You're making me feel great about my new car!

On 9/10/2018 at 6:58 PM, iantt said:

The new 1.0 ecoboost in the focus is a bit noiser than the mk3 . 

@iantt Is that likely to be because the MK4 1.0 EB is now chain driven rather than wet belt?

1 hour ago, TomsFocus said:

Front end looks slightly better after the 45mph impact tbf...   

27 minutes ago, 1979Damian said:

@iantt Is that likely to be because the MK4 1.0 EB is now chain driven rather than wet belt?

dont think so, just sounds rough compared to mine, thats only accelerating from idle up to 2500rpm ish. 

17 hours ago, Xpug said:

You're making me feel great about my new car!

Rest assured that you will soon be driving the best Focus gen yet. I wasn't sure about the looks  myself but they have grown on me especially the St line. People are just jealous that's all😋. 

Hey guys I’ve ordered an ST line in Shadow black I really like the look should be picking it up in a couple of weeks and can’t wait.I also think it looks quite similar to the bmw one series from the side you know long bonet and tight end.  I’ve seen pictures of the ST version and tbh it doesn’t look too much different from the ST line  although tbf I’m not sure the pictures of the ST I’ve seen are the final design. Think it was Auto car I seen it in. 

3 hours ago, Broxibear212 said:

Hey guys I’ve ordered an ST line in Shadow black I really like the look should be picking it up in a couple of weeks and can’t wait.I also think it looks quite similar to the bmw one series from the side you know long bonet and tight end.  I’ve seen pictures of the ST version and tbh it doesn’t look too much different from the ST line  although tbf I’m not sure the pictures of the ST I’ve seen are the final design. Think it was Auto car I seen it in. 

for sure not final design 🙂

Whilst I appreciate it’s not the best looking car in world, having now stretched its legs it’s not bad at all. This, the missuses’s 125 ecoboost is quicker than her old Fiesta Zetec S 125. The focus handles really well and the different maps in the drive modes are great. It needs storage options in the boot area and the glove box isn’t spacious but all in, pretty good. The clean by the dealer was really bad, I asked if they wouldn’t clean it before delivery but they wouldn’t had it over without being cleaned. Now I have given it a wash and had a look it will need a full decontamination and clay and it should be good to go. 

mate at work get's a deal coz his dad worked at ford....  and just went from a ST tractor, to a new a mk3 1 ltr and is missing the torque.  then drove a golf (hire car via work) and thinks its a lot nicer than what he just got....

I didn't get why he didn't go for the mk4 in the first place. 

Speaking of which I drove a mk3 hire car with the auto box and some version of sync that was a disaster.  Auto was OK except on hills on the motorway where it was desperate to go down 2 gears and rev over nothing (kept waking me up).  The sat nav was horrid, slow ,clunky and awful (and seems quite different to mates 2016 Mondeo nav that was pretty socking already)

@TheGinger1-- first Mk 4 I've seen in white and it looks very nice indeed! In view of comments on the refinement of the revised 1.0 earlier in the thread, would be interested in your views on engine noise/smoothness as you build the mileage.

 

On 10/14/2018 at 11:57 AM, Eric Bloodaxe said:

@TheGinger1-- first Mk 4 I've seen in white and it looks very nice indeed! In view of comments on the refinement of the revised 1.0 earlier in the thread, would be interested in your views on engine noise/smoothness as you build the mileage.

 

That might take a while, it’s only got 300 on it so far and 100 of that was driving it back from the dealer. So far I would say that it’s not way more noisy than the old Fiesta but I think the noise is a little more raspy and a little better. It is smooth but. ultimately it’s 1000cc 3 pot so if you want torque then get a wax burner. Our old Fiesta was a 5 speed so the this 6 keeps it more on cam when making progress. Ping me a reminder in a month or so and I will let you know how it’s going 

On 10/13/2018 at 7:13 PM, TheGinger1 said:

Whilst I appreciate it’s not the best looking car in world, having now stretched its legs it’s not bad at all. This, the missuses’s 125 ecoboost is quicker than her old Fiesta Zetec S 125. The focus handles really well and the different maps in the drive modes are great. It needs storage options in the boot area and the glove box isn’t spacious but all in, pretty good. The clean by the dealer was really bad, I asked if they wouldn’t clean it before delivery but they wouldn’t had it over without being cleaned. Now I have given it a wash and had a look it will need a full decontamination and clay and it should be good to go. 

Hey guys inserted a photo of the supposed ST mk4 I think it was auto car I got this from, unsure if this is definitely the final design. What does everyone think?

not difference as you say between them really

That is release shot of the mk 4 ST line with a set of mk 3.5 ST alloys photo shopped on to it. That’s just a render of what someone thinks it looks like I would suggest. 

