhere now and that was 14 years ago! There was many Hot Hatches back then that sold well, Renult's Clio 172/Cup, Megane 225, Seat's Leon Cupra, Audi's S3, Honda's Civic Type R, Mini Cooper S, Vauxhall Astra GSI, and it was the time that VW introduced the R. Maybe the Astra didn't sell that well because I wasn't any good? It wasn't even limited. The other manufactures seemed to sell heaps of their cars no problem, Ford sold every 1 of the Focus Rs before they had even started making them. So to say the Hot Hatch market was dead back then is ridiculous


----------



## Clarkey-88

alan hanson said:


> Audi Mercedes-Benz etc.... Top cars don't have to convince you to part with lots of cash ford have to work a little harder


:wall: Ford have never struggled to sell their Hot Hatches. The Mk3 Focus Rs is selling better then ever


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> So because Vauxhall only shifted 1400 GSI's that indicates that the Hot Hatch Market was dead back then? lol. I suppose it was so dead that Honda didn't sell that many Civic Type R's either? They are still everywhere now and that was 14 years ago! There was many Hot Hatches back then that sold well, Renult's Clio 172/Cup, Megane 225, Seat's Leon Cupra, Audi's S3, Honda's Civic Type R, Mini Cooper S, Vauxhall Astra GSI, and it was the time that VW introduced the R. Maybe the Astra didn't sell that well because I wasn't any good? It wasn't even limited. The other manufactures seemed to sell heaps of their cars no problem, Ford sold every 1 of the Focus Rs before they had even started making them. So to say the Hot Hatch market was dead back then is ridiculous


I'm guessing you are too young to remember the late 90s early 00s?

The Megane 225 was much later, as was any Golf R.

Volkswagen's hot hatch effort in the early 00s was a GTI with 115bhp. It was bloated, slow and had less power that Golf GTis from years before the slump.

The Astra Gsi was actually a good car. Just notice a few years later with the MK1 Astra VXR how Vauxhall sales exploded for a car that had iffy reviews.

It was at this point the surge started. Most of your choices are pushing towards the days when the market had recovered.

These days we have more choice than ever and they all sell far more than ever.


----------



## Andyg_TSi

The hot hatch market was killed off in the late 80's / 90's due to a spate of thefts and joy riders nicking cars for kicks. We're talking here of the era of the, MG Metro, Maestro/Montego Turbo & the Ford Escort Cosworth. 

Jeremy Clarkson said he was once quoted £22k to insure his Escort Cosworth for 1 year back in the day. Which was more than the car cost!.

That is what killed the market. The insurance premiums rocketed to obscene levels that nobody could afford to run them


----------



## Kerr

Andyg_TSi said:


> The hot hatch market was killed off in the late 80's/early 90's due to a spate of thefts and joy riders nicking cars for kicks. We're talking here of the era of the, MG Metro, Maestro/Montego Turbo & the Ford Escort Cosworth.
> 
> Jeremy Clarkson said he was once quoted £22k to insure his Escort Cosworth for 1 year back in the day. Which was more than the car cost!.
> 
> That is what killed the market. The insurance premiums rocketed to obscene levels that nobody could afford to run them


That was the case back then, but people forget or weren't involved.

GTI used to stand for Guaranteed theft Item.

When I started driving in the 90s I was paying over £1000 to insure a banger. Even in the early 00s I was paying a fortune.

My Astra GSi turbo was £2200 to insure the first year. An 1/8 of the actual value of the car!!!!! It did come down quickly over the years. £2200 back then was a serious amount of cash.

People complain about insurance now for hot cars, but it was worse back then. That was part of the reason the market was so restricted.


----------



## Andyg_TSi

That's why I mentioned it Kerr mate.

I started work in my 1st full time job 1991 aged 17 & my annual salary was..... £5,990 per annum.

My 1st car was an Austin Montego 1.6L bought the same year. Annual insurance was £900. It was a fortune, I hate to think what an XR3i or a Renault 5 GT Turbo would've cost me back then! Lol


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> I'm guessing you are too young to remember the late 90s early 00s?
> 
> The Megane 225 was much later, as was any Golf R.
> 
> Volkswagen's hot hatch effort in the early 00s was a GTI with 115bhp. It was bloated, slow and had less power that Golf GTis from years before the slump.
> 
> The Astra Gsi was actually a good car. Just notice a few years later with the MK1 Astra VXR how Vauxhall sales exploded for a car that had iffy reviews.
> 
> It was at this point the surge started. Most of your choices are pushing towards the days when the market had recovered.
> 
> These days we have more choice than ever and they all sell far more than ever.


Sorry, I meant the Golf R32. Both the R32 and the Megane 225 Sport were released in 2003 (the same year the Astra GSI was released) It must've been only Vauxhall that thought the Hot Hatch market was dead lol


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> Sorry, I meant the Golf R32. Both the R32 and the Megane 225 Sport were released in 2003 (the same year the Astra GSI was released) It must've been only Vauxhall that thought the Hot Hatch market was dead lol


I just looked at your profile, 27 year old. You missed what you are fighting about.

The Astra GSi was released in 2002.

There was only 12 R32 registered in 2002.

I stand to be corrected, but the Megane 225 came about in 2005.


----------



## Clarkey-88

I thought the Renault Sport was 2003. Just checked and it was 2004.

Still, the rest of the cars were around in 2002, including the first Focus Rs. 

I know the Hot Hatch market died down towards the end of the 90's but it was 2002 where it all took off again


----------



## robertdon777

Late 90's early 00s, was so poor for hot hatches. Remember Ford dropped the XR range and gave us such greats in its place as the Fiesta Si...

As Kerr said...VW Golf 2.0GTi but they did keep it real with a 16V mk3 , which wasn't that heavy that was just pub talk. They were lighter than a Peugeot 306 S16.

Even Peugeot dropped the GTi badge for a while but then bought back the GTi6 306.

There were still a lot of performance hatches available but sales were in a huge decline...but that happens with any product and niche. Its just good to see the category back stronger than ever because this is the most popular car for the car enthusiast.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Yes I know that the hot hatches were toned down in the 90's, another example of that was the Escort Cosworth's replacement (Rs2000 4x4).

So what year (in your opinions) did the Hot Hatch market pick it's self back up again, and what cars was it that made that happen?


----------



## 182_Blue

Clarkey-88 said:


> Yes I know that the hot hatches were toned down in the 90's, another example of that was the Escort Cosworth's replacement (Rs2000 4x4).
> 
> So what year (in your opinions) did the Hot Hatch market pick it's self back up again, and what cars was it that made that happen?


Maybe start a new thread as we are on the edge of being off topic


----------



## Kerr

182_Blue said:


> Maybe start a new thread as we are on the edge of being off topic


I was just doing that. Here it is.

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?p=5125824#post5125824


----------



## TomWVXR

Ive just ordered one, Been told not to expect it until May next year at the earliest


----------



## robertdon777

TomWVXR said:


> Ive just ordered one, Been told not to expect it until May next year at the earliest


Gives you time to save for the Mountune..400bhp factory approved.


----------



## TomWVXR

robertdon777 said:


> Gives you time to save for the Mountune..400bhp factory approved.


Mountune hasn't been announced yet though? Will be keeping an eye out though


----------



## robertdon777

They are already releasing some bits so the power maps will come soon enough.

400 easy I would of thought.


----------



## alan hanson

Why not release the car at 400 hp of it can manage it safely pressume that way it wouldn't lose to most of its competitors the?


----------



## Dal3D

alan hanson said:


> Why not release the car at 400 hp of it can manage it safely pressume that way it wouldn't lose to most of its competitors the?


Probably because if Ford release it a bit lower, the emissions will be lower as will the road fund licence level and sale price in countries where emissions make up part of the cost.

Doing a later upgrade means road fund licence is kept down (where applicable) as that's set on sale levels, not post sale modifications and reliability is still there included in the fun.


----------



## wylie coyote

alan hanson said:


> Why not release the car at 400 hp of it can manage it safely pressume that way it wouldn't lose to most of its competitors the?


