Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Ford Fiesta

1679111221

Comments

  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    See what I`m talking about? Here I am waiting on my new Fiesta and I posted my reasons for not wanting to wait for Fords new (C- segment) 2012 Focus and I mentioned Escort, lol. I should have remembered since I replaced my old 1998 Escort wagon with a new 2001 Focus wagon. Guess its time for my nap.
  • iamziamz Posts: 542
    Phill1, don't feel too bad about acidentally writing Escort instead of Focus. I didn't catch the mixup when I read your post. I guess they are one in the same in my mind also.
  • iamziamz Posts: 542
    That's a good plan B. Personally, I'd go for a 2006 Audi TT quattro sport.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,668
    Ok, bashing was a bit too strong. I was just trying to point out that Sync was not just for teenagers with ipods who use twitter and facebook. I was just curious about your reasons since I thought everyone nowadays at least had a cell phone that would benefit from Sync.

    If you don't listen to music, podcasts or audiobooks and you don't use your cell phone at all while driving then Sync isn't for you. I get it. Just making sure you guys understood the technology, that's all.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,668
    I'd go for a 2006 Audi TT quattro sport.

    But my wife has always been nuts for 911s (Cayman is close enough). For some reason she doesn't think we can afford one until the youngest is out of the house, even though I've pointed out time after time that I can buy a used Cayman or 911 for less than we've paid for each of her last 3 new vehicles. So this would not only be a nice ride for me but it would get MAJOR brownie points with the wife. Not so much with the Audi.......
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    Actually, I must admit that both my wife and myself both acquired our cell phones several years ago. She has a pre-paid Tracfone where as she pays about $100 annually for 12 months of use and 400 minutes of airtime which (always) rolls over due to lack of use, any I own a Net 10 pre-paid cell phone as well thats very seldom used. Both were purchased as emergency tools in case of vehicle break down or other calamity. Neither one of us keeps the phones on to conserve battery life as they are essentially for (out going calls) and convenience. We would`nt know how to text message someone if our lives depended on it. That said, you can see that Sync would be for us, a gadget that would seldom if ever be used. I am although happy to report that we both have been successful in the past using our finger to operate the power moon roof feature in our other vehicles by simply pressing the proper activation button!
  • iamziamz Posts: 542
    The bad thing about used high end vehicles (like Porsche, BMW, Audi, etc,...), are the repair costs. I've known two people who have bought "affordable" used luxury vehicles (one with a Porsche and one with a Mercedes), who quickly found they could not afford to keep it on the road.

    Although, if you managed to find a good extended warranty.... :)
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,668
    I have two neighbors and friends that both bought pre-owned 911s so I understand the expenses. And it's not really a financial decision - we could afford a new one if we really wanted it. I think it had more to do with her giving up her practical crossover for an impractical 2 seater which I agree with. I was planning to buy a Mustang convertible which she doesn't like anyway. So this way I get my sports car, she keeps her Edge and she gets to look at and drive the Porsche whenever she wants.

    I'll probably get the daughter a new one and end up keeping my Fusion for a few more years. After downgrading from a Lincoln LS and an Aviator to the Fusion and Edge I find that new cars don't have as much appeal as a car that's paid off.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    That said, if you get one with manual and without the overblown engine, the Cayman is a very decent car. Sure, things cost more but not unreasonably so. It's all of the electronics and ad-ons and goodies and automatic gearbox that end up costing a fortune to fix.

    Now, if you want 95% of the driving experience for half the money, look at a RX8.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    edited March 2010
    Who sez these high-hp cars are better to drive? Have you really had fun driving them (off track)?

    If you get to live w/ them, then you might regret.

    The heavy-weight 4-seat RX-8 has weak low end. Therefore the 2-seat Miata riding on the same-but-shortened platform power by the 2.0 Duratec similar to the Focus engine will get you more smile-per-mile on every power oversteer from churning the LSD (limited-slip differential).

    Recently my cousins each bought a new 2-seater -- a Cayman S & a base-suspension Miata. They were all surprised to find out that the Cayman S, which is about 3 times as expensive, is acutally less comfortable to steer & ride than the Miata.