Definitely not a full ST as it has chrome trim on the sills.

Sent from my SM-G965F (S9+)

Thanks guys for the replies as I said I wasn’t sure if this was a final version or even real.I actually hadn’t noticed the chrome until you mentioned it, I’m sure I got this from autocar. Well guess we will just need to wait and see what the final car looks like.

I have a mk3.5 and the new one exterior wise it's too.....busy? The only one that looks decent is the ST line but still it's a bit to boy raceish kind of looking. I did test drove one with the 1.5 tdci 120 hp St line 8 speed auto plus almost all the optionals. On the inside it's much better space wise (leg room is much better) and feature wise better too. The gearbox is ok but the engine is still slow and it takes too long too accelerate. I had to do a stanstill aceeleration to join a motorway and it took it's time to get to 120 km/h. I have the same engine but with the 6 speed manual and it's the same, mostly it  lacks torque. The 2.0 tdci with 150 bhp and with a bit of moding to 200 bhp it's a beast. 

After a Fiesta mk7.5 and a focus 3.5 I don't think I will get another Ford next. 

3 hours ago, B0D0 said:

I have a mk3.5 and the new one exterior wise it's too.....busy? The only one that looks decent is the ST line but still it's a bit to boy raceish kind of looking. I did test drove one with the 1.5 tdci 120 hp St line 8 speed auto plus almost all the optionals. On the inside it's much better space wise (leg room is much better) and feature wise better too. The gearbox is ok but the engine is still slow and it takes too long too accelerate. I had to do a stanstill aceeleration to join a motorway and it took it's time to get to 120 km/h. I have the same engine but with the 6 speed manual and it's the same, mostly it  lacks torque. The 2.0 tdci with 150 bhp and with a bit of moding to 200 bhp it's a beast. 

After a Fiesta mk7.5 and a focus 3.5 I don't think I will get another Ford next. 

The 1.5tdci was built for fuel economy and definitely not speed. Mines doing over 70 mpg at the moment! Very economical engine. Its definitely quicker than my last 1.6tdci!

13 hours ago, James said:

The 1.5tdci was built for fuel economy and definitely not speed. Mines doing over 70 mpg at the moment! Very economical engine. Its definitely quicker than my last 1.6tdci!

Well I am dissapointed with the fuel economy on my Fords.

My previous Fiesta mk7.5 with the 1.6 tdci 95 bhp did on average 54 mpg (with a full tank and during 60.000 km).

My current Focus mk3.5 with the 1.5 tdci 120 bhp does 49 mpg (with a full tank and I have about 40.000 km now).

This was/is done with normal driving towards a bit from time to time more spirited driving, 

Can I get into 60's? Yes and I have done it trying for 100 km return trip and at 100 km/h on a A road  (max speed limit on that road). 

Can I do it all the time? Of course not. In real world I can't get that. In real world I drive into town and on motorway (at least here) you can't have a pleasant smooth drive because of idiots who drive all over the place. And I don't like to under rev the engine because of the problems that I can get with egr and all that crap if I drive in that manner PLUS the engine doesn't like it because the lack of torque and this last thing is the most annoying thing. You almost always need to be in the correct gear, at least at lower speeds. In my opinion it lacks eleasticity.

Some while back I had  2 Focus rentals with the 1.0 ecoboost and they did 40-45 mpg and they were much nicer to drive and a lot more smoother. 

 

 

1 hour ago, B0D0 said:

Well I am dissapointed with the fuel economy on my Fords.

My previous Fiesta mk7.5 with the 1.6 tdci 95 bhp did on average 54 mpg (with a full tank and during 60.000 km).

My current Focus mk3.5 with the 1.5 tdci 120 bhp does 49 mpg (with a full tank and I have about 40.000 km now).

This was/is done with normal driving towards a bit from time to time more spirited driving, 

Can I get into 60's? Yes and I have done it trying for 100 km return trip and at 100 km/h on a A road  (max speed limit on that road). 

Can I do it all the time? Of course not. In real world I can't get that. In real world I drive into town and on motorway (at least here) you can't have a pleasant smooth drive because of idiots who drive all over the place. And I don't like to under rev the engine because of the problems that I can get with egr and all that crap if I drive in that manner PLUS the engine doesn't like it because the lack of torque and this last thing is the most annoying thing. You almost always need to be in the correct gear, at least at lower speeds. In my opinion it lacks eleasticity.

Some while back I had  2 Focus rentals with the 1.0 ecoboost and they did 40-45 mpg and they were much nicer to drive and a lot more smoother. 

 

 

To be fair the Focus (compared to the Fiesta) has more power, is bigger and heavier than the Fiesta so unless something amazing was done to the larger car (e.g. witchcraft/black magic/voodoo etc) it's always going to do less MPG when directly compared to a smaller lighter car that uses similar power units (when compared like for like i.e. same journey, similar conditions and similar driving style).

