Ford Fiesta

hpmctorque · August 2009

roxy 11: "sorry, but i think that saying the cars in this segment (Yaris, Fit, Fiesta.etc.) are only suitable as city runabouts is a load of hoo ha."

I agree, but many Americans feel this way. I think that the notion that only large, heavy, powerful vehicles, or even only midsize ones, are suitable for long distance travel is outdated. While it's true that small cars of yesteryear ('40s through, say, mid '90s) weren't good highway cruisers, today's small cars are engineered incomparably better for ex-urban travel.

On jeffyscott's message, I'd say that while there's some truth in what you say, I think your response is somewhat exaggerated.

On the matter of manual vs. automatic, and tall vs. short final gearing, every choice requires significant compromises, which is precisely why there are so many choices available.

hpmctorque · August 2009

I hadn't read your message regarding the use of subcompacts for long hauls when I wrote my message. It's possible that our differing conclusions are mostly about perspective. Whereas you focused on the driving dynamics of the xA, and perhaps similar models, at speeds over 70, I was thinking about how improved today's subcompacts are compared to those of yesteryear (think the European models, Crosley, Henry J and, later, the popular Japanese cars).

Mr_Shiftright · August 2009

oh no comparison to subcompacts of years ago. The ones today are miles ahead. But you know, 4200--4400 rpm for 3-6 hours and I'm ready to bail. It gets to you. And in California, you pretty much have to drive 70+ mph much of the time on freeways.

plekto · August 2009

I guess it's all relative. 3-4 hours of my mud terrain tires howling on the freeway is music to my ears. :P

Mr_Shiftright · August 2009

Well at least those tires have a purpose. It's less apparent to buyers why the engine has to be so wound up. I can tell you how many times a day I reached for non-existant gear #6.

hpmctorque · August 2009

Since this is the Classic Cars board, and we've meandered into how cars handle cruising long distances at highway speeds, I'm reminded of the early post WWII cars. Before the introduction of the Olds and Cadillac OHV, short stroke V8s in '49, all domestic cars were equipped with 1930s engines and gearing. The combination of long stroke engines, 3-speeds and short final gear ratios (4.11 and 3.90 were common) meant that the engines were loud at 60 mph, and roared at 70. Of the "low priced three", only Fords seemed able to cruise comfortably at 65, or maybe even 70, although that was kind of pushing it. Overdrive equipped cars were better. However, Chevy didn't offer overdrive before 1955.

I imagine that the advent of the interstate highway system played an important role in improving cruising ability. It probably also spurred the horsepower race.

jeffyscott · August 2009

Since this is the Classic Cars board...

I didn't even notice that. So this is supposed to be about the former Fiesta not the new (future) one, I guess.

The three speeds you refer to manual transmissions, right? Because my first car was a 1969 Chevy with a 2 speed automatic.

hpmctorque · August 2009

Yes, I was referring to the 3-on-the-tree manual transmissions - some with overdrive, but most without - that were common in early post WWII cars.

Regarding the 2-speed Powerglide, your '69 Chevy started in first, and shifted automatically to second. Instead, the first Powerglides (model years '51 and '52) started in high (2nd) gear, making these cars very sluggish off the line. You could elect to start in first by moving the shift lever to "low", then manually shifting
to "drive" to engage 2nd gear, but the transmission didn't do this automatically, as your '69 did. Buick's Dynaflow operated in a similar manner.

Yeah, this discussion began and is mainly about the former Fiesta, but detouring to the future one is informative and interesting. If we're talking about small Fords that were imported into the U.S., there was also the British made Anglia of the late '40s-early '50s, and the Anglia with the reverse slant C pillar of the late '50s-early '60s, the Cortina, and the Mazda-designed, Korean built Festiva and Aspire of the late '80s-early '90s.

The first generation Anglia was truly a crude POC, and many of the bodies were eventually used for dragsters. The second generation distinguished itself, style wise, with that strange roofline. Another distinguishing feature was an extremely oversquare (very short stroke) 4-cylinder engine. I have no idea how it drove, but it was interesting in theory. I also have no idea whether it was a decent car for its day. I imagine it was better than the Renault Dauphine (a low hurdle), but maybe not as good overall as the Beetle. Maybe Shifty can provide some insight on this Anglia.

Regarding the Cortina, I've read that it was a fun-to-drive car, especially the hotter versions.