    A dentist, who got excessive disposable income & just traded in his '96 BMW 528i for a new 911, told me that he doesn't even feel like driving his Porsche any more after just one day!
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    edited March 2010
    ...Escort instead of Focus. I didn't catch the mixup when I read your post. I guess they are one in the same in my mind also.

    Having the big-deal multi-link rear suspension distinguishes the two. The Control Blade suspension, along w/ the Focus, was borned in the late '90's. It took at least 1/2 a decade before the sister cars like the Mazda3/S40/V50 get to adopt, & followed by its competitors like the FWD Passat/Jetta/GTI/A3 which duplicated it only after the original Focus engineer designed for them!

    Today, the Astra/Cruze don't got multi-links, neither does the Euro-market Civic hatch. &, w/in Fiesta's exterior dimension of around 170cm width & 170in length, only the hard-riding Mini Cooper does.

    So here is my precious collection of B-class-size "vintage" cars:
    1) 1999 E36 328is coupe
    2) 2000 Civic hatch
    3) 2007 Focus 2.3 ST sedan

    Despite having Double-Wishbone suspension all around, Civic's torque-sensing pwr steering is numb & slow.

    E36's steering is heavy & slow. Fortunately substituting w/ base-Z3's rack quickens it up.

    Only the '07 Focus' quick/sharp-&-steady steering needs no significant improvement.

    The only tuning I applied on the E36 & Focus are:

    1) Torsen/Quaife differential to blast off the power during cornering.
    2) Monroe/Gabriel shocks to calm down the nervous rebound ride motion.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    The heavy-weight 4-seat RX-8 has weak low end.
    For its size, it weighs less than just about anything else on the market. And, yes, you have to rev it - it's not a V8. But it is very very fast if driven properly. About half a second faster than the Miata, in fact. It's one of the true sleepers out there - nobody seems to thinks it's that fast until they try to actually race one.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    edited March 2010
    Only about half a second faster than the Miata when rev-ed? What if you don't get to rev much in the real world? How are you gonna have fun drifting on low-speed corners? Peak hp isn't everything. That's also why the '05 TSX is no fun to play with.

    If the beautifully light-weight rotary is replaced by an electric motor, then that's a different story.

    That's why, after the test drive, I've decided to get an used fat-torque 328is w/ LSD so the power-oversteer drifting is frequently available on tap.

    In a way, the RX-8 is the best car in the world. Even w/ its ('05 spec) super-soft std suspension & high-profile 16" tires, the light nose & the complicate suspension front-&-back help it to ride even plusher than the noisier Focus 2.3 ST sedan, while the cornering limit is still unreach-able during test drive. But why did I ended up getting the Focus ST instead? Same reason why I got the Bimmer -- I get to drift in the real world w/ Focus' lower cornering limit.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    If you were contemplating an automatic, then, yes, get the Ford. The RX8 needs to be like the S2000 was and only offered ever with manual. Because whatever Mazda is doing just destroys the thing when they put that automatic into it.

    5.9 seconds 0-60 isn't slow. That's 0.1 second slower than the Cayman. And it handels almost exactly was well. They made a slew of minor improvements for the 2009 model and it's quite a bit better driving vehicle as a result. I'd liken it to the orginal Mini vs the new one - not much going on at first glance, but the tiny tweaks and changes all add up to a better overall ride.
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,686
    edited March 2010
    I got to see both the Fiesta and Mazda2 today at the local auto show. Both were roped off, hands-off. The Mazda2 looked stubby, kinda cute in a windup-car sort of way. It looked like it was a base model. The Fiesta was the sedan and looked all decked out (but was on a turntable also). It looked more like a real car, sort of like an Elantra that had been in the dryer a bit too long. The interior looked more upscale than that of the Mazda2.