Good point tho Alan - I'd been wondering the same myself. If it's the halo car, make it such as standard...


----------



## Scooby0775

robertdon777 said:


> Gives you time to save for the Mountune..400bhp factory approved.


If this is the case will it keep fords warranty I assume it will ?


----------



## TYPH3OUS

Scooby0775 said:


> If this is the case will it keep fords warranty I assume it will ?


Mountune stuff for Ford usually keeps warranty so it should be all good.


----------



## 182_Blue

wylie coyote said:


> Good point tho Alan - I'd been wondering the same myself. If it's the halo car, make it such as standard...


Doesn't that go for most cars though?, golf R's can hit 360 BHP with a remap so why not release that with 360, i think it's as Dal3D states.


----------



## Kerr

Mitsubishi used to do it with all their uprated models. The modifications were all done at the dealer after the car had been registered to get around emissions laws. 

Most turbocharged can all be remapped with significant gains in power. I'm sure sometimes that emissions come into why cars are a bit down on power, but manufacturers do make sure they engineer in a good safety margin for reliability.


----------



## Dal3D

Scooby0775 said:


> If this is the case will it keep fords warranty I assume it will ?


MPxxx kits from mountune are warranty and insurance friendly as they will have their own ABI classification and Ford sign off for the warranty.

MRxxx kits from mountune do not get either I believe.

I'd guess the first complete upgrade kit for the RS will be a MP380 :thumb:


----------



## thom5

Owned three fords, two 1.6 focuses (mk1 & mk3) and a mk1 fiesta ST...only the ST was fun...tbh I would avoid the RS and bag myself a mustang...far rarer and it's not a car you'd have to explain why it was good whereas I think the focus looks too reserved...you would have to tell people "but it's an RS!" and if you have to do that then it ain't doing what a hot hatch should.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kerr

I see more official tests are being conducted and guys already hitting drag strips with the RS.

There can't be any chance those cars are running anywhere near 350bhp. The performance figures are abysmal.

Cars are struggling to make even 100mph terminal speeds on various drag strips. The Golf R manages 105mph, M135i 108mph, the A45 and RS3 are 112/113mph.






Autocar managed the same on their quarter mile run. The 0-100mph is 13.9sec.



There was the few earlier videos of the 300bhp Golf R walking away from it, but the tested figures coming out match that of the Audi S1. The Audi is no lightweight and 120bhp down. The Mini JCW traps faster on the quarter mile and it has the same power deficit.

I know straight line performance isn't everything, but the figures being produced are embarrassing.


----------



## 182_Blue

Interesting video I saw from the link above, only one tenth of a second behind the M2 on a dry track.


----------



## Kerr

182_Blue said:


> Interesting video I saw from the link above, only one tenth of a second behind the M2 on a dry track.
> 
> BMW M2 vs Ford Focus RS: Which is king on track? - YouTube


The track has little straights. It's all twisty, slow technical stuff. He also makes a big mistake in the M2, then shortchanges adding to the loss.

Even then on a short track that is suited to 4wd, the Focus press car likely to have track tyres, the lap time of only 40 odd seconds, it still lost.

On a real circuit I'd expect the M2 to win comfortably.


----------



## 182_Blue

I simply saw the video from the link and thought it interesting.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Looks like the Focus is doing extremely well at what it was set out to do! It's certainly doing a lot better then Kerr wants it to 

:lol:


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> Even then on a short track that is suited to 4wd, the Focus press car likely to have track tyres, the lap time of only 40 odd seconds, it still lost.


No track tyres on this one, same tyres as the M2. Here's a pic from the photo album on that test.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/95569/bmw-m2-vs-ford-focus-rs-vs-audi-rs3-pictures#15

Clearly says 'Super Sport' at the bottom. Makes me wonder if the car that Autotrader used for their big test had Super Sports on it. There isn't actually an option to add Cup 2 tyres. I'm sure that they were supposed to come with the Forged wheel option originally, but of the 3 that I've seen with the Forged wheels, none have had the cup 2 tyres, they've all had Super Sports


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> Looks like the Focus is doing extremely well at what it was set out to do! It's certainly doing a lot better then Kerr wants it to
> 
> :lol:


How is it doing better than I want it to? I expected it to perform much better than it is. I was expecting 0-100mph in around mid 10s maybe 11s. Not 14s. That's really slow by modern standards.

What is a 350bhp hatch supposed to do?

A 350bhp hatch should be really fast and it just isn't. How can a 230bhp Audi be faster? Even the Mazda 3 MPS with the same engine and 260bhp is faster..

Reading the Ford forums prior to the release and they were all dreaming of performance figures to better the A45 and RS3. Rather than getting anywhere close to them, then falling short of the Golf R for speed, now it can't even beat the Audi S1. It's impossible to say that's not embarrassing.

Having read the posts on the back of performance tests and drag strip times, posts were deleted and requests made for those discussions to happen in private member's only areas of the forum. It's hard to extract anything other than owners are not happy with the performance on offer.

If owners are suddenly going to tell me it's no longer important, they are just kidding themselves on. It's mattered for every hot hatch since the creation of the hot hatch and it matters now.


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> No track tyres on this one, same tyres as the M2. Here's a pic from the photo album on that test.
> 
> http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/95569/bmw-m2-vs-ford-focus-rs-vs-audi-rs3-pictures#15
> 
> Clearly says 'Super Sport' at the bottom. Makes me wonder if the car that Autotrader used for their big test had Super Sports on it. There isn't actually an option to add Cup 2 tyres. I'm sure that they were supposed to come with the Forged wheel option originally, but of the 3 that I've seen with the Forged wheels, none have had the cup 2 tyres, they've all had Super Sports


Many of the reviews all highlight the Cup 2 tyres. Autocar had Cup 2 tyres on their test car for those times.

I think you need to give the reviews just a little credit that they've looked at the tyres before making up facts. Not many people know what Cup 2 tyres are, so you'd need to see them to know surely?

In the past Seat got slaughtered for doing laptimes with tyres and parts that weren't available to customers.

I didn't see the Cup 2 tyres on the options list a while back when I looked, but I'm sure I read they are £1100-1200, so maybe not going to be common on road cars. They don't last as long either with the compound and less tread depth.

Maybe Ford change the tyres on location when they know they are going on track? If they want to showcase their performance car, they are surely going to do all they car to make it compete?


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> Many of the reviews all highlight the Cup 2 tyres. Autocar had Cup 2 tyres on their test car for those times.
> 
> I think you need to give the reviews just a little credit that they've looked at the tyres before making up facts. Not many people know what Cup 2 tyres are, so you'd need to see them to know surely?
> 
> In the past Seat got slaughtered for doing laptimes with tyres and parts that weren't available to customers.
> 
> I didn't see the Cup 2 tyres on the options list a while back when I looked, but I'm sure I read they are £1100-1200, so maybe not going to be common on road cars. They don't last as long either with the compound and less tread depth.
> 
> Maybe Ford change the tyres on location when they know they are going on track? If they want to showcase their performance car, they are surely going to do all they car to make it compete?


Just had a quick skip through the Autotrader test to look for any close ups of the wheels, and again the car appears to have Pilot Super Sports and not the Cup 2's. If you pause it at the right place at 16:40 you can see that they are Super Sports






So it would seem that on these tests they are using just a usual tyre and nothing special. Whenever a com****son test come out, you always mention that the focus has track tyres and that's not fair as it would give the car a much better lap time, and if the Focus had a normal road tyre on then it would be quite a margin slower then the A45. Well it looks as though it is just as quick around a track straight out the box then the A45. If it did have the track tyres that were supposed to come with the Forged wheels, then it would most certainly be quicker by quite a margin


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> Many of the reviews all highlight the Cup 2 tyres. Autocar had Cup 2 tyres on their test car for those times.
> 
> I think you need to give the reviews just a little credit that they've looked at the tyres before making up facts. Not many people know what Cup 2 tyres are, so you'd need to see them to know surely?


