Hating on the Focus RS

[kevm14]

C/D says:

2016 Ford Focus RS
THE $40,000 COMPACT-CAR VALUE

Premise: If the Focus RS is the second coming, what does that make the SS?

Let's look at everyone's new favorite performance car and compare it to one of MY favorite performance sedans.

Straw man time: I know, blasphemous comparison, right? 10 out of 10 people under the age of 50 would prefer the Focus RS's looks to the Chevy SS, right? The Focus RS must be 10x the performance car of the very large SS, right? After all, it's a compact car stuffed with AWD and 350 hp, or every 18 year old's wet dream, right? It must be untouchable by anything under $80k or something.

But now it's time for judgment day. See what I did there?

Data:
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/201 ... est-review
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/201 ... est-review
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/201 ... est-review
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons ... ecs-page-4

Now, I realize the Focus is a different class of car (high performance sport compact or whatever size the Focus is now), and it has AWD. But to the extent that AWD improves performance, this comparison is fair, or even UNFAIR to the SS. But let's do it anyway.

So for $40k, you can have the Focus RS used in the first link.
For pros, the performance is pretty good.
For cons, you get a terrible ride, and a terrible interior.

Let's explore performance.

0-60: 4.6 (abusive clutch dump, best case)
13.4 @ 105 means it is similar in performance to my CTS-V (which you can buy for less than $15k)
5-60 which looks at real world acceleration: 5.7 seconds
158 feet from 70 mph in braking.
0.98 G
18 mpg observed

These are pretty good numbers, but remember the cons, and the price.

The SS, by comparison, is several classes larger in interior (or about the largest you can get outside of the extended wheelbase German cars). The interior is way nicer and it has way more options/features. It costs an extra $7k from this Focus RS tester.

The SS is only 491 lbs heavier (the RS is 3,459 lbs!) and has 65 more hp and 65 more lb-ft.

Compare performance (mixing two tests):
0-60: 4.5-4.6 (much less abusive and just as fast)
12.9-13.0 @ 111 (6 mph is very noticeable and the SS gets a better ET anyway)
5-60 which looks at real world acceleration: 5.1-5.3 seconds
153 to 159 feet from 70 mph in braking.
0.95 to 0.97 G
15-17 mpg observed

So granted these cars are not in the same market, but the extra $7k on the SS gets you a ton of space (front and especially rear seats) and luxury items, and a better ride, while giving up almost zero performance, and very little fuel economy, and you even get to retain a lot of the driver involvement/dynamics.

The Focus RS should base at like $28k for what it is (performance while giving up frivolous luxury items). I don't understand paying $40k and still making those same compromises. Or, if this was $40k and it weighed like 2,900 lbs (with the associated performance increase), then maybe I could see that. As it is, no.

Tell me the RS is going to sell and the SS isn't going to sell because of styling. But don't tell me the RS is a performance bargain without also acknowledging the SS, which is the greater bargain (I am addressing the car buying populace).

I forgot to mention: word in the comments is that dealers are marking these up $5,000.

Besides, I can get an SS for $30k. If this thing doesn't depreciate, then that makes it a bad buy as a used car, too.

There, I took it down a few pegs.

[kevm14]

Now for comparisons that are more relevant to Bill.

Subaru WRX STi, MSRP $35,490, 1/4 mile is 13.3 @ 105. It's QUICKER in the 1/4 mile (same MPH). For even less money. And you can buy one now instead of waiting for the RS to depreciate.

The Focus RS takes 45 extra rated HP to accomplish the same thing. Why is that better?

I am glad a domestic manufacturer is playing in this realm, but the car seems to be at par, not significantly above it.

[bill25]

You are wrong about the V6 Camaro...

Camaro Base 32,290 as tested 35,000

0-60 5.4 Vs. 4.6
1/4 14.1 @ 100 vs. 13.4 @105

Skid: .91 vs. .98

The V6 Camaro should get spanked pretty good by the RS. Sorry, you are totally wrong.

[bill25]

Also, considering the Camaro is probably one of, if not the best value for the money at 37K, the fact that it is impossible to even see another contender to the RS should tell you something. What does that put the RS, in the top 2?

[kevm14]

How is it better than the STI, which is cheaper?

This class bores me, and a Camaro 1SS will wipe the Focus RS off of any track. Both need snow tires to drive in the winter, and both are totally usable in the winter. Both are low to the ground and not going to work well in deep snow.

[kevm14]

Also thanks for addressing the SS and STI. Also, how a V6 Camaro/1LE may compare to the RS is not that relevant: The Camaro 1SS creams it for the same price. CREAMS.

[kevm14]

You are wrong about the V6 Camaro...

Camaro Base 32,290 as tested 35,000.

Nice try. The base Camaro V6 is $27k. EDIT: sorry, $28k.

And it'll be pretty embarrassing when a V6 1LE gets damn close to an RS, for less money. A V6 Camaro! And why shouldn't it? It weighs 20 lbs less than the RS and has only 15 less hp.

I'll be waiting for the Lightning Lap.

[kevm14]

The Ford won narrowly, with the R close behind and the STI in third. All were manual versions. The R won on subjective 'Car' parameters. The R was slowest to 60 but fastest to 100. It also had the best braking.

The RS, despite the claimed 45 hp benefit failed to out accelerate the STI. Surprising.

Sounds like it is competitive, not segment redefining.

[kevm14]

Driver's car? What does that mean anymore. The R is as fast, handles just as well and according to the comparison test (some moron downgraded me because I posted the facts from the comparison test) by C&D, the R has no problem keeping up with the RS on the street OR track. So what does that make the R? A non-driver's car?

They need the next gen chassis for this car now. The MQB [Golf platform] takes the segment further and Ford does magic with their AWD is all. Still only net a 0.1 mph slalom advantage even though it pulls 0.03g more and has 58 more hp with torque vectoring AWD as compared to the on-demand Haldex setup in the VW.

No question, this car [the RS] underperforms given its specs.

Golf R base MSRP: $35,650.

[kevm14]

This:

Tires don't change drivetrain layout, but your car can be 44-wheel-drive and it won't move anywhere in the snow with summer tires and will be dangerous when it's below 40F. Unless you're planning on climbing up steep snowy hills the whole AWD vs RWD debate is moot on a set of good winter rubber. You're not a WRC driver and you won't be powersliding every corner on your way to the store to pick up some kitty litter, so the only advantage of an AWD layout is faster straight line acceleration - something I think most people that buy AWD actually need less of in the snow.

If you do need the versatility of a hatchback, or just enjoy the driving dynamics of AWD "rally" cars... by all means the Focus RS or Golf R are great automobiles and aren't in the same segement as a RWD sports coupe.

The RS comes with Michelin PSS. Useless (dangerous) in the snow.