    I also looked at some of the current subcompacts at the show. The least expensive that I would even give a though to owning were a Versa 1.8S that with automatic and the power package for just over $16k, and a Yaris 5-door automatic with power package for about $16.7k. Even a fairly basic Rio with power package topped $16k. Based on pricing for the Fiesta that I've seen, Nissan, Toyota, and even Hyundai/Kia will be in big trouble in this segment of the market once the Fiesta is available--and probably the Mazda2 also.
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    edited March 2010
    If you were contemplating an automatic, then, yes, get the Ford.

    The Focus 2.3 ST 4-dr, like the SVT hatch, was never available w/ auto.

    I am only interested in stick. The soft suspension w/ 16"s, which I envy, only came w/ the early RX-8 auto base model. But I checked w/ the parts dept & found out that you can adopt this plush-riding set up on the stick model simply by changing the springs & sway bars (shock absorbers have the same part #s). I just wasn't sure if the 16"s will fit over stick's possibly larger brakes.

    So are you saying that, as long as you rev, the RX-8 w/ LSD can power oversteer at very slow corners in 1st gear not unlike the Miata w/ LSD?
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Yeah. It's odd in that you have to drive it like a sportbike more than anything else. It revs super fast but it's a small sweet spot. Not going to sugar-coat it. It's small.

    Which is why the automatic fails, I think. It just doesn't want to stay at 2/3 redline for more than a fraction of a second unless you're mashing the pedal down(and then you're often going way too fast for normal city traffic)

    Yes, the smart person will modify it to the 16s, because even that is overkill for the weight and power of the car. I had an old Volvo years and years ago with almost the same HP and weight and it came with 14 inch tires. And that was more than adequate. 16s are already overkill, and 18s ride like a go-kart. In a bad way. My old 1987 4x4 Toyota is less harsh to drive than those low profile tires, and it's about as subtle and soft to drive as a brick.

    Of course, the Focus also is miserable with the automatic. And the Mini and...(I think I see a pattern with small displacement engines and automatics... :P )

    What kept me from getting a RX8 myself was that the rotary engines aren't as reliable as I'd like. It's just a fact of life that they are a lot like a Cayman or Boxster in that the engines are good for about 80-100K and then you just need a new one. It just wears out due to the way it's designed and the high compression/high revs. Thankfully it's less money to replace than the Porsche, but it's still a cost I can't afford.

    My only gripe with the Fiesta is that they should offer a small supercharger on it instead of a turbo. I just don't like turbos on small displacement engines. IME, turbos actually work best on large engines with plenty of low-end power to compensate but not a lot at the top end and superchargers work best on small engines that need a boost overall. (yes, you can do well with both, but dual-turbos and fancy software is a lot of cost vs a simple supercharger)

    note - as an example, check out the Mercedes Kompressor models sometime if you're in Europe for an example of how enjoyable a small supercharger is to drive in city traffic.

    It's pretty good otherwise. I'd certainly own one over a Mini, just because the repair bills won't be sending my mechanic on free trips to Jamaica any time soon. :P
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    edited March 2010
    Yeah. It's odd in that you have to drive it like a sportbike more than anything else. It revs super fast but it's a small sweet spot. Not going to sugar-coat it. It's small.

    So it's not a broadband? That means power oversteer is not always available on tap.

    You need delicate throttle calibration in order to fine tune your "fun" during cornering. I test drove the old '99 C230 Kompressor sedan & wasn't impressed by the non-linear throttle. The next generation US-spec C230 sedan (not hatch) was actually a 1.8 Kompressor, & I didn't even bother to test drive it. So I only believe in displacement, but 6-cyl is also too heavy for fun, especially for the nose-heavy FWD set up. It's too bad that the Focus did not follow its sister-car Mazda3's (or Porsche 944's) foot step w/ the 4-cyl 2.5. That make my 4-cyl 2.3 Focus ST a collector's item, especially w/ its more torque-bias calibration than Mazda's 2.3. As you can see, even a 5-cyl (from the Volvo C30/S40/V50) is enough to make the Focus II a loser!

