Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2012 Ford Focus

1…1516182021…27

Comments

  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    edited November 2011
    "If I get to rent a car for a day just to blast off & skid around, then the new Focus SE stick will be the choice over the Golf/GTI. But to own one? I'm not sure -- The Focus has cheap/toxic plastic smell when exposed to sun heat, noisier A/C fan, shallower ride comfort than the Golf 2.5..."

    You really do need to get out more; for pure driving enjoyment the Focus SE is a very poor second to a GTI.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "Well, I'm thinking the GTI falls flat when it comes to fuel economy."

    Well, driven in the same manner as my 2009 Mazda3 i TVE 5-Speed, the GTI gets about one MPG better than the Mazda. That said, if I put my foot into the GTI, the fuel economy does drop off.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Hmm, too bad that TVE 5 speed has been replaced with a GDI 2L and 6-speed that gets 30/40. So I"m thinking the Mazda3 gets MUCH better FE than the GTI.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Yeah, the emasculated (from an option perspective) Mazda3 i with the SkyActiv engine and 6-Speed manual will probably deliver five mpg more than the GTI for any given style of driving; but at the economy levels delivered by the GTI, I'd gladly pay the extra couple of hundred per year in fuel costs to have a car with the creature comforts and the huge performance gains of the VW over the Mazda.

    Now, if Mazda had seen fit to allow us to buy a Mazda3 with the same options available in the "s GT" combined with the SkyActive engine and the 6-Speed manual, I would have been compelled to bump the Mazda3 further up the list. In the end, such a Mazda would have come to within $1,500 of the price of our GTI, and for that price delta, the GTI would probably still have gotten the nod.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    I'll take the creature comforts, but keep the MPGs. Hence Ford Focus.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Wasn't there a TSB for the DSG? If so, wouldn't that indicate there's something there besides lack of familiarity with the DSG transmission?

    A TSB is an automatic indication of there being a problem. TSB's are often just issued for informational purposes or for a new method of doing a repair.

    In this case, Ford issued a TSB to reprogram the transmission to shift differently if someone complained. Technically, it's working as designed.

    http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/26/transmission-woes-addressed-by-ford-b- ut-too-late-for-consumer-reports/
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    It's working as designed, hence the need for reprogramming for some drivers. Got it. :)
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    I think you missed the point, the TSB was to be performed on the drivers, not on the cars. :P
  • Sandman6472Sandman6472 Member Posts: 6,967
    We tried the same two but with the slush boxes and obviously preferred the 3...this next time I'm hoping she'll decide against the 3, but we'll see. I prefer the Elantra but she's complaining about the rear visibility without even trying one yet...ugh! Did mention the upcoming new Sentra & Corolla to her yesterday but reminded her that the 2012 Sentra SL I sat in recently had a outstanding front seat...super comfortable for me...but the styling is really dated though. But bet she could make a killer deal while they're still in stock. Timing is the issue though, she's just not ready to buy yet!

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

    2023 Hyundai Kona Limited AWD (wife) / 2015 Golf TSI (me) / 2019 Chevrolet Cruze Premier RS (daughter #1) / 2020 Hyundai Accent SE (daughter #2) / 2023 Subaru Impreza Base (son)

  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    edited November 2011
    Yep, the rear visibility (width) was the main reason I dismissed the Mazda3 (the old Focus sedan had a much wider view). Another reason is the door armrest too low for driver's elbow (I love the high one in the C30/S40/V50). I knew I can eventually smooth out the nervous ride motion when the Monroe shocks become available.

    Today, only the to-be-discontinued Lancer has a decently wide rear-view out, followed by the E90/E92 3-Series & maybe the C-Class sedan. The 1-Series Coupe isn't too bad, either.

    The new Focus sedan is tolerable if you remove the right rear headrest. If those "ST turbo" Recaro seats become an option on the sedan, then I might go for it!