Straight after it shows that they are Super Sports he says that the Forged wheel option comes with the Stickier Cup 2's (when they obviously don't) so he's probably not even bothered to look at what's on the car, and he's just taken what Ford said on their early press release and said they are Cup 2's


----------



## Dal3D

Kerr said:


> Many of the reviews all highlight the Cup 2 tyres. Autocar had Cup 2 tyres on their test car for those times.
> 
> I think you need to give the reviews just a little credit that they've looked at the tyres before making up facts. Not many people know what Cup 2 tyres are, so you'd need to see them to know surely?
> 
> In the past Seat got slaughtered for doing laptimes with tyres and parts that weren't available to customers.
> 
> I didn't see the Cup 2 tyres on the options list a while back when I looked, but I'm sure I read they are £1100-1200, so maybe not going to be common on road cars. They don't last as long either with the compound and less tread depth.
> 
> Maybe Ford change the tyres on location when they know they are going on track? If they want to showcase their performance car, they are surely going to do all they car to make it compete?


Cup2 tyres have not and will not be a factory option for UK sold Focus Rs cars regardless of which alloy option you chose.

Some of the Valencia and Lommel test cars had them (the left hand drive cars) but not on the RHD cars tested here.

I couldn't especially give a monkeys left testicle what the 0-60 / 0-100 times are of my new RS, I just know it's fun to drive and makes me grin like a 5 year old.

To me having fun is the main thing, not some willy waving exercise down the pub.

:thumb:


----------



## Soul boy 68

Dal3D said:


> Cup2 tyres have not and will not be a factory option for UK sold Focus Rs cars regardless of which alloy option you chose.
> 
> Some of the Valencia and Lommel test cars had them (the left hand drive cars) but not on the RHD cars tested here.
> 
> I couldn't especially give a monkeys left testicle what the 0-60 / 0-100 times are of my new RS, I just know it's fun to drive and makes me grin like a 5 year old.
> 
> To me having fun is the main thing, not some willy waving exercise down the pub.
> 
> :thumb:


That is whats important to me also, how much fun a car can give you and not how quick it really is.


----------



## alan hanson

Very true but does it justify it's price tag and as it's a hot hatch should it lose in pretty much every department against current hot hatches? I'm not sure it should at least be level surely. its good we all fancy something different but Ford were willy waving with the hype before release something it hasn't lived up to.


----------



## Kerr

Dal3D said:


> Cup2 tyres have not and will not be a factory option for UK sold Focus Rs cars regardless of which alloy option you chose.
> 
> Some of the Valencia and Lommel test cars had them (the left hand drive cars) but not on the RHD cars tested here.
> 
> I couldn't especially give a monkeys left testicle what the 0-60 / 0-100 times are of my new RS, I just know it's fun to drive and makes me grin like a 5 year old.
> 
> To me having fun is the main thing, not some willy waving exercise down the pub.
> 
> :thumb:


Strange that so many journalists, who know about cars, are specifically pointing them out and taking photos of RHD cars. I guess they have filmed in various locations to make up their articles and tested at different times.

One of the cars that has been ripped to shreds on here is the GT86. The context of those arguments is always it doesn't matter how much fun it is, the performance is far too slow compared to other cars. I've always argued that's the wrong way to look at it. It's not actually slower than a lot of cars that people think are fast. It's odd how people can find facts that aren't true.

Read any forum and the performance of a performance car is crucial. People analyse acceleration and lap times, even though they'll probably never even go near a track and can't drive like that anyway. It still matters though. We can all put our foot to the floor and use the car's straight line performance, that is why more will hit drag strips than race circuits.

I just find it odd that the Focus only offers the performance it does for the power it has. It should be a lot faster than the figures produced. I'm also surprised that the magazines testing these time also don't question it. In other tests they point out car B is 0.2sec quicker than car a.....

When people questioned the times of the Ford forum, owners asked for the thread to be hidden. Posts were then removed and the thread deleted. If that's not people upset, I don't know what is.

I'm sure very few people would agree that performance stats don't matter. It has mattered for every other performance car. It's also the reason so many people opt for DCT over manual for the few extra tenths it brings. If a few tenths matter, then 4+ seconds really matters.


----------



## Dal3D

Kerr said:


> Strange that so many journalists, who know about cars, *obviously not that much as they make so many mistakes in quoting things incorrectly constantly* are specifically pointing them out and taking photos of RHD cars. I guess they have filmed in various locations to make up their articles and tested at different times.
> 
> One of the cars that has been ripped to shreds on here is the GT86. The context of those arguments is always it doesn't matter how much fun it is, the performance is far too slow compared to other cars. I've always argued that's the wrong way to look at it. It's not actually slower than a lot of cars that people think are fast. It's odd how people can find facts that aren't true.
> 
> Read any forum and the performance of a performance car is crucial. People analyse acceleration and lap times, even though they'll probably never even go near a track and can't drive like that anyway. It still matters though. *To who? You? Certainly doesn't to me. I put a deposit down before any performance or power figures were known I went on Fords heritage to deliver a fun RS car* We can all put our foot to the floor and use the car's straight line performance, that is why more will hit drag strips than race circuits.
> 
> I just find it odd that the Focus only offers the performance it does for the power it has. It should be a lot faster than the figures produced. *Automotive Engineer are we?* I'm also surprised that the magazines testing these time also don't question it. In other tests they point out car B is 0.2sec quicker than car a.....
> 
> When people questioned the times of the Ford forum, owners asked for the thread to be hidden. *No they didn't. The moderators moved them to the correct section that you can't see because you need to be a paid up member to see them.* Posts were then removed and the thread deleted. *Nope. Your assumption rather than fact* If that's not people upset, I don't know what is. *I think you're the one upset.*
> 
> I'm sure very few people would agree that performance stats don't matter. It has mattered for every other performance car. It's also the reason so many people opt for DCT over manual for the few extra tenths it brings. If a few tenths matter, then 4+ seconds really matters. *If that matters to the actual buyer rather than the magazine stat reader in the back of a mag, then fair enough. A Golf R I drove felt numb and inert compared to my RS. For me it's about the feeling just as much as the times - something you don't seem to get a grasp of.*


Anyway, you're entitled to your opinion, just as I am.


----------



## Kerr

I can't quote as you've done it all wrong.


How hard is it to look at the tyres? How could they see something that wasn't there and photograph them too??


You don't need to be an automotive engineer to understand with 350bhp it should be faster than the proven times. It's just basic common sense. All the other hatches 300bhp+ even in FWD guise manage faster acceleration. The 4wd cars of similar power are two levels of performance up. You don't need anything more than common sense to say the car is slow for the power and weight. Look at all the cars with similar power to weight ratios and drivetrain and the performance all ends up rather similar. Example being the A45 and RS3. 4wd, similar power, similar weight, similar performance. 

The RS with 350bhp shouldn't be slower than an Audi S1 with 230bhp. There is absolutely no argument about that, unless you're kidding yourself on. 

Before the RS came out the claims and dreams of the Ford forums was it would be faster than the RS3 and A45.

I read the forum with my own eyes. I seen the posts been made, the requests to remove them and delete them as they were embarrassing. They were removed and a thread deleted. 

The discussion was firstly in the magazine reviews thread and they were discussing the Autocar review which contained the times. It was the right section as far as I could see. They were later on the open forum and then were requested to be deleted again. 

I'm not upset, I have no reason to be upset. 

I've always been curious how magazines come up with their reviews. I read about how car xxxx is perfect and there is nothing better and never will be. 6 months later something else comes along and car xxxx isn't what we thought it was back then..........continue in that circle. 

To me a hot hatch has to be able to do everything. Reading the reviews, like the rest of the reviews they all pick up significant faults, build quality, seats and position, fuel cosumption, bad ride and not a very good engine. 

How can a car have so many shortcomings and be a 5 star car? 

Autocar did conclude the Golf R is the better car if you can't overlook the faults with the Ford. To me they are significant faults. Maybe if you're a huge Ford fan and used of what Ford offer then it's maybe not a big stumbling block. 

None of the magazines has ever turned around and backed up their tests and said it's much slower than its rivals. They'll point out that it's ££££ cheaper, point out the RS is a bargain, but they won't point it that it doesn't perform like the cars they compare it to. It's all rather odd.

