I have grown to like fords after being a vw man. I currently have a 02 1.4 zetec fiesta and a 58 1.2 corsa. I also had a 58 fiesta 1.4 tdci which was written off.

my plan is to go a bit newer, like a zetec or titanium. so what would your thoughts be on a mk7 fiesta 1.25 or 1.4 or maybe a 1.6 focus?

the less to go wrong the better!

i have already tried a turbo corsa hire care 3 cylinder and i found it drank fuel, so i would probably rule out the ecoboost.

diesels that age have cheap tax but i worry about dpf filters and cost of the fuel.

I've done 90k miles of mixed driving in my diesel and have had no dpf issues. 2 weeks ago a litre of diesel was the same as a litre of petrol, so I wouldn't worry unduly about that. Even if it goes back to being 10 percent more than petrol, you'll still save money as you'll get say 50mpg instead of 40 mpg.

good points alan, i did like how the 1.4 tdci drove, sluggisgh but steady and a guaranteed 50mpg+. 

tax was £30 

10 years old would be 2013.  By that age the diesels have coated DPF's which are far more robust and reliable than the old Eolys additive type in the earlier Focus.  (Fiesta DPF's have always been coated as they weren't fitted until later). 

1.0 EcoBoosts don't drink fuel unless you hoon them everywhere.  They're certainly better than the old Zetec engines on equivalent trips.  Should see over 45mpg average from a 1.0 EB Fiesta.  But they are potentially unreliable at this age and have a massive cambelt cost at 10 years old.

To get a Fiesta with a Zetec engine (1.4/1.6) in 2013 the only option would be Mk7 pre-facelift, which do look very dated now.  Though that is obviously personal preference.  The 1.25 was kept into facelift (alongside the 1.0 EcoBoost) but only in lower trim levels.  That may be the best choice for yourself with limited reliability issues.

The Focus wasn't available with a basic Zetec engine at that age, it would only be the 1.6 Ti-VCT which has a little more to go wrong than the non-Ti-VCT engines.

So in conclusion, none of them...   I'd probably go for a 1.6 TDCI Focus myself (and I did, back in 2018) but they will be due cambelts now, and mine was full of faults with water leaks, electronic issues and irreparable air conditioning at just 6 years old.

thanks Tom , I guess the 1.25 would be similar performance to my 58 plate corsa 1.2 16v. a bit gutless at low revs but takes off and keeps going easily over 100 where speed limits allow! 

i also get good mpg, usually 48-53 mpg. no turbo needed.

30 minutes ago, Ben97397284 said:

thanks Tom , I guess the 1.25 would be similar performance to my 58 plate corsa 1.2 16v. a bit gutless at low revs but takes off and keeps going easily over 100 where speed limits allow! 

i also get good mpg, usually 48-53 mpg. no turbo needed.

The 1.25 comes with two power levels in Mk7 Fiesta.

The lowest entry only has 60bhp which is about 25% less than the Corsa.

The other is 82bhp which is roughly the same as the Corsa I believe.

These engines really need to be revved to get any power, but it sounds like you don't mind that. 

1 hour ago, TomsFocus said:

The lowest entry only has 60bhp

Rice Pudding keeps the skin on 🙁

1 hour ago, TomsFocus said:

The other is 82bhp

Rice Pudding just gets the skin pulled off 🤣

haha i dont really care too much about performance anymore.

we have electric vans at work and i actually prefer driving them in eco mode!

Neither!

The 60ps 1.25 was only available as an option on the lowest trim levels (Style and Edge) anyway and was probably bought more by fleet, rather than retail, customers.

I used to find the 82ps version my Mrs had to be a lot of fun to drive, but it did need a LOT of revs, which doesn't sound like Ben's style.

(It's not my other half's style either, and she prefers the 60ps 1.0 in the SEAT Mii she has now, which seems to pull better at lower speed.)

That engine is available in lots of VW Group (Polo/Ibiza/Fabia etc) cars in 75ps n/a form and could be worth looking out for. Even the turbo version available (90ps and above) doesn't seem to have any particular nasties.

well i dont mind having to rev if i want some performance , its what im currently used to in the 1.2 corsa life. its specs as follows:

Top speed	104 mph
0 - 60 mph	13.8 seconds
Gearbox	5 speed MANUAL

Engine & fuel consumption

Power	80 BHP
Max. torque	110 Nm at 4.000 rpm

30 minutes ago, Ben97397284 said:

well i dont mind having to rev if i want some performance

That's fine, then.