    You sure you tried the '05-07 ST sedan? It was never available w/ slushbox. Only the '05-07 ST & '01 Street Edition versions of the MkI Focus sedan do not have "weak knee-ed" front springs! ;)
  • gogogodzillagogogodzilla Member Posts: 707
    Funny that. I just traded in my GTI (Mk V) for a Focus Titanium Hatchback with sport handling package.

    Here's what I've found.

    Steering feel: the GTI is the hands down winner. I'm not saying the Focus is bad, but the GTI is probably got the best steering feel out of any affordable car on the road.

    Handling: the GTI is slightly better, but only because the steering setup is so dang good.

    Power: GTI wins, hands down. But then, it better... considering that it's got 40 more horses than the Focus.

    Fuel economy: Focus wins

    Electronic gizmos: Focus wins

    Seats: Focus wins with softer seat bottoms (GTI's were hard as a rock)... combined with good, but not intrusive, seat bolstering

    Interior material quality: GTI wins, as it's got high quality cloth covering every bit of the roof and pillars. Focus has plastic coverings on the pillars, though it does have good quality woven cloth for the ceilings. As for the rest, it's a wash. Both have soft touch plastics and buttons that are pleasing to the touch.

    Transmission: Focus wins it. Despite all the talk of the DSG transmission 'problems', it's actually smoother off the start than my GTI. The actual shifts are quicker in the GTI, but then... you also have to put up with the herky-jerky starts that you'd find on a manual if you don't give it the time to get into gear.

    Price: Focus wins. When I bought my GTI, I paid $24,000~ for it, with leather seats, 6-disc CD player, automatic dual-zone climate control, and a moonroof. To get nearly the same thing, it's roughly $28,000... and you won't find the automatic dual-zone climate control included.

    Whereas I can get all that and more in the Focus for the same price.

    ---

    So to sum it up:

    If you aren't pinching your pennies; if power and handling are paramount; if fuel economy isn't an issue; and a solidly-made interior focusing on performance is your cup of tea... then the GTI is the best car.

    But if you are pinching your pennies; if interior comfort matters slightly more than performance orientation; if fuel economy is something you worry about; and you're willing to settle for performance and handling that are very good but not masterfully superb; then the Focus is more your speed.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    There is one exceedingly important issue which your comparo completely skips over; nobody in my house is willing to tolerate a lame automatic transmission. If you want a Focus with a stick you MUST opt for a Focus SE and a 5-Speed (or a Focus S if you are okay with a sedan), and while the manual in the Ford is a decent transmission it's not in the same league as the sweet shifting 6-Speed in the GTI, a transmission which only tips its hat to the unit in the likes of the RX-8, the Miata, and the S2000.

    Said another way, the 6-Speed in the GTI is the finest manual I've ever driven in a transverse engined FWD car, the 5-Speed in the Focus is just run-of-the-mill.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    Gosh, are you really saving $ trading in a DSG GTI for a DSG Focus? Or did you forget to buy your GTI an extended warranty, especially for that DSG, which can grind itself up eventually?
  • drvettedrvette Member Posts: 99
    Would owners post their MPG figures AND their driving habits/areas [highway/suburban/rural]

    The vehicle should be thoroughly broken in first.

    I see MPG figures from 27 to 41mpg, so this much variation leaves me concerned.

    Thanks for your time and assistance

    DrVette
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    nobody in my house is willing to tolerate a lame automatic transmission

    Well, it's a good thing Ford doesn't have a single Focus with an automatic transmission, isn't it? :shades:

    You see, the Ford Focus has either a straight up manual or an automated dual-clutch sequential transmission.
  • backybacky Member Posts: 18,949
    That kind of variation in mpg is to be expected. Driving conditions and habits vary so much. One person could drive his/her Focus in a rush-hour commute all the time, while another could have easy suburban/highway miles. One could drive like the folks at C/D (who averaged 21 mpg on their automatic tester), another could drive with a light foot and a bent towards fuel economy.

    YMMV.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "You see, the Ford Focus has either a straight up manual or an automated dual-clutch sequential transmission."