They also don't point out that a £31k doesn't even have rear parking sensors. The other cars cost more and offer more, yet get slated for it. I don't understand the logic.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> I just find it odd that the Focus only offers the performance it does for the power it has. It should be a lot faster than the figures produced.


It lacks the straight line performance because it doesn't have a DCT. I know that you say that having a DCT doesn't help by much. In some cases it doesn't but it all depends on the person that's driving the manual as to how good & fast they can change gear. There's also changing gear at the right time, a DCT will be programmed to change up a gear at the exact moment that's required to get the maximum performance from the car, and it will do that perfect every time. With a manual, gear changes will never be 100% perfect, you can change too early or even too late. Then there's also the break in the pull from a manual, every gear change you have to let off the throttle to be able to change up, where as a DCT will pretty much have a constant surge with no break what so ever.

In this Autocar video the closest time they got to matching the Golf R DSG in the manual Golf R was 0.6, and the worst was nearly a second slower to 60. His gear changes weren't naff either. I'd imagine if they were testing those cars to 100MPH then the gap would've been even larger. Notice the DSG gets the same time on each run too.






Then there's the different gear ratios that you get from a DCT. They come with 7 gears, so will have a shorter gear ratios probably from 3rd upwards, and having the shorter ratios coupled with the instant shifting will make the car get more out of the power band. So of course a DCT will have the edge over the manual in a straight line


----------



## Kerr

The Ford Focus RS is doing 60 - 100mph in 8.6secs. You'll have what, one gear change, maybe two at most? That's not even an in gear test, that's taking 13.9 off of 5.3. So no throttle delay or lag taken into account. 

I don't think you realise just how slow that is. 

The Audi S1 that is faster is a manual only car too, there is no DSG option. It's faster from 0-100mph and faster time and terminal speed on the quarter mile.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> The Ford Focus RS is doing 60 - 100mph in 8.6secs. You'll have what, one gear change, maybe two at most? That's not even an in gear test, that's taking 13.9 off of 5.3. So no throttle delay or lag taken into account.
> 
> I don't think you realise just how slow that is.
> 
> The Audi S1 that is faster is a manual only car too, there is no DSG option. It's faster from 0-100mph and faster time and terminal speed on the quarter mile.


Well I'm sure the Mountune Pack will get better sprint times when it's available.

You mention the Audi S1, Is that the car that's alot faster then the Fiesta ST, but keeps losing to it in the reviews?


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> Well I'm sure the Mountune Pack will get better sprint times when it's available.
> 
> You mention the Audi S1, Is that the car that's alot faster then the Fiesta ST, but keeps losing to it in the reviews?


There is already tuned cars out there. Even the tuned cars are much slower than the A45 and RS3 in standard guise. They will need to throw a lot of power at the RS to even keep up.

Then the A45 and more so RS3 boys have tuning options too. There's some mentally fast cars out there.

Ford have always been supported well in the tuning world. They'll likely have plenty of options soon. There didn't seem to be that much options for the engine when in the Mazda.

The S1 is knocked down because of the cost. It is a bit pricey, but it is 4wd, an Audi and 230bhp. It's debatable if S1 customers would be seriously considering a Fiesta.

I just used that for argument sake to show the performance of the RS. The S1 is the little brother to the S3, which is obviously the twin of the Golf R.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> There is already tuned cars out there. Even the tuned cars are much slower than the A45 and RS3 in standard guise. They will need to throw a lot of power at the RS to even keep up..


What tuning packages are available now? I was under the impression that they were still in development?



Kerr said:


> Then the A45 and more so RS3 boys have tuning options too. There's some mentally fast cars out there..


But are they factory approved like the Mountune is? I suppose the Mountune upgrade could be considered an optional extra



Kerr said:


> The S1 is knocked down because of the cost. It is a bit pricey, but it is 4wd, an Audi and 230bhp. It's debatable if S1 customers would be seriously considering a Fiesta.
> 
> I just used that for argument sake to show the performance of the RS. The S1 is the little brother to the S3, which is obviously the twin of the Golf R.


It's also less fun to drive then the Fiesta. Sounds like the German rivals of the Focus RS (to expensive and/or boring to drive) I've said it before, but a hot hatch really needs to offer driving thrills. If it doesn't offer them then it's never going to take the crown in a hot hatch shootout


----------



## Kerr

A company called Pumaspeed. They are offering remaps and tuning boxes claiming 70+bhp. They clocked a 108mph terminal speed their tuned car. 

That's the same as the M135i for example. 

The A45 and RS3 are still 4-5mph faster and that is a lot down a quarter mile. 

They managed 103mph with their standard car, which is the fastest I've seen but still slow, then 108mph with the tuned car. So if it takes 70bhp to gain 5mph, it'll take an even larger hike to gain another 5mph.

So if 420 bhp can't beat 320bhp, what chance has the 400bhp Mountune Pack beating 380bhp? I see they offer more upgrades too. You'd be better buying the A45 and not pumping loads in to attempt to keep up if you're not happy with the performance.

I've never driven the S1, but it's the same engine and platform at the S3 and R. I doubt it can be that bad. It's a lot bigger and heavier than a Fiesta, so it's not really like for like. I've never read boring in a review before. I don't think I've ever heard of any of the big German cars referred to as boring before.


----------



## Brian1612

Just like to say I personally couldn't give a toss how good rhe little fiesta ST is. It puts me to sleep looking and listenong to it, such a boring car as is the full ST range in my opinion. Even the new RS is pretty boring in boths looks and sounds compared to the MKII. It's a dissapointing car to me and going by fords history, no surprise it isn't touching the quoted times, the same story can be found on the old RS also. 

How they get away with it is anyone's guess.


----------



## Clarkey-88

oh, Pumaspeed lol Anyone with any sense wouldn't have their car touched by them (well that's what it's like with the Mk1 Focus Rs lot anyway)

Ok they might not of used the word boring, but when compared to the Fords they don't come close to offering the fun that they offer. You even said yourself that the RS3 is a dull drive


----------



## Clarkey-88

Brian1612 said:


> Just like to say I personally couldn't give a toss how good rhe little fiesta ST is. It puts me to sleep looking and listenong to it, such a boring car as is the full ST range in my opinion. Even the new RS is pretty boring in boths looks and sounds compared to the MKII. It's a dissapointing car to me and going by fords history, no surprise it isn't touching the quoted times, the same story can be found on the old RS also.
> 
> How they get away with it is anyone's guess.


Are you angry with the Fiesta ST because it always comes out on top of the Fiat Abarth in the reviews and you believe it shouldn't? Or are you angry because you bought an Abarth when you should've bought an ST?


----------



## Clarkey-88

Brian1612 said:


> How they get away with it is anyone's guess.


Get away with what?


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> oh, Pumaspeed lol Anyone with any sense wouldn't have their car touched by them (well that's what it's like with the Mk1 Focus Rs lot anyway)
> 
> Ok they might not of used the word boring, but when compared to the Fords they don't come close to offering the fun that they offer. You even said yourself that the RS3 is a dull drive


I did say the RS3 was a dull drive, there's some people who agree, there's some people who strongly disagree, then the RS3 owners say it's the best car ever and won't hear a word against it. People with my opinion are totally wrong according to RS3 owners.

They were fuming at the Autotrader review.

I've never really been a big Ford fan. I don't have this emotional attachment that a lot of people have for Ford. Over all the years they've released hot cars, I've never really liked any of them that much after the Escort Cosworth.

I think they've all been hyped up too much. There has always been better, more fun alternatives, often cheaper too.

They've also been very guilty of falling way short of the power and performance figures claimed. They have always been outperformed by cars you'd not expect.

It appears the MK3 is also very guilty of this. The performance figures for the Mk3 are very poor.

My issues with the Mk3 is that people are trying to make it sound much more than it is. They keep saying it's a mega hatch and com****ng it to the big boys. They keep telling everyone it's a bargain and it sounds as if you're getting an amazing deal.

I don't think it's in the mega hatch category when it falls so short on performance, the barrier than defines the mega hatch.