The Festiva was considered a "throw-away" car by many, but, in fact, it must have been well built because it was reliable and durable. A surprising number of them went over 200,000 miles on the original engine. For whatever reason, though, the next generation Festiva, renamed the Aspire, was not as reliable or durable. It was probably better than the Korean built Pontiac LeMans, but that car defined POC. LeMon would have been a more appropriate name for this model. Surprisingly, though, I occasionally see one of those LeMans actually being driven. I also see Festivas once in a while, but I can't remember the last time I saw an Aspire. That makes me wonder whether the Korean LeMans was indeed worse than the Aspire.

roxy11 · August 2009

really, fiesta, corolla, yaris, fit etc...they are all slow anyway. gear the manual for optimal mpg's on the highway, then let downshifting take care of the need for (what little) speed that these cars can accomplish. ive never bought a car because it was fast. what little fun is to be had these segments, imo, is going to come more from handling characteristics.

ive always gotten a manual in these types of cars because 1)it can add a little bit of texture to the driving experience, even in a slow car and 2) i still believe, regardless of epa estimates, that i can extract the best mileage by driving a manual.

homerkc · September 2009

It's often said that driving a slow car fast is more fun than driving a fast car slow. How often does any owner get to wring out a Corvette or Porsche near it's limits? My old boss had a Porsche 962 (whale tail turbo) and he told me about taking it to 120mph on a local interstate, and then backing off to 70 out of fear of losing his license. He commuted to work in the car after that. My first new car was a VW Scirocco, which had 71 HP and weighed 1900 lbs. It was like driving a go kart, and always fun. Not fast, but always fun. I think that's what the top-end "B" cars will be like (Fiesta, Fit, Polo). They won't weigh 1900 lbs. anymore, but they will be much lighter than most cars, and with today's electronics, will deliver much more HP. I can't wait to try a Fiesta with 118 HP and a curb weight of what - 2600 lbs?

Mr_Shiftright · September 2009

That's probably one reason why the Fiesta became a minor cult item in America in the 1980s, because it was one of the few imports that was cheap and fun. It probably didn't break as fast as a VW Rabbit, no doubt was more spirited and better handling than most Japanese cars, certainly more sure footed than a Fox bodied Mustang flexi-flyer, and easier to fling around than most American products. The little Scion xA (no longer made) reminded me of that car somewhat. Of course FWD has its limitations but with so little power, it didn't matter so much.

hpmctorque · September 2009

We're on the same page here.

I wonder how the new Fit compares with the xA, in terms of fun. Although I haven't driven either, my guess is that the Fit is a little more refined, and a tad less fun. Now, how about a Fit vs. a Civic coupe?

In addition to the new Fiesta, we'll also have the VW Polo, and probably several other economical, fun-to-drive cars to choose from. Cadillac and Lexus also plan to introduce compact luxury RWD cars, to compete more directly with the BMW 1 and 3-Series. I hope they're not too complex, gadget laden and heavy, since these things detract from the driving experience, in my opinion.

Mr_Shiftright · September 2009

I don't think you'll ever see anything approaching the simplicity of an 80s Ford Fiesta ever again in this country. Pushrod ohv I4 with carburetor, roll up windows, tiny tires and rubber floor mats? I don't THINK so! :P

dodgeman07 · September 2009

I don't think you'll ever see anything approaching the simplicity of an 80s Ford Fiesta ever again in this country. Pushrod ohv I4 with carburetor, roll up windows, tiny tires and rubber floor mats? I don't THINK so!

====================================================

Let's hope not! Mainly because the old Fiesta was butt ugly! :P

What will be the first truly "upscale" sub-compact to hit the U.S. market? There's many on the drawing board but what will be the first on sale?

Mr_Shiftright · September 2009

2003---the BMW Mini fits that bill completely.

Fiesta wasn't particularly ugly, it just wasn't particularly ANYTHING--- a very generic car in styling.

stickguy · September 2009

I got to drive an original in HS, so it was a 78 or 79. I do know it was the "sport" model. I think it had some kind of plaid seats?

Only drove it once, but I seem to recall it was fun and even somewhat spritely. Of course, at the time, we were transitioning the family carfrom a 1969 Volvo 144 to Dodge Omni 1.6l! It was nicer than the dodge, if smaller.