49 minutes ago, 1979Damian said:

To be fair the Focus (compared to the Fiesta) has more power, is bigger and heavier than the Fiesta so unless something amazing was done to the larger car (e.g. witchcraft/black magic/voodoo etc) it's always going to do less MPG when directly compared to a smaller lighter car that uses similar power units (when compared like for like i.e. same journey, similar conditions and similar driving style).

Of course and I know that.

I was not comparing the Fiesta with the Focus. I was just saying that my fuel consumption is in my eyes poor for a diesel engine. 

I did own a 1998 Peugeot 106 1.5D 58 bhp non turbo of course. I had it from about 2011 until november 2013 when I got the Fiesta. After all those years I was getting what it was written in the manual 56-64 mpg. The later only after the oil change (every 10.000km). And that car it had to be pedal to the metal almost all the time to get somewhere at decent pace. 

Nowdays I can't even get close enough to the manual (72 mpg).

Just now, B0D0 said:

Of course and I know that.

I was not comparing the Fiesta with the Focus. I was just saying that my fuel consumption is in my eyes poor for a diesel engine. 

I did own a 1998 Peugeot 106 1.5D 58 bhp non turbo of course. I had it from about 2011 until november 2013 when I got the Fiesta. After all those years I was getting what it was written in the manual 56-64 mpg. The later only after the oil change (every 10.000km). And that car it had to be pedal to the metal almost all the time to get somewhere at decent pace. 

Nowdays I can't even get close enough to the manual (72 mpg).

A large part if it (not just Ford) is the way that the official MPG figures are worked out for vehicles that are sold in the EU i.e. the tests are lab based, not at all realistic in relation to "real world" driving, the manufactures can do their own testing and also do naughty things like over inflate the tyres/run with minimum fluid, remove the spare wheel if fitted etc.

The newly introduced system which is supposed to be far more representative of real world driving, should hopefully improve things so the "official" MPG figures should be closer to what a person could actually achieve in real life.  I'm sure there will still be ways for the manufacturers to bend the rules but I guess only time will tell if the "average" person starting being able to get closer to the official MPG figures for their car.

20 minutes ago, B0D0 said:

Of course and I know that.

I was not comparing the Fiesta with the Focus. I was just saying that my fuel consumption is in my eyes poor for a diesel engine. 

I did own a 1998 Peugeot 106 1.5D 58 bhp non turbo of course. I had it from about 2011 until november 2013 when I got the Fiesta. After all those years I was getting what it was written in the manual 56-64 mpg. The later only after the oil change (every 10.000km). And that car it had to be pedal to the metal almost all the time to get somewhere at decent pace. 

Nowdays I can't even get close enough to the manual (72 mpg).

I also had a 1.5D 106, thrashed everywhere and still averaged 67mpg over a tankful...used to cruise at 90mph down the dual carriageway and even tug a trailer with it too.   

Diesel MPG hasn't actually got any better over the years, it just looks like it has due to the way they calculate it for book figures.  Trouble is, when one manufacturer 'exaggerates' the MPG, they all have to do it to compete.  Book figures now are purely a comparison between cars of the same age, it's not really anything to do with on the road figures.

Personally, a 5mpg drop from the Fiesta to the Focus seems about right.  I've driven various mid-size turbo diesel hatchbacks and they all average around 55-60mpg for me, regardless of engine size or power, I don't even bother looking at book figures any more.

9 hours ago, TomsFocus said:

I also had a 1.5D 106, thrashed everywhere and still averaged 67mpg over a tankful...used to cruise at 90mph down the dual carriageway and even tug a trailer with it too.   

Diesel MPG hasn't actually got any better over the years, it just looks like it has due to the way they calculate it for book figures.  Trouble is, when one manufacturer 'exaggerates' the MPG, they all have to do it to compete.  Book figures now are purely a comparison between cars of the same age, it's not really anything to do with on the road figures.

Personally, a 5mpg drop from the Fiesta to the Focus seems about right.  I've driven various mid-size turbo diesel hatchbacks and they all average around 55-60mpg for me, regardless of engine size or power, I don't even bother looking at book figures any more.

Not as economical as my Focus though I bet😋. Just finished an hour and twenty minutes driving there now, mostly motorway but it included town and back road driving aswell. I suspect previous owner put an economy map on it.

40 minutes ago, James said:

Not as economical as my Focus though I bet😋. Just finished an hour and twenty minutes driving there now, mostly motorway but it included town and back road driving aswell. I suspect previous owner put an economy map on it.

You'll surely have to do a brim to brim measurement to see what your actual MPG is, if it's anything close to that then that would be amazing.