    Renault: 5/5
    Agile, beautifully balanced 250 gives a hot hatch masterclass. Cup chassis has stiffer springs, dampers and anti-roll bars than the standard 250, as well as a limited-slip differential. Just be prepared for the firm ride.

    Volkswagen: 4/5
    The Scirocco R is a very capable machine that mixes excellent body control with strong grip and powerful brakes. But it isn’t much more involving to drive than the accomplished standard TSI version.

    Ford: 3/5
    While the chassis offers lots of grip and plenty of feedback, the weight of the Focus’s engine affects the handling. Traction breaks easily and torque steer can corrupt the steering. It’s not as agile as the Renault, either.

    Audi: 3/5
    The S3 is the softest car in this test, but still has lots to offer. It’s reassuring in poor weather due to the 4WD, and the light controls give decent feedback. Yet the ride is firm without the optional adaptive dampers.


    So my cousin who got rid of his '04 RX-8 (w/ 18"s), due to repeated engine starting problem, eventually bought the '08 Cayman S, but everyone hates that Porsche's ride comfort (even worse than their already-uncomfortable '04 TSX). LOL

    Bottom line, the RX-8's has the best ride/handling compromise in the world. But rotary's fuel consumption & 2-stroke-like oil consumption are stupid. So how about a "Focus powered" RX-8? The solution is the Miata, which uses a shortened version of the same platform & pretty much share its 4-cyl Duratec powerplant w/ the Ford Focus 2.0. Even before the Miata switched from 1.6 to 1.8 back then, that exact 1.8 twin-cam (Mazda engine) was already being used by the US-spec Escort GT hatch & Tracer LTS sedan.
  • iamziamz Posts: 542
    edited March 2010
    " The Mazda2 looked stubby, kinda cute in a windup-car sort of way."

    Agreed. I think they were aiming at women as their target buyer. I can't see a lot of men going for it.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    edited March 2010
    Well, you can powersteer - just like a sport bike, you have to keep the revs up above 3K rpm at all times. If it drops below that, well, you slow down like a rock. The thing has tons of power from 3K-9K and if you leave it in gear you can rev and power through a turn. But you have to almost always be a gear or *two* lower than the automatic wants to be in. I found for instance, that leaving it in 2nd gear on the test drive was all I needed to do. The second I put it into 3rd at anything under 40mph, it bogged down. The Cayman/Boxster is similar in that it's made to go 150mph and as a result you never actually use those top gears. Kind of annoying, really to always be shifting 1-2-3-6 and avoiding 4th and 5th because they have no use here in the U.S.

    As for the oil consumption, it's a required function of the design as the oil lubricates the seals exactly like a 2-stroke engine. That said, they really need to make it have a huge oil resovoir as a result. That's where the engines eat themselves as they age - you let it get a quart low and you're in trouble(this means checking the oil every week which nobody does so...)

    Oh - the Cayman is great if you get 16 inch all-seasons on it(from a boxster). I just don't get it, really, other than maybe the designers being idiots. Higher profile tires are superior for handling, comfort, and fuel efficiency. Now, it doesn't have to be 1920s era skinny, but putting 18 inch semi-slicks on a normal car is... they have their brains backwards on this one.
  • phill1phill1 Posts: 315
    Besides having KPH instead of MPH and Daytime Running Lights, the Canadian Fiesta has several different standard features. ALL SE model Fiesta`s get as standard, am/fm single CD radio with (4) speakers, BUT also standard SIRUS Satellite radio with free 6 months subscription at no additional cost. Also included is the removeable folding package tray for trunk stowage. NO premium upgrade charge of $180 for the Red Candy metallic paint either. Power Moon Roof is $1295 instead of only $695 on US version, ouch! The car is priced model for model and option for option several thousand dollars more in Canadian dollars and with the exchange rate not being all that much different, its still quite a bit more. Can`t figure why they would switch low end radios on assembly line with identical features except for the Sirius. The cost differences in the two radios must me minimal and leave the buyer to decide if they want to subscribe with or without the introductory 6 months of free service. As far as the DRL, now thats another matter. Only Ford and Chrysler refuse to join with the rest of the world and refuse to equip US version vehicle with this devise unlike nearly all other foreign and domestic manufacturers. Until DRL`s are mandated by the NHTSA for all US cars, they refuse to add the module to the wiring harness while the same car goes down the same line and is installed with DRL`s heading for Canada, go figure?
  • creakid1creakid1 Posts: 2,032
    edited March 2010
    ...I replaced my old 1998 Escort wagon with a new 2001 Focus wagon.