I get annoyed with the shortgearing too. My miata was buzzing at 3Kbefore 60,but at least it made somesense in that car. and I rarely had it on a highway.

Now, my Scion tC with a big lumpy 2.4l? it made no sense to have that one geared almost as short. I think 3K only got me about 63mph. It certainly could handle a taller ratio!

back in the 80s, I had a colt 1.5l with a whopping 68 hp (weighed I guess1900-2000lbs). That was replaced by a 1986 mazda 323, another 1.6IIRC,with 82 hp.

both of them took a number of highway trips, and were prerfectly uitable at highway speeds (probably never over 75, and the colt was probably usually 70? but hard to remember).

The Mazda pulledpretty well in5th,but the colt? oftenhad to get dropped to 4th, aneven3rd onoccasion to pull long hills!

hpmctorque · September 2009

Also, unlike in the '80s, most subcompacts today are equipped with A/C. I was surprised to see that A/C comes standard on the Yaris.

Heck, the Yaris is significantly larger than the late-'70s/early-'80s Fiesta. The length, width and height of the Yaris 2-door hatchback are 150.6", 66.3" and 60" vs. 140.4", 61.7" and 53.5" for the old Fiesta. Quite a difference, and the weight differential is even greater.

Even the new MINI (145", 66.3", 55.4") is bigger than the first generation Fiesta. The new MINI is a giant compared with the original Mini (120.1", 54.1", 53.1",,,Now that's small!).

hpmctorque · September 2009

I imagine the tC is pretty quick, given the displacement and gearing. Of course, it's no featherweight.

colloquor · September 2009

I know I'm replying to an old post, but I wanted to comment on the Ford Festiva and Aspire, and Pontiac LeMans.

Both the Festiva and Aspire were built by Kia for Ford. The small Pontiac LeMans (a real corruption of a good name BTW) was built by Daewoo for Pontiac. Thus, all three were Korean-built.

dodgeman07 · September 2009

But Mr. Shiftright the Mini wasn't even big enough to be called a sub-compact and roared to 77dB and road like a lumber wagon on the Interstate.

Not a sub-compact (only 84cu.ft.) and not very upscale.

I'll keep waiting.

Mr_Shiftright · September 2009

You don't find the Mini upscale? It's got just about every feature that a Lexus does and can easily cost you over $30,000.

True, the early cars rode harshly with their abominable runflat tires, but the newish ones, 2006 on up, ride pretty nicely. Besides, their handling and speed are what makes them so attractive. And with 6 speed transmissions I can't imagine decibel level would be that high anymore.

hpmctorque · September 2009

Could dodgeman07 be referring to the original Mini of the '50s and '60s? Probably no, but just wondering.

I drove a first generation BMW designed MINI, but not the more refined latest generation one. I found that I preferred the driving and ride dynamics of the Rabbit to thise if the MINI I drove. I might come to a different conclusion after driving the new MINI.

Mr_Shiftright · September 2009

The old Minis....yeah, upon reflection I think that's what he was referring to.

But you know, the old Mini Cooper S was a ferocious little car---yeah, noisy as the hammers of hell, constantly breaking down, but what a hoot to drive!! I have some vintage video footage from the 60s of hot rod Minis slapping Corvettes silly at theLimerock, CONN racetrack. How was that possible? Well the old Corvettes roared off the line, got way ahead of the Minis, hit the first turn, wallowed through it with their great weight and marginal braking, and the Minis passed them, never to be seen again. Of course now a modern 2010 Corvette would be too formidable an opponent for a little car like this.

The Fiesta had a bit of the old Mini Cooper in it---a knowledgable tuner could get some decent power out of that Fiesta engine (1.6L Kent engine) and in fact started a kind of cult in Europe for "hot hatches". A nicely tuned Fiesta could easily accelerate 0-60 under 10 seconds, not bad for the 80s and better than many American V8s of the time.

dodgeman07 · September 2009

Hello again. I was referring to the Mini of a few years ago.

2003 Mini Full Test

The following generation was much improved and the Mini is a fine car. I'm hoping ALL manufacturers' bring their top compacts and subcompacts to the U.S. market.