Then saying at £31,000 it's a bargain when the spec of the car is so poor and the build quality falls short too just isn't fair. It's cheaper, but it's clear why.

I fail to understand all the glowing 5 star reviews even though they all admit many serious issues. Normally they don't mention any faults until six months down the line when the next big thing is out.

I've listened Ford owners for years how RWD is rubbish, drifting is just stupid and there is nothing wrong with FWD. Now Ford have made a hatch that handles like a RWD car and even drifts, suddenly things that didn't matter are now really important.

People don't pick cars to suit their wants and needs, they pick a car and change their stories.

Ford have always been the media darlings. They get too much press and favourably assistance. If Vauxhall brought the same package out there wouldn't be the same hype.

I guess I'm at the wrong age for a Ford RS. I'm not young enough to desire one, but I'm not old enough to want to relive my youth with the fond memories of Fords I had.


----------



## 182_Blue

Clarkey-88 said:


> VW Golf R - DSG versus manual by autocar.co.uk - YouTube
> 
> Then there's the different gear ratios that you get from a DCT. They come with 7 gears, so will have a shorter gear ratios probably from 3rd upwards, and having the shorter ratios coupled with the instant shifting will make the car get more out of the power band. So of course a DCT will have the edge over the manual in a straight line


Just to point out (as the video shows a Golf R) the DSG R doesn't have 7 gears, it has 6 same as the manual.


----------



## Dal3D

Kerr said:


> Ford have always been supported well in the tuning world. They'll likely have plenty of options soon. There didn't seem to be that much options for the engine when in the Mazda.


The above quote is just one of so many that you have factually wrong that I really can't be bothered to correct them all. I had an MPS - there were lots of tuning options for the engine - I had lots of them.

We get you don't like the RS - please knock yourself slagging it off but others reading his posts, please do your own research to get facts rather than his opinion.


----------



## andy665

Different people want different things.

I seriously considered 3 cars:

Octavia VRs230
Golf R
M135i

Octavia had the best equipment. looked great in estate form, was superbly built, loads of room - it was a great choice if you buy with your head

Golf R - fast but just too competent, no playfulness in it at all and getting a bit common as well - still a great car though

M135i - worst build quality, least space, worst looks, least equipment - its still the one I bought - because it was fun to drive, great engine, rwd and a bit of a handful - a challenge to get the best out of it 

Did I look at performance - I wanted something quick but bhp, 0-60, top speed, I looked at them but any of the 3 I considered were all more than quick enough for my purposes


----------



## Kerr

Dal3D said:


> The above quote is just one of so many that you have factually wrong that I really can't be bothered to correct them all. I had an MPS - there were lots of tuning options for the engine - I had lots of them.
> 
> We get you don't like the RS - please knock yourself slagging it off but others reading his posts, please do your own research to get facts rather than his opinion.


What am I wrong about?

I'm not slagging it off. What have I said that is remotely unfair, or unjust?

Last time I looked at the MPS they were having real issues mapping the car to high outputs. Most cars were struggling to better 370bhp with a good level of tuning.

I see now there's is more extreme tuning options. It's still a lot of work to crack 400bhp. Most people are looking for simple tuning, maps and exhausts etc.


----------



## Dal3D




----------



## Soul boy 68

Kerr said:


> There is already tuned cars out there. Even the tuned cars are much slower than the A45 and RS3 in standard guise. They will need to throw a lot of power at the RS to even keep up.
> 
> Then the A45 and more so RS3 boys have tuning options too. There's some mentally fast cars out there.
> 
> Ford have always been supported well in the tuning world. They'll likely have plenty of options soon. There didn't seem to be that much options for the engine when in the Mazda.
> 
> The S1 is knocked down because of the cost. It is a bit pricey, but it is 4wd, an Audi and 230bhp. It's debatable if S1 customers would be seriously considering a Fiesta.
> 
> I just used that for argument sake to show the performance of the RS. The S1 is the little brother to the S3, which is obviously the twin of the Golf R.


As you all know I have an S1, not for much longer though and yes it is pricey when compared to the Fiesta ST but with that you get much better build quality, a desirable image, much better materials, it's all wheel drive and it's pretty quick for it's size.


----------



## Kerr

Dal3D said:


>


You're the guy that says I'm upset, yet you're the guy making the niggly comments, images and remarks.

You earlier suggested I'd need to be an automotive engineer to have the opinion that the figures produced for the Focus are slow for 350bhp. There is absolutely no dispute whatsoever that the car is slow for 350bhp.

You keep telling me I'm wrong, yet make silly comments like that to disregard what is very obvious.


----------



## Soul boy 68

OK guys, I can tell this debate is getting a little heated so please lets try and keep it sensible and constructed in which the majority of it has, I'd hate to see this thread fall apart. Thank you.


----------



## Kerr

Soul boy 68 said:


> As you all know I have an S1, not for much longer though and yes it is pricey when compared to the Fiesta ST but with that you get much better build quality, a desirable image, much better materials, it's all wheel drive and it's pretty quick for it's size.
> 
> View attachment 46826


It's not a straight comparison between the S1 and the Fiesta. There isn't that much similarities when you directly think about it. Bigger engine, more power, more performance, 4wd, higher build quality and obviously an Audi is always going to be more pricey than a Fiesta.

The Fiesta is a good little car and very hard to beat for the price you can get one.

As much as it's not fair to compare a Fiesta ST to a S1 as there is so much extra in that cost, it's not directly fair for the Focus to be compared to the A45/RS3.

I didn't mean for it to turn into a ST/S1 battle. I was just using it to highlight that the 350bhp Focus shouldn't be recording slower times than the S1 with 230bhp.

EDIT......Why is normal English words now getting deleted due to the swear filter?


----------



## Clarkey-88

You've got to give it to the Focus for its performance on the track, considering how much faster the Audi, Merc and VW are in a straight line, the focus wins back the credit for its driving abilities. It's clear that the Focus out performs the rest with the way it drives


----------



## Soul boy 68

^^^ That's fine Kerr, sometimes these threads can go a little wayward and I get your point about the ST/S1 comparison, I am surprised that the Focus RS recorded slower times than the S1 considering it's got over 100 bhp more.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Clarkey-88 said:


> You've got to give it to the Focus for its performance on the track, considering how much faster the Audi, Merc and VW are in a straight line, the focus wins back the credit for its driving abilities. It's clear that the Focus out performs the rest with the way it drives


I have to agree with you on that point, I have test driven the RS3 and although it's rapid, it felt a little disappointing with it's lack of driver involvement.


----------



## Clarkey-88

182_Blue said:


> Just to point out (as the video shows a Golf R) the DSG R doesn't have 7 gears, it has 6 same as the manual.


Yes, I am aware of that. I was just using that video to show how much quicker a DSG box is compared to the manual equivalent in the real world.

The AMG and RS3 have 7 speed gearboxes don't they?


----------



## Deniance

Why are you girls arguing over the power, what about the fact the rs has five doors!, we need to get a petition going to bring back 3 door cars.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Deniance said:


> Why are you girls arguing over the power, what about the fact the rs has five doors!, we need to get a petition going to bring back 3 door cars.


I agree, a sports car or hot hatch needs to have 3 doors, 3 doors always look much better on a performance car.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Deniance said:


> Why are you girls arguing over the power, what about the fact the rs has five doors!, we need to get a petition going to bring back 3 door cars.


The 5 door thing has been done to death ever since Ford said there was no 3 door option last year


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> You've got to give it to the Focus for its performance on the track, considering how much faster the Audi, Merc and VW are in a straight line, the focus wins back the credit for its driving abilities. It's clear that the Focus out performs the rest with the way it drives


It's a road car and so few will ever see the track. Most will only be tested at the drag strip and the traffic light GP.

Even then if you ever go to a track day there is so few people who can drive anywhere near the limit of the car, either through lack of ability, or just the risk of crashing your expensive car.

It will be interesting to see how it gets on against the A45 and RS3 when off the Cup tyres that were said to be used on the Autotrader test.