Very similar power (82ps), torque (114Nm) and performance (claimed 0-62 13.3 secs fwiw) to the Corsa.

thanks should be satisfactory then  , but wont rule out a 1.4 which might be a little better on the motorway!

 

48 minutes ago, Ben97397284 said:

thanks should be satisfactory then  , but wont rule out a 1.4 which might be a little better on the motorway!

We bought our 1.25 new, as did 2 sets of friends at the same time. We were all given the same advice by three different dealers - that the 1.4 wasn't worth the extra cash for the small gain in performance.  

That was then, of course, and buying a 10 year old is a different matter and more about overall condition.

I was also reminded of a focus ghia I briefly owned, it was a 57 plate 1.8 engine. That car sounded great, felt solid and stuck to the road. It had a buzzy engine which sounded big and short gearing. plus the ghia spec had lovely seats and sony console. I'd be tempted to get another if I could find a looked after one. It also came in 1.6 and 2.0. I wonder if anyone has tried these engines? The 1.8 was a beast.

1 hour ago, Ben97397284 said:

I was also reminded of a focus ghia I briefly owned, it was a 57 plate 1.8 engine. That car sounded great, felt solid and stuck to the road. It had a buzzy engine which sounded big and short gearing. plus the ghia spec had lovely seats and sony console. I'd be tempted to get another if I could find a looked after one. It also came in 1.6 and 2.0. I wonder if anyone has tried these engines? The 1.8 was a beast.

The Ghia spec was dropped from the Focus in 2008.  Replaced with Titanium when the Mk2 was facelifted.

The 1.6 petrol struggles a bit in the Mk2 Focus, it's pretty slow, pretty thirsty, and pretty expensive to tax.  The 1.8 & 2.0 are both decent options.  They have cam chains so no belt replacement to worry about.  The 1.8 suffered from piston ring wear which would ultimately lead to oil burning and failing MOT on emissions.  The 2.0 didn't suffer with that fault, but is obviously a bit higher on running costs.  It's also 'only' 140bhp...which is a bit weak and the reason it was dropped in favour of the turbocharged 1.6 EcoBoost in 2010 when the Mk3 was released.

The newest Mk2 facelifts are 13 years old now, so you would have to budget for a few minor repairs, and look very carefully for rust around the suspension and chassis.  The Mk2 Focus also uses independent rear suspension for every model, which is great for ride & handling, but does mean a lot of bushes to wear out on the rear as they get older.

thanks Tom  maybe it was the independent rear suspension which gave it such a secure feeling on the road?? I'll have a look whats out there. It definitely feels nicer to drive a slightly bigger car especially with a high quality interior.

47 minutes ago, Ben97397284 said:

maybe it was the independent rear suspension which gave it such a secure feeling on the road??

Yeah, that and the chassis.  Much better chassis on Mk2 Focus than Mk4 Golf! 

VW really had to up their game for the Mk5 Golf.  (Which they did pretty successfully tbf.)

I like the mk5 golf but it still feels a bit too big compared with the mk2 focus and previous golf. i dont think the engines are that great in them either. the gti was obviously good, but ive heard a lot of negative things about the fsi engine.

Got a 16 plate 1.0 ecoboost titanium  125hp 78k for sale if you got £5k. 

Mine were all diesels.  Not interested in an FSI unless it's got a T...and I couldn't afford the fuel for those. 

Mk2 Focus is a bigger car than a Mk5 Golf.  They feel pretty similar inside though.  I've had a late Mk6 for the last 5 years.  Looked tiny next to the Mk2/3/4 Focus's that it's managed to outlive so far lol.

nice ecoboost for sale ian

4 hours ago, Ben97397284 said:

nice ecoboost for sale ian

It's my partner's car. Had it since 2017 and only thing that's gone wrong has been a rear coil spring and ign switch. 

18 hours ago, TomsFocus said:

Mk2 Focus is a bigger car than a Mk5 Golf. 

Yes, I remember noticing that when I test drove both in 2005. Dimensions were (I think) about:

Golf 4204mm long, 1760 wide, Focus 4340/1840. 

I think even the Golf 7 is still a bit smaller than the Focus 2.

3 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

Yes, I remember noticing that when I test drove both in 2005. Dimensions were (I think) about:

Golf 4204mm long, 1760 wide, Focus 4340/1840. 

So you remember the dimensions to the mm, even after. 18 years!??? I can't remember what I had for breakfast 🤣🤣