Most subcompacts (AKA penalty boxes) in the U.S. are low end models. That is beginning to change. I expect the term "Luxury Subcompact" to hit the U.S. scene with 2-3 years. CAFE almost guarantees it.

urbc · September 2009

All I can say is this is one bad ride! Eventhough I only get to keep it for six months i'm enjoying the free ride.
http://www.carspace.com/blogs/MYFIESTA/

explorerx4 · September 2009

my 04 focus was a 2.3/5 speed stick. it had no problem when setting the cruise on 70 making it across the hills of I 80 in PA. not only that, it got close to 40 mpg (rated for 33 mpg highway).
although my guess is that the fiesta will weigh about the same, maybe vvt has been added, which could help despite a smaller engine.

oldcem · September 2009

I agree with you on the "tuner" comment. I had an 80 Fiesta with a header, pacesetter exhaust, a racing clutch, rejetted Weber, and no smog stuff. I put the fatest Michelins on her that would fit. The torque steer was ferocious, and, if you lauched too hard, she'd break one of her driveshafts. I sold her when the Getrag 4 speed needed a rebuild at 119000 miles. Hated to see her go.

Regards:
OldCEM

Mr_Shiftright · September 2009

Yes torque steer was formidable in those days. Early Saab turbos were also vicious in that way.

iamz · November 2009

The official US version of the Ford Fiesta will be unveiled next Wednesday (Dec. 2nd) at the Los Angeles auto show. I'm really hoping it doesn't change much from the euro version. Next fall I'll be replacing my Protege5 and the only two contenders right now are the Fiesta and the Scion XD.

hpmctorque · November 2009

Why wouldn't you also consider the Honda Fit?

iamz · November 2009

The Fit is more expensive than the Scion. If I want cruise I have to get the Sport and spend almost 18k. I have to have cruise. Beyond that, you know how there are some cars out there that when viewed from certain angles, you just don't like? Well for me, the Fit is one of those cars, except I can't find any good viewing angles. And yet I think the XD looks pretty cool. Go figure.

I was able to see the euro Fiesta in person this summer and wow, Ford got every angle right. That's why I'm really hoping they don't mess with it too much. Guess we'll find out next week. I don't think we'll know pricing or content for awhile though.

hpmctorque · November 2009

Valid points. I also don't like the fact that you can only get cruise control in the Fit Sport, but not as a stand alone option in the standard Fit.

I also like the xD, but have never driven one. However, the reviewers seem to feel the Fit sets the standard in its class, and generally rate the xD as okay, but not great. I agree that price is part of the equation, though.

hpmctorque · November 2009

raychuang00 · November 2009

If you want to see what the new US-market Fiesta looks like, the Spanish-language AutoBlog page may have what could be pictures of the four-door sedan and five-door hatchback:

http://es.autoblog.com/photos/ford-canada-filtra-el-fiesta-americano/

Note that on the hatchback, the nose is slightly longer to meet NHTSA safety standards and they changed the lower front grille to accommodate US-sized license plates. On the sedan, the upper front grille has the three-bar design to match that of other Ford models in the North American market. Note how the turn signal lights are part of the headlamp housing to meet NHTSA specifications for turn signal lights.

creakid1 · November 2009

a German-made one for test drive in California.

I think its lack of multi-link rear suspension means lack of plush ride while lacking roll control, plus the electric pwr steering lacks some feel. The compact Fiesta's biggest enemy is the compact-exterior '05-07 Focus, which I test drove the SE, SES & ST. Go test drive an used '06 Focus SES & this upcoming Fiesta, then see for yourself.

I also rode in the new fit, even w/ the base suspension, & I was still unimpressed w/ its ride comfort. Ditto the Civic LX coupe.

I wonder why people are embarrassed to be seen driving an '06 Focus SES. It's a superb car -- steering feel, ride comfort, the sedan also got wide rear visibility for easy lane change... Who can beat that?

The next Focus will not likely to have compact exterior dimension, especially the width.

hpmctorque · November 2009

I agree with you regarding the Focus. What other car in its class has independent rear suspension? Its platform dates back to the '00 model year, but the Focus remains an excellent value.

iamz · November 2009

Cool. Thanks for the link. I have to say I'm very pleased. If anything, I like the US front end a little bit better. More so on the hatch. I would have liked to have seen that orange color currently on the US website. That would be my choice if available. The green will work though.