I'm not sure how much credit you can give it for on track performance when many reviews have pointed out the use of Cup 2 tyres. That is obviously under heavy dispute that the reviewers have been inaccurate, but I find it hard to see how journalists could see something that wasn't, when it could be.

Like I said earlier about the video with the M2 v RS, the gap was artificially close. Small, tight, twisty track and mistakes by the M2 all suited the 4wd car.

Evo magazine managed to find a 2 second gap between the cars around Rockingham.

I think you'll find on tracks where the RS3 and A45 can stretch their legs the RS won't have a chance. There's just too much performance deficit to make up.

I actually think the Focus handling sounds great. A hatch that drives like a RWD sounds good to me. It does look very lively and gets to some angles going around corners. I don't think it will be an easy car to drive fast.


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> Yes, I am aware of that. I was just using that video to show how much quicker a DSG box is compared to the manual equivalent in the real world.
> 
> The AMG and RS3 have 7 speed gearboxes don't they?


There really isn't the gap between DSG and manual as some people assume. It is harder to launch a manual 4wd car through. Far too many people bog down as they don't give it enough revs. Obviously the RS has launch control to stop that happening.

DSG does make the most different from a standing start. On the move the difference are really small.

Like I used as example earlier in this thread, VW used a manual box in their hardcore Clubsport hatch as they said the extra 20kg of a DSG outdid the benefits.

The RS3 and A45 do have 7 speed boxes.

The new A45 has more power and torque over the last model and shortened the gear ratios too. It has made a few tenths difference, but not that much. It's now 9.5sec for 100mph over the old car being 9.9/10.0sec with 360bhp.


----------



## Clarkey-88

you aren't going to let the tyre thing drop are you lol The videos from those tests even show that the car has Super Sports on it and straight after showing them the bloke states that the Forged Wheel option comes with the stickier Cup 2 Tyres, which they don't. So yeah the journalist is wrong. Dal3D has even confirmed that all the Uk press cars don't have Cup 2's because they won't be available on the Uk cars


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> you aren't going to let the tyre thing drop are you lol The videos from those tests even show that the car has Super Sports on it and straight after showing them the bloke states that the Forged Wheel option comes with the stickier Cup 2 Tyres, which they don't. So yeah the journalist is wrong. Dal3D has even confirmed that all the Uk press cars don't have Cup 2's because they won't be available on the Uk cars


It's not journalist, it's journalists. The Cup 2 tyres feature in a number of tests and reviews I've seen.

How can you dismiss what numerous journalists have said? Why would they automatically assume their car had Cup 2 tyres fitted when they did not?

Some of the reviews specifically talk about the tyres for that reason and they were aware they were special tyres. Some of the reviews pictured Cup 2 tyres.

If one made the mistake you could maybe call a mistake, if two specifically mention it, then you've got a bit more doubt, but when you can find numerous tests all highlighting Cup 2 tyres, I'm sorry, that's way too much of a coincidence.

If it looks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

To keep dismissing numerous car journalists as incapable of looking what tyres are fitted is odd, very odd.

I read it on the spec sheet of a couple of cars somewhere. I also read about press cars having heated steering wheels, something that's also not available here apparently.

There's always stories about certain companies handing out cars to the press that are a little more than what the real customers get.


----------



## Clarkey-88

The Autotrader test car had the standard Super Sports on it and you can clearly see it, same with the car that was tested against the M2


----------



## Clarkey-88

Anyway you are all wrong. The standard Mk1 Focus is the best

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring...tin-Ferrari-Why-the-Ford-Focus-of-course.html


----------



## Brian1612

Clarkey-88 said:


> Are you angry with the Fiesta ST because it always comes out on top of the Fiat Abarth in the reviews and you believe it shouldn't? Or are you angry because you bought an Abarth when you should've bought an ST?


Not at all, I wouldn't even blink an eyelid at a fiesta st and that is the reason why it doesn't compare in the slightest to my little abarth. It's boring. And if we are talking about fun cars to drive I think you'll find the abarth usually wins that accolade hands down. Isn't that your whole argument? About how 'fun' a car is to drive? I also agree and that's why I didn't even consider a ST and went straight for my abarth 

Also to add the abarth is quicker, stops better, way better looking and sounds fantastic compared to the dull fiesta. The amount of people that stop you to ask what it is, tell you how good it sounds etc is all worth while for me, there are that msny STs on the road nobody gives a toss about them.

It has its short failings in interior build quality being based on a cheap car but so does the fiesta. The interior parts of the car upgraded by Abarth which are all the main parts you touch (seats, steering wheel, gear knob & pedals) again put the fiesta to shame, show casing how to take a standard small car and give it some flair, something Ford are very poor at doing and is evident in their current line up of dull looking dross. They lack any imagination and have done so for the last few years now.


----------



## Brian1612

Clarkey-88 said:


> Get away with what?


Quoting false power figures and 0-62 times. Your MKII RS was exactly the same story.


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> The Autotrader test car had the standard Super Sports on it and you can clearly see it, same with the car that was tested against the M2


Aren't you getting the Autotrader and Auto Express reviews mixed up?

Autotrader highlighted that the laptimes and acceleration tests were done earlier. You never seen the tests being conducted.

Watch the video again and watch the footage. One minute they are driving in pouring rain, cut back into the car and it's sunny and bone dry, back outside the car and it's soaking again.

The footage has been recorded on different days.

Looking at the laptimes they set, they must have been done in the dry as they are as fast as Evo magazines best lap times with the same cars.

We watched the cars lapping in the wet, but that's not when they set the times.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Brian1612 said:


> Quoting false power figures and 0-62 times. Your MKII RS was exactly the same story.


I don't have a Mk2, I have a Mk1. Don't know If the mk2 made less power then what they were supposed to, but all of the Mk1's made considerably more power then ford quoted


----------



## Clarkey-88

Kerr said:


> Aren't you getting the Autotrader and Auto Express reviews mixed up?
> 
> Autotrader highlighted that the laptimes and acceleration tests were done earlier. You never seen the tests being conducted.
> 
> Watch the video again and watch the footage. One minute they are driving in pouring rain, cut back into the car and it's sunny and bone dry, back outside the car and it's soaking again.
> 
> The footage has been recorded on different days.
> 
> Looking at the laptimes they set, they must have been done in the dry as they are as fast as Evo magazines best lap times with the same cars.
> 
> We watched the cars lapping in the wet, but that's not when they set the times.


Not getting them mixed up. Pause it at 16:40 and you'll see that Super Sports are on the car

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/content/features/ford-focus-rs-vs-all-the-rivals


----------



## Mikej857

Just to lighten the mood, while I was at Devil Developments the other day I was able to snap this picture showing the 3 different RS'S over the years










Having already ordered a mk3 in black I was eager to sit inside one and luckily Devils had one in which they've been "playing" with and I have to say it was a bit disappointing


----------



## Soul boy 68

Mikej857 said:


> Just to lighten the mood, while I was at Devil Developments the other day I was able to snap this picture showing the 3 different RS'S over the years
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Having already ordered a mk3 in black I was eager to sit inside one and luckily Devils had one in which they've been "playing" with and I have to say it was a bit disappointing


What aspect of the RS did you find disappointing?


----------



## Mikej857

Soul boy 68 said:


> What aspect of the RS did you find disappointing?


The interior, the seats are taken straight out of the mk2 and apart from the additional mode button you'd be forgiven for thinking you were in an ST not an RS


----------



## Clarkey-88

Most Hot Hatches are like that though. The biggest difference will always be the seats. What else would you of expected to see in there?


----------



## Brian1612

Not at all clark, certainly not in my little abarth you were so quick to have a go at which is plenty different inside to the base spec car. Only the RS it seems. It is very dissapointing inside, more so than the exterior and if you are going to argue that point then all you are proving is how much of a ford fanboy you are. You like to quote reviews, every review states how dreary the interior is, an understatement I think.


----------



## Clarkey-88

He said that you'd be forgiven for thinking you was sitting in an ST, not a base model.

Here's an Abarth interior



And here's a normal 500 interior



Apart from the obvious steering wheel and pedals, what else is there that will make you believe that you sitting in the better car?