    Nope, the only correct description of the Ford dual-clutch transmission is "Automatic transmission with a semi-automatic mode". Don't believe me, get out a dictionary.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    edited November 2011
    My 1979 Scirocco had the torsion beam rear suspension, and it was one of the best cars I've ever driven. I suppose some folks may look down their nose at cars with such a setup, but not me.

    There's no doubt these A1-platform VW's w/ 70's technology is still one of the best today. That's why I collected an used Mk1 Jetta. But I'm pretty sure the car is even better if its rear suspension is replaced w/ multi-links.

    Would you still choose the GTI if its Control Blade multi-links are replaced w/ the torsion beam just like how Jetta's std suspension evolved from Mk5 to Mk6?
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "Would you still choose the GTI if its Control Blade multi-links are replaced w/ the torsion beam just like how Jetta's std suspension evolved from Mk5 to Mk6?"

    Yup, in a heartbeat; I loved flinging my Scirocco around tight curves on three wheels. :shades:
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Nope, the only correct description of the Ford dual-clutch transmission is "Automatic transmission with a semi-automatic mode". Don't believe me, get out a dictionary.

    You may want to check a simplistic dictionary, but I'll stick with more technical resources.

    An automatic transmission has a torque converter:

    http://www.familycar.com/transmission.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_transmission

    A semi-automatic transmission is a transmission with manual characteristics (such as an actuated clutch and a lack of a torque converter) but with computer controls taking over some number of these functions.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-automatic_transmission

    A sequential manual transmission is a manual transmission that can only be shifted up and down gears, without skipping, and in which the clutch may be computer controlled.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequential_manual_transmission

    So the Focus "automatic" is actually a sequential manual transmission with additional automation of the shifts, or a semi-automatic transmission. If you want to get really technical, it's a dual-clutch automated sequential transmission, commonly referred to as a DSG.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_clutch_transmission

    Here's a nice article that explains all five (yes five) major transmission types: automatic, manual, CVT, sequential manual, and dual-clutch DSG. I suppose if you separate out the torque-converter automatic-based manumatics you get six.

    Go get out the Internet. :shades: The Focus has a manual, and a dual-clutch DSG. There is no automatic. The Focus is not the first car to do this. The VW Golf TDI and the VW GTI are only available with a manual and a dual-clutch DSG. The Toyota MR2's final version was only available with a sequential manual, no automatic.

    I realize there's people out there who want things to read as follows:

    "Manual transmission: any transmission with a clutch pedal"
    "Automatic transmission: any transmission without a clutch pedal"

    Get over it. :shades:
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Would you still choose the GTI if its Control Blade multi-links are replaced w/ the torsion beam just like how Jetta's std suspension evolved from Mk5 to Mk6?

    Isn't Control Blade a Ford-owned trademark? ;)
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    edited November 2011
    These Blades are from the original Focus, & only the original Focus engineer knows how to do it. That's why he continued to be in charged of this suspension set up on VW Passat/Jetta/Golf/GTI/A3. Of course, the Mazda3, C30/S40/V50/S80 & the (Jame Bond) Mondeo all got Control Blades. Other multi-links are less cost-effective b/c they don't got blades.

    So the Golf 2.5, which has longer suspension travel, is the most comfortable "Focus" in the world. ;)
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    the Ford dual-clutch transmission is "Automatic transmission with a semi-automatic mode".

    I was at the dealer yesterday & noticed that the Sport Package on the SE adds an "up & down" arrow on the shifter button to shift manually, as oppose to the "one way" button.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    edited November 2011
    Wikipedia is often an extremely poor resource for many things (given that their "articles" are written by the general public), and this is one of those cases. Like it or don't, believe it or not, the term "Automatic transmission" means a transmission which can shift for itself. Can the Ford transmission shift for itself? Yes; ergo, it is an automatic transmission first and foremost. Does the Ford transmission have a semi-automatic mode which will allow the driver to request a plus one or minus one gear change? Yes; if the request is determined to be within reason, then the transmission will execute the gear change; this means the transmission has a "Semi-Automatic" mode.

    Long story short, there is no true industry related technical resource, such as the SAE, which will refer to various automated mechanical gearboxes now penetrating the market as anything other than "Automatic" transmissions (or "Semi-Automatic" transmissions when the driver must always indicate which gear he or she wants). If a good dictionary isn't "good enough", then ask Porsche, VW, Audi, Ferrari, and even Ford; not one of them refers to this type of transmission as a "Manual".

    - Audi refers to the DSG in the A3 as a "six-speed S tronic automatic"
    - VW refers to the DSG in the GTI as a "6-speed DSG automatic"
    - Ferrari refers to their transmission as a Formula-1 "type" of gearbox (not a help in and of itself, but the Formula1.com web site says, "Formula One cars use seven-speed semi-automatic gearboxes")
    - Porsche avoids the matter entirely by calling their Automatic transmission a "Porsche Doppelkupplung" or "PDK", which literally translated means "Double Clutch".
    - Ford refers to their dual clutch transmission simply as a "Six-Speed PowerShift Automatic Transmission"

    As I said before, no cars with Automatic transmissions (of any stripe) need apply for housing in our garage.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Except that you can't call it "Control Blade" without permission from Ford. :shades:

    It's probably a similar multilink design, but I bet either they have to change it enough to avoid a Ford lawsuit, or they have to pay Ford a licensing fee to use a similar design.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Wikipedia IS in fact accurate on this, I know because I know the technical details of each type of transmission. If you want to believe the marketing drivel, fine. I'm a car guy, I'd rather be accurate.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "I was at the dealer yesterday & noticed that the Sport Package on the SE adds an "up & down" arrow on the shifter button to shift manually, as oppose to the "one way" button."

    There is nothing "manual" about shifting in that manner; all the driver is doing is requesting a gear change. If (and only IF) the computer agrees with the requested change, then it will actuate the various relays and such to perform the gear change "automatically".
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Sorry, it seems you really don't know the technical details in this case.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Automatic transmissions have a torque converter between the motor and the wheels sapping power. AUTOMATED transmissions do not. Manual transmissions have a clutch pedal and an H-pattern shifter allowing one to skip gears. Sequential transmissions do not, but still must be shifted manually, even though the clutch action is automated. Put in automation of the shifts and you have an automated sequential manual, some of which have dual computer-actuated clutches. These transmissions do not necessarily allow manual shifting, though most of them do.

    CVTs are not manual at all, nor would one want them to be since that would obviate the purpose of a near-infinite set of gear ratios provided by the connecting band. "Manual" shifting shifts between several pre-selected gear ratios which might be nice for fun but defeats the purpose of the transmission type. It's arguable that CVTs are even less manual than an "automatic" transmission, which generally has either "L" or "1" and "2" positions on the shifter.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    There is NOTHING in the word Automatic which implies a torque converter in any-way-shape-or-form. If you know of a true technical reference which states otherwise, please let me know, I'd love to read it.

    My previous post may have mistated things a bit. While I agree you understand the "technical" construct of the various transmission types (not difficult concepts), you seem to be "technically" challenged when it comes to how the English language (the best "technical" language in the world) is used to describe a "technical" item. Automatic is a automatic does, if something is capable of automatically performing a task from start to finish, it is an "Automatic".

    In the end, you can call any given item anything you want, but calling a frog a swan doesn't make it so.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    edited November 2011
    This reminds me... In Chinese (no matter how comprehensive this language is), the word for "automatic" is "self move". & when referring to an automatic transmission, they frequently use the term "self shift".

    I always laugh when repeately hearing some of the girls told me (in Chinese) that they can't stand driving "self shift", b/c it's too tiring (operating the clutch pedal) in heavy traffic.

    So I replied -- If you really don't like "self shift" (transmission), then take "manual shift" (transmission). :P
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Already gave you the references. Your argument is that they have nothing to do with the English language. Too bad, given the dictionary definitions of "trojan" or "service" right? Since we both know that the dictionary, while linguistically accurate on both, does not address the technical details of these technical terms that someone in our field would know?

    Anyway, I'm done on this topic, back to the wonderful vehicle that is the 2012 Focus. Since it is so much better than the GTI in the FE department. :shades:
  • Sandman6472Sandman6472 Member Posts: 6,967
    These are the only kind that will make it into our garage...we just look at driving in a different way. I want to put the shifter in "D" and go forward, put the lever into "R" and go backwards. Most folks want the same thing, as manufactures know this and produce more automatics. We still drive the same...manuals make the driver think and react more. But we still get from Point A to Point B. And that's the whole point, now isn't it!

    The Sandman :) :sick: :shades:

    2023 Hyundai Kona Limited AWD (wife) / 2015 Golf TSI (me) / 2019 Chevrolet Cruze Premier RS (daughter #1) / 2020 Hyundai Accent SE (daughter #2) / 2023 Subaru Impreza Base (son)

  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    The reason most people call DSGs "manuals" is because they have the same types of gears as a manual and they have clutches like a manual as opposed to torque converters and planetary gearsets. It's just semantics and not that important.
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    I can't deal with a true clutch-pedal based manual for a number of reasons, including the ugly traffic I periodically encounter on my highway commute. That being said, I like the flexibility of being able to choose my own gears should I want to at the time, and if I can do so without a torque converter getting in my way, so much the better.

    Of course, if I can get there without shuddering at the creepy-crawly speeds of rush hour traffic that would be good too. But the most recent Focus I test-drove creeped along very well in "S" mode and reasonably well in "D" mode. They must have applied the new programming to it, it doesn't quite make it imitate an automatic, but it resembles the behavior enough where it should be easier to make the transition.
  • gogogodzillagogogodzilla Member Posts: 707
    That's including an extended 7-year warranty.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    edited November 2011
    There is NOTHING in the word Automatic which implies a torque converter in any-way-shape-or-form...Automatic is a automatic does, if something is capable of automatically performing a task from start to finish, it is an "Automatic".

    Here are some lame manual transmissions, b/c it does not "self shift". If you're guessing the Hondamatic 2-speed transmission w/ torque converter, then you're right.

    I remember it now, b/c it was only months ago I got to drive a 1972 Super Beetle w/ a "semi-H" pattern shifter, but no 3rd pedal. It has "1st gear", "2nd gear", "super-low-range gear", & of course, the "R gear". As soon as your hand touches the shift knob, a magnet inside is so sensitive that the clutch would instantly release into neutral, then back into gear when it detects your hand's absence -- how entertaining! :D The engine continues to idle when the car stops completely & can take off even in 2nd gear w/o lugging, so I'm pretty sure it's got a torque converter... No wonder I heard about "clutch-less VW's" from my folks during my childhood, & then later scratched my head wondering why didn't they call it "automatic".

    Today, these DSG's are even better performing than "stick shift w/ a 3rd pedal" in both acceleration & MPG. Just make sure it doesn't have a flawed design that will grind its self up.

    Even some slushboxes now lock up the torque converter quite frequently while keeping that graceful move in stop-&-go situations. VW seems to encourge Golf 2.5 buyers to take the 6-sp Japanese slushbox (see what Winding Road said) by offering only 5-sp on the manual tranny, especially w/ that long "deep down" clutch-pedal travel! & if you add a pedal extension on that 3rd pedal to solve this problem, then your knee might hit the bottom of the steering wheel! :mad: My 2.3 Focus ST sedan doesn't got this issue, plus the pedal is effortlessly light! No wonder stick is its only transmission choice.

    Remember the old days when VW only lets you choose b/t a 5-sp manual or a rather slippery 3-sp slushbox?
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    First we have an "Automated-Manual" next we'll get Whited-Black, Nighted-Day, Offed-On, Newed-Old, Himed-Her (oops, this one at least has come true)... You get the idea.

    The fact is, that Automatic and Manual are diametrically opposed terms and proper language constructs prevents one from modifying the other. Why? Because when you do it (from a language perspective), you describe neither.

    Proper technical language requires us to describe items by their properties, as such, transmissions of the DSG ilk can be correctly called Automatic gearboxes, Automated-Mechanical gearboxes, or be trade named (as in DSG or PDK); the one thing such transmissions manifestly are not are Manual gearboxes. Why? There is nothing "Manual" about their operation (pressing a button or pulling a toggle to ask a computer to do something for you doesn't qualify as "Manual").
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    First we have an "Automated-Manual" next we'll get Whited-Black, Nighted-Day, Offed-On, Newed-Old, Himed-Her (oops, this one at least has come true)... You get the idea.

    Yeah, what will become of the world with the introduction of concepts like grey, twilight, sleep mode, certified pre-owned, and (s)he? :shades:

    Isn't Whited-Black the most popular car color right now? Personally I like the darker Whited Black Metallic on the Focus, it's almost as nice as the Candy Red Metallic. :)
  • markus5markus5 Member Posts: 102
    edited November 2011
    Lets just say for the purpose of brevity ( which we certainly need on this subject of transmissions ) that the Ford unit is not a semi automated transmission, but has " semi-manual capability". It does not have torque converters or CVTs, and will not allow driver to change gears if it is not within the limits of the programming.
    Most of the cars I had since the late 1960's have been Clutch cars. Who ever tought me how to drive the standard transmission must have tought me well, because none of those cars had ever needed clutch replacement. So there is a bit of a "Chauvanism" of the Professional driver which is still here as a part of me. Yet, (BTW) I am old enough to remember Jim Hall and his Chevy Engined Chapperall which dominated road racing back in the 60's. Those racing cars did indeed have torque converters.
    Today with the Automatic transmission equaling and going beyond the manual in the fuel efficiency, and with a some times bad knee for working the clutch, I have no problem allowing the best of technology to do the job of converting engine torque to the wheels.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    edited November 2011
    Lets just say for the purpose of brevity ( which we certainly need on this subject of transmissions ) that the Ford unit is not a semi automated transmission, but has " semi-manual capability".

    No, it's the exact opposite; the transmission has a semi-automatic mode.

    It does not have torque converters or CVTs, and will not change gears if the programming does not allow it to do so."

    Precisely why it is an Automatic transmission with a semi-Automatic mode.

    I most of the cars I have had since the late 1960's have been Clutch cars. Who ever tought me how to drive the standard transmission must have tought me well, because none of those cars had ever needed clutch replacement. So there is a bit of a "Chauvanism" of the Professional driver which is still here as a part of me. Yet, (BTW) I am old enough to remember Jim Hall and his Chevy Engined Chapperall which dominated road racing back in the 60's. Those racing cars did indeed have torque converters.

    I too am old enough to remember the excitement and controversy caused by the legendary Jim Hall. While I don't dispute there are situations where automatics of all stripes have their place, they're called what they are, "Automatic transmissions"; even the FIA/Formula One folks refer to the gearboxes in their race cars as "Semi-Automatic gearboxes".

    Today with the Automatic transmission equaling and going beyond the manual in the fuel efficiency, and with a some times bad knee for working the clutch, I have no problem allowing the best of technology to the job of converting engine torque to the wheels.

    Funny thing, in the EPA tests there are any number of automatic equipped cars which best their manual transmissioned siblings in fuel economy, however, with the possible exception of Subaru's Impreza (CVT vs. old-school 5-Speed), I've yet to see any real-world reports which support the EPA results. Said another way, while the controlled environment under which the EPA tests are conducted may well show that automatic transmissions can now exceed those of a manual transmission under some circumstances, for the time being at least, the real-world says otherwise.
  • akirbyakirby Member Posts: 8,062
    Everybody knows what it is - does it really matter what we call it?
  • bpizzutibpizzuti Member Posts: 2,743
    Actually I think the disagreement is that we don't know what it is. :shades:
  • markus5markus5 Member Posts: 102
    edited November 2011
    Shipo, you just contradicted yourself in the last paragraph.: If you do not know of "any real world reports", logically you can not say that "the real world says otherwise".
    Anectdotal evidence ( sitting next to many drivers in stick-shift cars ) informs me that many do not shift optimally for efficiency in mileage. BTW, the EPA procedure is under controlled experimental conditions, as you say, and manual shift changes are done at optimal points.

    me.
  • markus5markus5 Member Posts: 102
    Thank-you Creakid for your keen eye. Ever since I first saw the rear end view of the Hatch, something was there that did not please me.
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    edited November 2011
    Anectdotal evidence ( sitting next to many drivers in stick-shift cars ) informs me that many do not shift optimally for efficiency in mileage. BTW, the EPA procedure is under controlled experimental conditions, as you say, and manual shift changes are done at optimal points.