As an aside, I just noticed that the wipers are really tucked down in under the trailing edge of the hood. This kind of attention, if carried out across the entire car, should keep the wind noise down quite a bit.

jeffyscott · November 2009

Edmunds now shows MSRP of $15,200:

http://www.edmunds.com/new/2011/ford/fiesta/101216523/prices.html

That listing also indicates it is a 5 speed automatic, so perhaps the manual would start about $1000 less? Elsewhere they specify 17 inch alloys, power windows, locks, and mirrors, steering wheel audio controls. So it appears to be a well equipped model (by my standards). This listing also indicates it is a 4 door hatchback.

I'm guessing this is equipped comparably to maybe a Focus SE, which has MSRP about $3000 higher.

iamz · November 2009

A 5 speed automatic would be a bonus I was not expecting. Particularly at $15,200!

creakid1 · November 2009

"What other car in its class has independent rear suspension?"

All I know is that I got my '07 Focus ST w/ a fat-torque 2.3 Mazda-developed Duratec engine for under $16k out-the-door in California.

Yes, cars in its class should be compact enough to evade the old tax in Japan for cars wider than 170cm (5'7"). & both my '07 Focus ST & '99 BMW 328is qualify! :P

Today, If you want compact exterior w/ multi-links, & $ is no object, then there's the Mini Cooper, but it rides far from plush

Yes, even the new VW Polo failed miserably in steering feel & ride/handling when compare to the Fiesta (According to TopGear magazine).

See AutoExpress comparison:
http://newsletter.autoexpress.co.uk/c/15fiph2HIqsAVzq1ZFJ

jeffyscott · November 2009

To me if the ride is described as "plush", that'd be a negative, as I'd assume it meant floaty with vague handling...I'd be thinking Camry-esque, which would not appeal to me.

creakid1 · November 2009

Have you driven an early base RX-8 w/ std 16" rims? It glides so well over bumps w/ such plush & silky ride unbelievable for a car that handles like a track racer

Another amazing thing about it is its electric pwr steering that's actually more confident inspiring than my Focus ST's hydraulic pwr steering.

I wonder why Ford didn't bother using this platform to build a RWD sedan to embarrass BMW's?

jeffyscott · November 2009

I did test drive a 2007 RX-8, don't recall what wheels it had, but I am am pretty sure that they were larger than 16 inches. The ride did seem fine to me, not overly stiff or anything like that. I don't that that I'd call it plush, but I do remember thinking that it was surprisingly smooth, far smoother than I had expected, given the great handling and low profile tires.

I also enjoyed the fantastic handling of the RX-8, when I drove one several times at "Zoom-Zoom Live" a few years ago, I believe that was in 2006.

iamz · November 2009

C/D said this about the Fiesta;

"....the Fiesta one-ups the Fit in any winding-road run. And a German-built version we tested here in Ann Arbor handled the worst of Michigans potholed roads with isolated solidity that bests some luxury cars."

"...Ford of Europes engineering chief, says that the dynamics of the U.S. and European cars will be the same, a change from previous policy. If so, American drivers are in for a treat because this new Fiesta is probably the best-handling and most driver-friendly of all the worlds microcars."

creakid1 · November 2009

The early base RX-8 w/ 16" rims also got softer springs & sway bars. I believe that dark blue one in L.A.'s 2004 MazdaRevItUp test drive event came w/ this softer suspension set up even though it had 18" rims.

Unfortunately the base model was not available w/ traction/stability control, & I fishtailed it about 180 degrees while stepping on the throttle hard making a right turn in the wet (on purpose). I would get the sport model w/ stability control, then replace w/ the non-sport springs/sway-bars/rims.

If the Fiesta handled the worst of Michigans potholed roads with isolated solidity that bests some luxury cars, then the RX-8 w/ the softer set up can do the same in BOTH ride & handling to BOTH luxury cars & Porsche's :P

plekto · November 2009

According to testing, the RX-8 also is .1 second slower in acceleration, handling, and just about every other test than a base Cayman. 99% as good for half the money is quite a feat. Now, is it a Cayman S or even a BMW 3 series? Of course not. But like the Subaru WRX, it gives a lot of performance for not a lot of money.

My only gripe is that they need to put that setup in the Mazda 6.

hpmctorque · November 2009

"... even the Polo failed miserably in steering feel & ride/handling when compare to the Fiesta"

That's disappointing, since it seems that VW will offer the Polo in the U.S. Also, VW knows how to do steering feel and ride/handling because the Golf does very well in these areas.