----------



## Clarkey-88

Golf GTI



Golf R



Everything is the same, but they've changed the red and silver bits to blue and black


----------



## RisingPower

Certainly i've had the recent experience of driving a boggo spec fiesta 1.25 and really, even an st isn't going to sway me, the visibility out the rear is pretty rubbish, the interior is dull as and unless they somehow made it less silly tall, I just don't get it.

The fiat 500 is bouncy and i'm not sure I'd consider that either, but the abarth , it's a little bit crazy, it has waayy more character than a fiesta st.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Audi RS3



Audi A3 S line


----------



## Mikej857

Clarkey-88 said:


> Most Hot Hatches are like that though. The biggest difference will always be the seats. What else would you of expected to see in there?


They haven't changed anything about the seats it's like they were an after thought so they put the same ones out of the mk2 in


----------



## RisingPower

Like it or not, the interior on the st looks pretty much identical to the zetec i've been driving this week, short of the aluminium pedals and a different gearknob. I.e dull.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Weather you like the interior or not of the focus is entirely up to you, I couldn't care less.
The point I'm trying to make is that in most cases, hot hatches interiors are very similar to the model below them


----------



## RisingPower

Clarkey-88 said:


> Weather you like the interior or not of the focus is entirely up to you, I couldn't care less.
> The point I'm trying to make is that in most cases, hot hatches interiors are very similar to the model below them


The abarth is a bit different, I don't think most audis (aside from the rs audis) even vary in the interiors, not sure bmws do(in the hatches), civic type r or megane though....


----------



## Soul boy 68

IMO it's about costing and engineering, you couldn't expect ford or any other company to completely redesign the interior just because it's the top of the range model, all they will ever do is tweek the interior with flashy trim and dials and seating as we have seen with those pictures. Some could argue well what about some Alcantara or a leather dash then if ford did that with the RS, would it still cost around the £30 K Mark?


----------



## Brian1612

That photo doesn’t really show the changes & it certainly doesn't represent a current model abarth or my own.

As I said previous... completely different seats, the abarth model I have come with sabelts, mines are grey leather sabelts. The steering wheel as you can see is completely different but strangely this one doesn’t have the red leather on the steering wheel to match the rest. The full fascia of the dash changes dependant on model, mines comes with a glitter effect matte grey dash. The gear knob is solid aluminium, the top of the speedo dial is leather clad, the abarth comes with a boost gauge on top of the dash, the main dash is a TFT digital display with different modes and graphics specific for the abarth. Also comes with abarth specific car mats with leather inserts and abarth branded aluminium studs to hold them in place with meal abarth pedals, all different dependant on model. Also comes with a leather clad parcel shelf with the model name stitched into it. Carbon fibre side abarth side sills also. Also has a TTC and Sports button on the dash.

So quite different


----------



## alan hanson

agree not many differences but there is one big difference the quality to start with vw audi etc... All have very nice interiors on the lower model under the r or rs3 fords is cheaper and more plastic so had way more further to go. If the rs was less than its rivals you would understand but it'st not what is it now 34 or 35 k. and it's miles behind in interior and figures that's my issue Ford have released a car that's slower than them all costs more and build quality is no where near and these aren't cars that were released at the same time they have chance to look and see what's what out there. If v aux hall had done this with a vxr it would get slaughtered to death only as it has an rs badge ion it its ok too. looks of the rs have grown on me since seeing one in the flesh but given the market it would be low on the shopping list. I'm sure it's a good car but peeps have to accept the bad points too of this car which unfortunately there's a few


----------



## Clarkey-88

Well anyway, the Focus isn't going to please everybody, just like the R, RS3 and AMG aren't either. Yes the car gets some stick for the interior, but I suppose that all comes down to weather you like the lay out of it or not. It's not a horrible place to be, and it's not actually as plasticy as some might think. It's put together pretty well. The wheel feels pretty nice, and the dash has like a spongy feel to it, it's not hard plastic. Some people will think it's too expensive for a Focus and won't buy it, but there's plenty of people out there buying them and it's selling well.

I saw the SCC Performance Focus RS again last night at a car show. Revo's stage 1 map has been completed and will be uploaded on to this car within the next couple of weeks, It should be 390+ ( I cant remember the exact figure)


----------



## TomWVXR

I really like the interior of the new RS. Miles better than the Mk2. Even with the standard seats it's a really nice place to be


----------



## alan hanson

Parked up next an rs3 today some oldish chap with a disabled badge car looked stunning inside and out and I bet it goes. Ticks all the boxes for me just no chance of owning one sadly


----------



## Brian1612

Saw one for the first time in person tonight at Irvine Cruise. Very underwhelming to look at in the blue, even more so in black and totally eclipsed by the new Type R just down from it and a stunning dark blue MKII RS.


----------



## Clarkey-88

I agree that it doesn't stand out like the Mk1 & Mk2 Focus's did. Ford toned it down to make it appeal to a wider market. In one of the production videos, they said that they looked at the S3 and wanted to focus more on how that looks (no wide arches etc). Tbf they all look pretty bland, with the Golf R you can only tell it's an R if it's got 4 (pretty silly) exhaust tips, other then that it just looks like a normal Golf. Same with the S3 and the AMG, unless the AMG has got the aerodynamics pack on it, it looks pretty similar to any old A Class. Yes the new Type R stands out allot more then the others, but it's rank! It reminds me of a Prius


----------



## Brian1612

I didn't like it in photo's but looks really nice in person I must admit. A lot of 'fakery' going on with vents etc but still, it looks like an actual hot hatch. Agreed on all the German stuff.


----------



## alan hanson

i've been hard on the ford, dont even get me started on the katie price typre R terrible car to look at, my opinion but thats why i dont do OTT looking cars peeps get carried away focus RS over a typre R any day


----------



## Brian1612

Quoted figures from the manufacturers might suggest there is quite a gap in the performance of the Type R compared to the RS. 

Going by real world figures being reported on the RS, the 0-62 aren't as far part as people thought despite only being FWD, this is in the dry though. If in the wet, different story I bet but the engineering in the FWD type R is remarkable.


----------



## alan hanson

typre R could be the quickest hatch ever nothing would make up for the looks of it inside and out someone drank too many energy drinks whilst designing that. they must also have been on bonuses to use as much plastic as possible


----------



## Brian1612

It hits the mark perfectly though in terms of styling. It is a hot hatch and unlike the RS and most, if not all of Germany's offerings apart from the RS models, it properly looks like one. 

I didn't like it to begin with compared to the original concept but I definitely do now, looks really good in the flesh. As for cheap plastics, again the new Focus RS wins that with the nasty looking, dull black plastics on the nose.

I appreciate we all have different tastes but a hot hatch should look wild & fun, a hot hatch shouldn't look like a motorway muncher.


----------



## insanejim69

Seen a new Focus RS today in white with silver wheels pulling out of the ford dealer round the corner, looked like a Zetec S tbh unless you were actually taking notice of it, looked very bland in that combo. The blue def stands out alot more and looks more purposeful. 

Going by the pics as most people have mentioned the interior does look very bland and just like a normal focus almost, seats look good though. Would be good to see how it feels in person though. 

I am a big fan of the Mk 1 Focus RS, thats was a brilliant car with what felt like a alot of rally heritage behind it. The Mk3 seems more like a Playstation/Xbox/Need for Speed generation type car with only the RS badge to hint at past greats, IMO of course.

James


----------



## Scooby0775

I've seen 3 now on the road 2 blue 1 white the blue caught my eye straight away the white could quite of easily past me by if it wasn't for the rs badge and tail pipes 
I must say I really like it id love to test drive one but worried I might like it too much 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TomWVXR

Scooby0775 said:


> I've seen 3 now on the road 2 blue 1 white the blue caught my eye straight away the white could quite of easily past me by if it wasn't for the rs badge and tail pipes
> I must say I really like it id love to test drive one but worried I might like it too much
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I was the same, Test drove one just because my local ford dealer had one, Came out an hour later with an order form in my hand


----------



## muzzer

alan hanson said:


> i've been hard on the ford, dont even get me started on the katie price typre R terrible car to look at, my opinion but thats why i dont do OTT looking cars peeps get carried away focus RS over a typre R any day


Thats why i went for the 308 GTi in the end, compared to the RS it's subtle, compared to the Type R it's so subtle you can't see it.