    They're both sweet cars, & not too slow w/ manual. The Protege-based Escort has uncontrollable oversteer available, while the Focus, w/ the technologically advanced Control Blades, oversteers controllably.

    They both got an excellent steering that's quick w/ real road feel & a comfortable resilient ride, all wrapped in a roomy but highly-maneuverable compact-exterior package. What more can you ask?

    But everytime when I recommended one these 2 "best small wagons in the world" (especially the Focus wagon) to those who are in real need of a roomy small wagon, they always came up w/ excuses like they need more pwr, larger back seat, or AWD. Yeah, right. You know what? I don't believe'em! They've been living w/ 2WD cars w/ 4-cyl & were OK w/ them.

    So my brother ended up getting the E46 325xi wagon, which gave the passengers a hard time sitting next to the center-mounted child-safety seat. Not to mention their 130lb Swiss-mt rescue-dog pet could barely squeeze into the cargo area & kept dripping saliva onto the cow-hide-wrapped 2nd-roll seat...

    & I can only laugh when watching my slow-driving friend & relative, who just became Porsche owners for the first time lately, living miserably driving these brand-new cars. & I'm not talking about the $.

    FYI, Ford's Duratec engine block is designed by Porsche, so my Focus 2.3 ST is like a Porsche w/ a smoother ride :P
  • puffin1puffin1 Posts: 276
    What about the Animals? "We Got to get Out of This Place no Matter what we do"
    I Corps Con Tien Grid 6341 Second Marines on the DMZ Puffin 0302 and I avoid my Bluetooth and would be paranoid using On Star. Yes, I still watch my back.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Perhaps it's because the thing drives like a Kia with an automatic? :P

    Just drive stick if you want a small fast hatchback.
  • iamziamz Posts: 542
    Normally that is true. The Fiesta might be one of the exceptions. Each clutch in a dual clutch takes turns shifting through the gears, meaning there is no lag between shifts. In all likelyhood, it will shift faster than 99.9% of all drivers with a manual. If they are tuned for efficiency, keeping the gears matched to the engines powerband, the 6-speed dual clutch may be faster.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,668
    Dual clutch gearboxes can shift in milliseconds, orders of magnitude faster than even the fastest stick shift.

    There is no reason to get a traditional manual trans now other than simple driving enjoyment (which is a great reason). Manuals are no longer cheaper, faster or get better mileage.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    We'll see. I suspect that what we actually get here in the U.S. will be a miserable kludged thing like Ford is famous for. Toyota tried this a few years ago in the MR2 and the Smart Car is downright crippled by a half-baked version of it. At best this will work like promised but break down by 50K miles unles you drive my my grandmother.

    This isn't BMW. It's Ford. And the smart money is to avoid any automatic transmission they make if there's a manual available.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,668
    But that's just it - this is NOT - I repeat NOT - an automatic with manual shift capability. Totally different technology. This is really 2 manual transmissions with an electronic clutch that share an input and output shaft. While one is engaged, the other one has preselected the next gear and you simply move the input shaft from one to the other to shift. No torque converter.
  • lilengineerboylilengineerboy Posts: 4,116
    But that's just it - this is NOT - I repeat NOT - an automatic with manual shift capability. Totally different technology. This is really 2 manual transmissions with an electronic clutch that share an input and output shaft. While one is engaged, the other one has preselected the next gear and you simply move the input shaft from one to the other to shift. No torque converter.

    Its tuned for economy, the shifter just says PRNDL and there is no manual mode. Its a dry clutch sequential automated gearbox. Its efficient, not fun.
Sign In or Register to comment.