This is probably a dumb question, since they compete in different segments and one is RWD while the other is FWD, but since you own a 3-Series and a Focus, how would you compare their steering feel and ride/handling?

creakid1 · November 2009

Rotary engine sacrifices low-end torque (& mpg, clean air, reliability, etc.) for a light-nose handling, & thus improves ride/handling compromise. That's why you want to stay away from a heavy-engine FWD platforms such as the Mazda6 V6, or even worse, earlier Audi's w/ longitudinally-mounted engine.

But lack of low end is no fun! If future technology allows RX-8's rotary powerplant be replaced w/ an electric motor, then that would solve the only problem. B/c RWD low-end power drifting w/ the rear LSD (limited-slip differential) is loads of fun even at SAFE low speeds, just like the superb-steering-feel old Miata's.

& really, exactly how hard do you get to corner in the real world? I couldn't even reach the limit of the softly-sprung base '05 RX-8 w/ std. high-profile tires, at least not during test drives. It seemed even more impossible to touch the handling limit during my test drive of the Cayman/Boxter this year. So why sacrifice the ride comfort so far for the cornering limit you can't even approach?

I ended up buying the Focus ST instead of the better ride/handling (& quietness) RX-8 mainly b/c I get to play w/ the Focus's limit-- trail throttle produces controlled oversteer, & (after the installation of the Quaife LSD, which cuts down the chance of triggering of the traction control to kick in) heavy throttle blasts the front tires out of corners, even in the wet when the traction control actually helps the performance by taming the spinning. The '07's traction control is not so intrusive compare to the '05's tuning.

Talk about tuning, lets take a look at how Japan today ruins Fiesta's original design.

http://newsletter.autoexpress.co.uk/c/15fiph2HIqsAVzq1ZFJ

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/grouptests/241327/mazda_2_sport_16d.html- -
"Driven back-to-back with the Fiesta, the 2 doesnt have the same delicate feedback through its steering, and its body control isnt quite as good. Ride comfort is also firmer than the Fords.

Yet while its set-up is harder, the suspension is settled over bumps and is comfortable enough around town."

In this comparison, the Fiesta-based Mazda2's harder suspension set up trades ride comfort for a sportier handling, but why does this sportier set up come w/ less steering feel? I was already unimpressed w/ the level of steering feel from the Fiesta.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/carreviews/grouptests/241336/ford_fiesta_zetec_16_t- dci.html
"Hit the motorway and the Ford doesnt isolate road noise as well as the VW, but its the most flexible car, with strong pace in fifth gear.

So its more than happy as a long-distance cruiser.

In fact, the ride comfort, stability and general refinement put some vehicles from the class above to shame.

And on our 1,000-mile test route, which took in a proving ground, city streets, country roads and miles of motorway, we found no driving conditions that fazed the Fiesta.

The chassis is faultless  its easy to drive in town and then comes alive on flowing roads. The steering is communicative, sharp and precise and, with superb body control and grip, the car is reassuring and engaging to drive.

This dynamic excellence extends to the ride, too. The suspension is supple and easily irons out imperfections, so the Fiesta is as comfortable as it is fun.

There is a cost for all this talent, though. A number of price hikes this year mean the Ford is the most expensive car..."

Did you hear that, America? The Fiesta is the most expensive compact in Europe, even w/ worse sound insulation than the VW Polo! LOL

creakid1 · November 2009

"Also, VW knows how to do steering feel and ride/handling because the Golf does very well in these areas."

Which models have you driven? VW lost steering feel since the late '90's. I ended up trading my '05 Focus ST for an '07 Focus ST instead of the '07 MkV Rabbit/Jetta due to VW's feel-free electric steering. Even the MkIV introduced in '99 lack steering feel at the cornering limit.

Nevertheless, I still love the way this mid-'90's Jetta steers -- the resistance builds up so naturally progressive as the cornering load increases it just feels GOOOOOD! My Focus ST's steering feels unnatural & too elastic by comparison.