Yes both cars are faster but i wont be noticed when i'm whizzing along


----------



## Steve_6R

I much prefer the MK3 to the old MK2. Slightly less 'in your face' and it just looks stunning in white.

Saw quite a few of them at the Nurburgring a fortnight ago and they really do it for me.


----------



## Soul boy 68

Would you believe I've seen four RS this week alone, three in the Blue and one in Black, I fear they will be a very common sight, they will quickly lose the air of exclusivevity about them.I think the Nitros blue is the best color, the black one looks very ordinary in comparison, IMO it seems to lack that road presence that it's predecessor had.


----------



## Blueberry

I saw one at the Bedford Autodrome Track on Saturday in a horrible dark grey colour, which did absolutely nothing for the car.


----------



## SBM

Soul boy 68 said:


> Would you believe I've seen four RS this week alone, three in the Blue and one in Black, I fear they will be a very common sight, they will quickly lose the air of exclusivevity about them.I think the Nitros blue is the best color, the black one looks very ordinary in comparison, IMO it seems to lack that road presence that it's predecessor had.


I've travelled some 350 miles over this long weekend and I've 3 Ferraris, a McLaren, even a brand new R8 on a delivery trailer, a Mk2 RS2000 and 3 stunning RS Mexicos (MK1) all on the motorways.... still not seen a single Mk3 RS and I really want to see this stunning blue in the flesh!!!


----------



## 182_Blue

SBM said:


> I've travelled some 350 miles over this long weekend and I've 3 Ferraris, a McLaren, even a brand new R8 on a delivery trailer, a Mk2 RS2000 and 3 stunning RS Mexicos (MK1) all on the motorways.... still not seen a single Mk3 RS and I really want to see this stunning blue in the flesh!!!


Not seen a single one on the road either.


----------



## TomWVXR

Apart from at dealers ive only seen 1 parked up on someones drive and 1 being driven,


----------



## muzzer

One reason i didnt buy one was the attitude of the local dealers.Went something like this
Hi, i'm interested in the new Focus RS, have you got one i can come and look round?
Nope
Okay, are you getting one?
Dunno mate
Are you bothered if i go elsewhere?
Nope.

So i went elsewhere and got far better service and then what do i see the other day, a blue focus rs with their name and demonstrator plastered all over it.


----------



## Mikej857

muzzer said:


> One reason i didnt buy one was the attitude of the local dealers.Went something like this
> Hi, i'm interested in the new Focus RS, have you got one i can come and look round?
> Nope
> Okay, are you getting one?
> Dunno mate
> Are you bothered if i go elsewhere?
> Nope.
> 
> So i went elsewhere and got far better service and then what do i see the other day, a blue focus rs with their name and demonstrator plastered all over it.


Problem was with most dealers they were suffering delays from the factory so had no idea when there demonstrator was going to arrive in most cases the demonstrator was arriving at the same time as some customers cars but the early purchases were made by people not interested in how it drives more so that it had the RS badge and that's all that mattered, the dealers knew this and feel it's a car they don't have to up sell as such

I haven't drove one yet and I'll wait till Devils have played with the one they have to air my thoughts and I'm hoping any issues that they encounter will have been sorted by the time mine arrives and I'll be able to immediately invalidate the warranty by driving straight to devils for mapping ect


----------



## Clarkey-88

Don't mean to drag this up again, but I've just seen a new video that involves a drag race with the Focus, Golf R and Civic. But this time the Golf has a MANUAL gearbox. Going back a couple of months ago I said that if the Golf R had a manual gearbox instead of DSG it wouldn't be anywhere near as quick as it was in the first drag race we all see, and watch how much slower it is. It even loses to the civic

http://www.car24news.com/heres-the-...-focus-rs-vs-honda-civic-type-r-vs-vw-golf-r/


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> Don't mean to drag this up again, but I've just seen a new video that involves a drag race with the Focus, Golf R and Civic. But this time the Golf has a MANUAL gearbox. Going back a couple of months ago I said that if the Golf R had a manual gearbox instead of DSG it wouldn't be anywhere near as quick as it was in the first drag race we all see, and watch how much slower it is. It even loses to the civic
> 
> http://www.car24news.com/heres-the-...-focus-rs-vs-honda-civic-type-r-vs-vw-golf-r/


To be fair, the Focus is moving long before the VW. You'd win most drag races on reaction times of that level.

There has been quite a few comparisons made so far between the Focus RS and the Golf R manual. A couple of the tests explained it's impossible to launch a Golf R manual. Even if you give it maximum revs and dump the the clutch, it still bogs down and the start is ruined. The Focus RS has launch control and works even better dumping the clutch at maximum revs.

On the other tests the Focus leaves it badly at the start, but the Golf managed to turnaround the speed gap and start closing.

The Focus RS has an incredible first few yards. I think every test I've seen so far it leaves even the A45 and RS3 for the first few yards before they blow it away.


----------



## Clarkey-88

Although it was great fun, I'm not getting into another 3 month debate again lol. I just see the video and thought I'd post it, because I was certain that the only reason the golf was quicker then the focus on the first drag races we saw was because of the DSG. I suppose if the A45 and RS3 were available in manual, or the focus was available with a similar DSG box, the rs3 and a45 wouldn't be much (if at all) faster then the Focus


----------



## Kerr

Clarkey-88 said:


> Although it was great fun, I'm not getting into another 3 month debate again lol. I just see the video and thought I'd post it, because I was certain that the only reason the golf was quicker then the focus on the first drag races we saw was because of the DSG. I suppose if the A45 and RS3 were available in manual, or the focus was available with a similar DSG box, the rs3 and a45 wouldn't be much (if at all) faster then the Focus


It's a terrible drag race though. I skipped the rest. If a car moves long before the rest it's always going to win a short drag race.

There's been numerous RSs down the drag strip now and they've all recorded slower terminal speeds than the Golf R. The manual Golf is faster on the move.

Straight-line speed isn't the Focus' strong point.

A DCT box doesn't make the different you keep thinking it does.

The difference between the A45 and RS3 v the RS is huge.

There was another company posting the figures of their tuned RS. They managed 0-60mph in 4.2secs(which is pretty good) but 0-100mph was 11.2secs. Stock figures are consistently much slower and tuned figures are also way down on other cars too.

That's still slower than a RWD BMW M135I and nearly 2 seconds down on a stock RS3/A45.

They are going to have to throw silly power at the RS to match the other cars in a straight-line.


----------



## 182_Blue

Clarkey-88 said:


> Although it was great fun, I'm not getting into another 3 month debate again lol. I just see the video and thought I'd post it, because I was certain that the only reason the golf was quicker then the focus on the first drag races we saw was because of the DSG. I suppose if the A45 and RS3 were available in manual, or the focus was available with a similar DSG box, the rs3 and a45 wouldn't be much (if at all) faster then the Focus


They need a dual clutch in the RS, i suspect it will be in the next RS, they seem to be a generation behind with the latest RS's, its the reason i didn't go for one in the end, I do actually see quite a few here now to so I feel a little better about not getting one LOL.


----------



## grunty-motor

182_Blue said:


> They need a dual clutch in the RS, i suspect it will be in the next RS, they seem to be a generation behind with the latest RS's, its the reason i didn't go for one in the end, I do actually see quite a few here now to so I feel a little better about not getting one LOL.


it was a deliberate decision to go with a stick box - old school feel like your driving the car thing. but yeah, it hampers performance.

ace to drive though.....but i could be biased, maybe.....:driver:


----------



## Matt_Nic

Daffy said:


> *Like all recent RS fords *will drive superbly but looks like a teenage wet dream that sucked up the accessory bin at Halfords. So will probably sell well


You mean ALL RS models worth owning? By which I exclude boring things like the mk5/6 Escort RS2000

All previous RS models were kitted up to the eyeballs in comparison to normal models. Car design just happened to be less adventurous.


----------

