Last post on Jan 23, 2012 at 7:12 PM
You are in the Ford Focus
What is this discussion about?
Ford Focus, Sedan
#1944 of 2013 The '08 American invention ruined it
Nov 06, 2007 (2:43 am)
Oh no, we need to be competitive in the fuel-economy area, especially when most Focus buyers here are bunch of cheapskates. So instead of having efficient engines like Honda's, let's just pull out the belt-driven hydraulic power-steering pump.
This original Euro classic now doesn't just look domestic. It's as boring to steer as well!
"Moving to the new design, some of the ingredients have changed, such as the conversion to electrical power steering...
Though much is the same, the new Focus has a different character than the old one, a more sober, mature character. The steering maintains the effortless, light feeling of the old car, but it's less hyperactive. While still precise it feels slightly dulled when going straight ahead, something I'd chalk up to the setup of the electrical power steering to require less inputs when driven at high speeds on the highway and fewer kickbacks from the wheel. The conversion to an electric rack also leaves the wheel mostly devoid of feedback, an area which the old Focus was very strong. The Focus' handling has also been tweaked fairly substantially to increase its stability. The new model now reacts neutrally to input, safely understeering its way out of problem situations, which is in sharp contrast to the current car's desire to oversteer upon throttle lift-off or when trail braking. Our Sport Package equipped Coupe tester featured a rear stabilizer bar for a slightly flatter ride, but there's still a fair deal of body roll."
So you don't get to play oversteer w/ this high-tech Control Blade rear suspension anymore? Our fun playful puppy has died
#1945 of 2013 Lack of Effeceint Engines?
Nov 06, 2007 (3:34 pm)
Please refrain from making comments based on biased fiction instead of Facts.
The 2.0L in the Focus has a combined EPA of 28 mpg. The 1.8L in the Civic has a combined EPA of 29 mpg. Hardly much of a difference when you consider that the Focus has a 4 speed auto vs the 5 speed auto in the Civic. Focus has a bigger engine (more torque) and has 2 cubic feet more in the passanger compartment and in the truck.
#1946 of 2013 Re: Lack of Effeceint Engines? [mschmal]
Nov 06, 2007 (7:37 pm)
More low-end torque should meant even higher mpg. As shown in other manufacturers' results, such as the 2.8 BMW gets better mpg than the 2.5 BMW if they are both tuned to have the same high-end hp.
Consumer Reports' real-world testing has been consistently complaining about Focus' low mpg, even after switching to Mazda-ized engines. While these Mazda-ized engines used in the Focus are tuned to have stronger low-end torque & weaker high-end hp than the ones used in the Mazda3, CR's real-world testing praised the 2.0 Mazda3 for having the best mpg!
My torquiest Focus engine -- the ST 2.3 -- feels weaker than my '98 Corolla 1.8 at low rpm. I get 40mpg cruising my 5-sp Corolla LE on the fwy, while my 5-sp Focus ST can't even come close.
Despite all that, I still hated my Corolla due to the poor steering, handling, ride & driving position. That's why I got rid of it & bought the Focus ST. How many people in (the "badge snob") S. California do that?
#1947 of 2013 Stupid 4 speed Auto.
Nov 07, 2007 (5:37 am)
I really wish Ford would dump 4 speed autos. It doesn't hurt so much in the Focus as in other vehicles.
The new 08 Escape actually gets lower MPG than the bigger Edge!
I know Ford is retooling a plant in Mich to make more 6F trans and they already have excess 3.5L capacity so that is coming to the Escape. But by then the competition will have moved on also.
FORD LETS GET THE STUFF TO MARKET!
#1948 of 2013 Re: Stupid 4 speed Auto. [mschmal]
Dec 01, 2007 (12:49 pm)
"A first for Ford is the firm’s new PowerShift gearbox, which is similar to VW’s DSG semi-automatic transmission. Using twin clutches, it pre-selects the next gear, allowing faster changes. The six-speed ‘box can be used as a full automatic, or with steering wheel-mounted paddles. It goes on sale in spring, costing around £950."
Ford thinks that Focus buyers in America are bunch of cheapskates that don't deserve the best transmission. So only people overseas get it.
But heck, I don't care 'cause I drive stick.
"Following in the footsteps of the hatchback range, this is the first picture of the new Focus saloon (below left). Getting the same Mondeo-style looks as the three and five-door cars, the booted car features a revised tail with a fresh bumper and LED lights. Unlike the hatches, it will only be available with 1.6, 1.8 and 2.0-litre diesel engines, as well as 1.6 and 2.0 petrols."
Click the lower right picture to see the sedan.
I still think my 2.3 "classic" Focus ST rules, in terms of looks, normally aspirated power & handling fun!
Having the old Mondeo nose
http://www.wheels24.co.za/Wheels24/Galleries/w24_GalleriesModelPicDisplay/0,,675- - - - -13649,00.html
looks more cool than having the new Mondeo nose, IMO.
#1949 of 2013 2002 Ford Focus Rear Suspension
Dec 01, 2007 (6:06 pm)
The Firestone mechanic who tried to correct premature rear tire wear said that he can not adjust the rear camber because Ford didn't create a way. I like this car otherwise, but the ride is killing me. Are there any reasonable solutions?
#1950 of 2013 Are you rotating your tires every 5k?
Dec 03, 2007 (5:46 am)
It continues to surprise me how many people never learned to rotate their tires.
I suspect though that you might have something else going on. Usually its the front tires that take the beating, especially on a front drive car.
Incidently, the Focus and the Civic have a 4 wheel independant suspension.
the Corolla and the Sentra/Versa do not have independant rear suspension.
You want a better ride, you need to get a car with a longer wheel base.
#1951 of 2013 Re: 2002 Ford Focus Rear Suspension [jacksoncat]
Dec 03, 2007 (6:25 am)
Has you car been lowered? There is no reason you should be having either a poor ride or rear camber wear, unless the car has been improperly lowered or the struts are shot. The solution is putting the correct springs in or replacing the worn struts.
Proper tire rotation is essential as well, but that will not effect the ride.
Also, you can buy a camber kit so as to be able to adjust the rear camber, but that will not effect ride either.
One of the reason I love the Focus is the supple ride combined with great handling.
#1952 of 2013 2007 Focus
Dec 08, 2007 (7:00 pm)
Just bought a 2007 SE. Great deal with all the rebates. So far about 400 miles on the car. It is not quite what I am used to, but a fun car to drive. I hope it lasts like my last Ford.
2007 Focus Sedan
cruise tilt etc...
Already at 34 MPG.....only first tank of gas....
#1953 of 2013 Re: Are you rotating your tires every 5k? [mschmal]
Dec 21, 2007 (8:22 pm)
Granted, usually it is the front tires that get ate up on FWD cars, but my Focus ZTW wagon (and I suspect other Foci) have such light rear ends that they cup tires in short order. This causes the whump, whump, whump, so many folks complain about and there just aint a damn thing you can do about it, other than carry sand bags in the trunk. I rotate my tires every 5k and after about 10-12k (for the whichever two are in the back) they are shot. Minor issue for me, the car handles like a bat out of hell, so no worries.