MkVI has improved steering feel over MkV:
http://newsletter.evo.co.uk/c/161K9906Oxy4ApC7jmw
"Spot on  although it takes me a while to work my way up to that level. The new GTI is fearfully competent. Does that concern you? It should. True, the last Golf was not a raw, trembling ball of energy either, settling for being richly satisfying instead, but in the new one you really have to go looking for entertainment. Cruise around and the stunning damping composure means the car is always too much in control, too able. So you hurl it into a tight-ish third-gear corner. Aha now were talking. Now the steering is more alert, now you can feel whats going on, now the front end sharpens up a treat. Now its a GTI.

Its a neat trick, a sudden sense of layers pulled back, true character revealed, but its also frustrating knowing how hard you have to drive it to have fun."

While the new "Japanese Focus" ruins the steering feel further for this generation:

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q4/2010_mazdaspeed_3_vs._2010_- volkswagen_gti-comparison_tests

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/09q4/2010_mazdaspeed_3_vs._2010_- volkswagen_gti-comparison_tests/2010_mazdaspeed_3_page_2
"...the new steering rack substitutes effort for feel."

http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/application/6952ff8- da96308c97c849c9db557f719.pdf
STEERING FEEL: 5 points for GTI, 3 points for Mazdaspeed3 -- that's whopping 2 points apart!

creakid1 · November 2009

"...since you own a 3-Series and a Focus, how would you compare their steering feel and ride/handling?"

My Focus ST still has less steering feel than my '90 Protege twin cam, '99 E36 BMW 328is & '84 manual-steering MkI Jetta. But it still has better steering overall than all of them! Here's why:

The Jetta's manual steering does not have quick ratio for agility, while still too heavy doing parallel parking.

The Protege's steering is sharp, quick & never heavy while brimming w/ feel all the time, but becomes too skittish & not relaxing enough to cruise in a straight line at fwy speeds.

The E36's steering is both slow & heavy that trying to steer it feels like navigating a 19th Century pirate ship. Replacing it w/ a quick-ratio rack from the std Z3 now makes it steer just as quick as the E46 3-series, which has a less feel than the E36. The E36's steering system is still gravity sensitive so it tends to steer by itself left & right all the time when the road is not perfectly smooth & leveled, & thus cruising on the fwy feels like taming wild horses all the time w/ both hands. It's a handful, but in a way it's kind of fun, too, but I wonder what the fuss is all about.

Below fwy speeds, my Focus's steering may seem kind of numb compare to my Protege's delicious unit. But once on the fwy, it's amazing how this quick/sharp unit can cruise in a straight line in such relaxing/confident manner while ready to attack curvy bends. It's the best of both worlds.

My E36 coupe also has Torsen (similar to Quaife) differential installed. The horribly short springs from its original sport suspension was replaced w/ longer springs from non-sport suspension along w/ calmer-motion Monroe shocks. But Mercedes seems to have longer springs still.

I noticed how the '99 newer-generation E46 sedan has a comfy calm-motion ride, while after 2001.5 the suspension has a quick-motion tuning for a less comfy/relaxing ride. & this is the non-sport suspension.

The current E90 is badly compromised w/ run-flat tires, while the steering feels too light at lower speeds.

The 2700+lbs Focus ST w/ 4-cyl may have a nose-bias weight distribution compare to the 3000+lbs RWD E36 w/ inline 6-cyl, but Focus's overall light weight makes up for overall agility & tossability. FYI, the BMW 1-series 6-cyl coupe & today's Mazdaspeed3, which is derived from the upcoming Focus III, all weight about 3200lbs.

My RWD E36 feels like a rich man's Miata -- quieter, smoother riding & more powerful, but does require a higher velocity in order to drift the back end on every turn. & this fun feature is the ONLY reason I need to own a RWD car!

Compare to my Bimmer, my Focus ST feels like a more competent car & requires less effort from the driver to deliver the same results on curves & straight roads.

The '05 Focus ST's SVT shocks provide a ride motion so abrupt that I'm glad I traded it in for an '07 Focus ST w/ softer springs/shocks. But I might soften it further by replacing w/ Gabriel shocks later. & that'll leave my front springs about the only item stiffer than the Focus SES. & this is important b/c the Focus front springs are not very long to begin with, but probably pretty comparable to the lowered factory sport suspension from the more current BMW 3-series & Mercedes C-class. So don't expect any Focus to ride as smooth as BMW 3-series sedan or Mercedes C-class sedan w/ non-sport suspension, especially over deeper bumps.

Ford Fiesta

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles