Hating on the Focus RS

[bill25]

I have to say that I think you are both right. It depends on what you are doing. If you are talking about a daily driver that gives the feeling of a race car, that is awesome. If you are talking about tracking a car to win a professional race, you need to spend more than 40K. I think this car is suffering the magazine numbers war. I have seen it in videos driven. There is no way that this is not more fun to drive on the street than almost anything in it's price range, and it is totally practical. I think it might be the best of everything. The problem is that Kevin will say that the SS is bigger and as fast or faster and ignore that it is also 10K more. The RS is probably way more fun to drive on anything except maybe a track. Also, it would be interesting to see how the SS does against this in a Rally race, which is more for what this car is about, and Rally is more realistic to New England driving conditions (curves, bumps potholes, dirt on the road, snow, ice, rain) than New England roads are to race tracks... there is that. I just don't understand the hate for this car.

[kevm14]

Here's some hate then: that Ecoboost in RS application has little headroom and may suffer some powertrain reliability issues as a result. There are enough documented issues on the Mustang side, in lower output. And generally I think the Ecoboost formula is to use the tiniest possible turbo you can get away with, which really helps in drivability, but longevity, not so much.

[Bob]

This actually doesn't sound like an undersized turbo to me.

It doesn’t feel remotely like the screaming demon the press made it out to be

Now, I’m not saying the RS isn’t quick; quite the contrary. At the top of the powerband, from 4,500-7,000 RPM, this thing pulls like mad in every gear. But below that, it’s a pussycat. It might even feel slower about town than the Focus ST and its smaller turbo.

The GT350 is the same way; it feels slower than the base car at the bottom of the band, but much faster at the top. The problem is, to enjoy it, you have to rev the hell out of it, and to do that, you’re going way faster than traffic, in any gear.

[kevm14]

All I remember reading is that the engine did not have a lot of headroom over what they are asking it to do in the stock RS. Maybe that doesn't mean turbo size, and instead is referring to the engine architecture itself. I will see if I can find it.

[kevm14]

curves, bumps potholes, dirt on the road, snow, ice, rain

All cars handle all of these conditions, more or less. What you are arguing is the RS is a rally car for the street and therefore can be pushed to 9/10ths or whatever in: curves, bumps potholes, dirt on the road, snow, ice, rain. And I'd say aside from curves and a compliant suspension being truly desirable in a performance car, you are completely dreaming if you are envisioning your drive to work to be a reenactment of a WRC race.

In snow, yes, this will accelerate faster than my Caprice. So will a bone stock Forester. So what?

I have a problem with "OMG rally car" (see also: "OMG Ken Block") the same way I do with "OMG NASCAR." It's all stupid. This is a reflection on the owners, not the cars of course. But you seem to put a whole lot of weight into what some owners say/do (i.e. Corvette) so it must be important to you.

I'll say it one more time: when the intangibles and feel add up to an ability to achieve a higher performance, I am all in favor. When it doesn't, then I don't understand the point.

Here's another argument: if you need extremely high resolution steering feedback to explore the limits of the car, maybe you need the driver mod.

Take an example with a simple one: acceleration. You could say "I like high performance because I like the way high longitudinal Gs feel." Sure, so do I. But there is another rationale: so you can beat the next guy at the light, before that merge point, on the highway or on the 2 lane rural back road.

And my problem with the RS is everything's going great driving along. Man, this thing is so dialed in and connected. I can use all this feel to scoot this thing around this mountain road. But what about when you can't shake the guy behind you in the Golf R? To me, that would completely shatter my perception of the car. And you made some compromises with the RS over the Golf R (the C/D article covers it). So, who proved what here? I know what I think.

[kevm14]

So I know this all boils down to different preferences. I'm just not convinced the RS is the ultimate daily driver. Based on the C/D article, it sounded more like the Golf R was the ultimate daily driver.

So racecar feel. I've driven the Elise. I understand the difference between the Elise, my CTS-V and other vehicles. But maybe what I'm confused about is, if the Elise was shaped like a 5 door hatch, would that be the ultimate daily driver? I don't think it would. I don't think the reason why the Elise is not a daily driver car is because it is a small 2 seater. Well, it is A reason, but I guess I don't understand why the goal is to have the most raw, unfiltered chassis and steering at all times. I DO understand why you'd want that in a weekend vehicle or semi-track toy. But daily driver? I don't get it. It's similar to the argument of why you don't want a manual transmission at all times - first, the manual isn't really faster, it doesn't really get better fuel economy, and the extra enjoyment it provides when driving enthusiastically doesn't overrule the extra work in commuting situations. It's really the exact same argument I'm trying to make against the RS as a daily.

And where I am really going is, I think it's also disappointing as a dedicated performance car. I think if I had a weekend or occasional daily, I'd be much happier in either a Camaro SS (yes, not 4 doors), or if I wanted a commuter sedan with performance, yes Bill, the SS for $10k more (MSRP - the gap is considerably smaller for transaction prices, and forget it if the RS goes for over MSRP) for a considerably larger, more comfortable car that doesn't really give up any performance. Much more likely it would be something older and cheaper (like a gen 5 1LE or even C5 Z06 - both would dominate the RS in just about any track situation). Which means this conversation is pointless until we see what happens to RS resale.

In the end, if the RS had Camaro SS performance (or better), I think I'd be singing a totally different tune. But it doesn't. 105 trap in a hot hatch was big news like 10-15 years ago. Not buying it.

[kevm14]

I re-read the very first post to this thread. We are going in circles. I fully stand by what I said originally.

[Bob]

if the Elise was shaped like a 5 door hatch, would that be the ultimate daily driver?

I don't think it would be, but for someone who likes performance cars and can have only one car, it could work since it might meet some of their minimal requirements by having 5 doors and seating for more than 2.

Here's an example: a 2010 Mercedes E550 4Matic and the RS run almost exactly the same 1/4 mile (ET and trap). Which one would I rather have as a daily driver? Well it really depends on whether I have the Elise sitting the garage for when I want to do fun driving.

[kevm14]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ep10ChjKVuQ

Matt Farah leased one. Pretty much everything you want to hear is in here. And I continue to not understand.

[Bob]

Doug DeMuro reviewed one. He liked the steering and feel of the car, but wasn't as much a fan of the ride quality.

http://www.autotrader.com/car-video/is- ... 000-256741