    Exactly, that's why EPA believes that most drivers are not smart enough to upshift earlier for close-ratio manual boxes. EPA also done enough statistics to show that not all drivers follow the "upshift light", so the EPA's rating also only follows that "upshift light" part time.

    The "upshift light" maybe best working on that "treadmill" EPA test rather than in the real world. When Motor Trend (or some other magazine) tested the Mk1 Jetta w/ the "upshift light", they found this light asking you to upshift too early & actually made their "good driver" increased fuel consumption from 25mpg to 24mpg. :D Or maybe that light always comes on a little too early to allow slow-reacting drivers to follow a second later?

    I think what's even more important is a warning buzzer to warn driver that he is lugging the engine & needs to downshift! So the crankshaft bearing won't be prematurely worn just like the overpowered E46 M3 engine!
  • creakid1creakid1 Member Posts: 2,032
    You're welcome -- must be my creative imagination.

    I kept seeing "future Saab" in the new Kia Optima.

    I even had a chance to see the future Kia Forte (or its equivalent) in person -- It looks just like the new Focus sedan from behind but more gorgeous through out.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Really...really simple.

    For my mother...

    It's automatic if you don't have to tell it what to do.

    For a manual it won't go unless you tell it what to do.

    So she doesn't care if a torque converter is involved, if it's a cvt or has automated dual clutches or quad clutches...if she could just press the gas and go it's an Automatic.

    Most people are like this. Even if there is no clutch...if you 'have' to tell it what gear to go in it's a manual.

    My preferred Automatic is a DSG (which is VW talk).
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "Shipo, you just contradicted yourself in the last paragraph."

    No contradiction what-so-ever, what I said was that I've yet to see any real-world reports which support the EPA results, however, I've seen plenty of real-world reports which show otherwise.

    "Anectdotal evidence ( sitting next to many drivers in stick-shift cars ) informs me that many do not shift optimally for efficiency in mileage. BTW, the EPA procedure is under controlled experimental conditions, as you say, and manual shift changes are done at optimal points."

    So what are you saying; that you're okay with the EPA results because you've seen too many incompetent manual drivers? :confuse:
  • drvettedrvette Member Posts: 99
    One thing for sure, the VW interior components are poorly made, AC vents, door handles and other plastic components fail in a hasty manner.

    Keeping the VW running "per" suggested maintenance schedule will break Howard Hughes, even worse than keeping a Japanese vehicle maintained.

    On the other hand, VW's typically handle rough roads much better and tolerate them without breaking or bending alignment parts as much.

    So it's kinda a "push and pull" deal.
    If you are gonna beat the heck outta the suspension, go with the VW
    If you plan to pamper it and stick to smooth asphalt roads, go Ford.

    The Mazda should be pretty tough overall, worse real world fuel economy, VERY LOUD DB in the passenger compartment but this may be fixed with some of the adhesive backed rubber sound absorbent mat, maybe.

    For TCO [total cost of ownership] check the intervals for timing belt change, check the price of them and clutch R&R [the Ford auto has a "Dual Clutch" electronically shifted "Manual" instead of a Torque Converter & AT.

    Both of the VW engines [Gas & TDI] do have a "Interference Engine" and Timing Belt which means when the timing belt breaks,, you lose a $4,000.00 engine.

    Neither the Ford Focus or Mazda 3 are listed at Gates as having a "Timing Belt"
    [Double Check with their service dept. for clarity on this]

    http://www.gates.com/part_locator/index.cfm?location_id=3598

    DrVette
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles