Has Anyone Had The St250Rs Kit On Their Focus St

[Tomm Smith]

Has anyone has their focus ST upgraded with this kit? If so could you tell me if its worth it or not and give me some 0-60 times.

This is the kit im talking about: http://www.pumaspeed.co.uk/product-Focus-ST-225-Power-Upgrade-ST350-Plus-bhp_566.jsp

Edit (I meant 350rs kit in the title.)

[ben1191]

i dont,but that looks brilliant :D Cant wait to get my ST one day when the insurance fairies decide im allowed lmao

[FOCA]

Has anyone has their focus ST upgraded with this kit? If so could you tell me if its worth it or not and give me some 0-60 times.

This is the kit im talking about: http://www.pumaspeed.co.uk/product-Focus-ST-225-Power-Upgrade-ST350-Plus-bhp_566.jsp

Edit (I meant 350rs kit in the title.)

£5000 pounds is a lot of money, its still a modified ST225,(it is unlikely it will increase the value of the ST225 as much as the cost) you would be better off buying a genuine, factory made Focus mk2 RS

The Mk2 RS has a lot of design changes that the ST225 does not, like it has an ATB (automatic torque biasing) diff, this is an advanced type of limited slip differential that can distribute the torque to the 2 front wheels (basically so both front wheels grip instead of just one(the one with the least traction) ) - the ST225 (and this expensive kit) has to make do with a regular diff + a traction control system that can brake the front wheels (not as effective as an ATB)

So in terms of value for money, depreciation, and "go per pound" you would be better off with a (real) Focus RS mk2 han wasting your money on this kit, in my opinion

With all that power going through the front wheels and no limited slip diff or ATB, the 0-60mph is not going to change much - i have figures for the ST225 and the (Factory) RS the 0-60 is similar, even though the RS is more powerful, - only at higher speeds is there a big difference

with the ATB (+ other things) and more power (than the pumaspeed ST) the RS is better -

RS mk2 - 400 bhp / 2010 / low milage £23000 -

http://www.pistonheads.com/classifieds/used-cars/ford/focus-rs

[ben1191]

Yeah but the going rate of an rs is about 15k,and they're only 320bhp? Think it's more around 310 the rs500 is 350bhp.goig rate of an st225 is like 4-5k? I'd rather find one with a dodgy turbo or blown one and then get this done to it(assuming they're changing the turbo out?) either Way,personally when I get my focus st I'll keep it until I own a focus rs or maybe some super quick mondeo If they ever make one .

Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC

[troy45]

You can do a lot to improve the power of an ST before you spend that sort of money.

There's always lots of second hand parts up for sale so you could pick up an intercooler, exhaust , downpipe, sports cat and induction kit and one of the many tried and tested maps. With that sort of kit you'd get an ST in the region of 300bhp depending on the map and for a guess it'd maybe cost you a grand (ish) Also the peak bhp figure doesn't tell the whole story by a long way - an uprated turbo should give more than just a big peak followed by drop off in power which is how some maps perform to get their publicised power figures.

Going full monty with a modified turbo and 350+ bhp you're starting to get to the limits of some of the stock ST parts such as driveshafts and the clutch. Maybe the oil cooler too, and if you pick up an ST with standard suspension you'll miss getting the full potential out of the cars handling.

I know someone with a seriously heavily modified ST running hybrid turbo, also needs an uprated fuel pump, boost controller, RS airbox, and host of other things including uprated driveshafts for it to perform at it's best. Fuel pump is a biggie - Ford do an uprated pump for the RS350 kit but once owners without the kit started buying the pumps on their own from parts counters the price shot up to circa £1500 :o

Then there's the diff - no good having that extra power if the car spends half it's time either triggering the TC or trying to understeer you off the road. That's one thing my mate doesn't have on his ST and he admits he needs one!

On the other hand buying an RS gives you 305bhp to start off with but not as torquey/punchy low down as an ST due to the bigger turbo. The ride can be fairly harsh with standard springs and I've had various RS owners offer to swap their seats for my ST ones. Course this can all be improved if you spend a bit of money on it. The RS is holding it's value really well though that may change if/when the mooted mk3 RS is announced.

Not to say the RS is a bad car, far from it - I just prefer my ST. I considered the RS before buying my second ST but price was 10K higher and I already had a lot of decent kit off my pre-facelift to carry over to a new one. And it's ended up looking like an RS in some ways but that wasn't an intentional plan

:)

[Andy.B1971]

RS 305 BHP

RS 500 345 BHP

look at JW Racing for kits/tuning/styling a very good company indeed.

Gotta say the ST seats are so so comfortable , love em, just don't own em .

:D

[FOCA]

Some interesting points there

Dont forget the Bluefin stage 3, this is the map, intake, exhaust and uprated intercooler required

Brings the ST225 up to a claimed 305Hp (same as a stock RS) -

http://www.mybluefin.co.uk/search?make=9&model=2&fueltype=3&variant=2025

The stage one is the map alone, a mere £320, with 271Hp / 435Nm -

http://www.mybluefin.co.uk/curves/FocusSTStage1.pdf

The RS is more of an extreme car than the ST with the ride/ seats fucussed towards handling rather than comfort, it depends what you want from a car, ,if comfort was your main priority, an old Jag or a Caddilac (or a big old Merc) would be ideal - the seats and ride ar real comfy

Niether the ST or RS are particularily economical, properly souped-up ones are often gutsy (gas-guzzling) brutes

Superchips RS mk2 mp350 to 390Hp £360 -

http://www.mybluefin.co.uk/curves/FocusMk2%20RS500%20&%20MP350.pdf

[troy45]

Ran Bluefin stage 3+ on my last ST - quite a good map but as with a lot of the ST maps it delivers all in one big lump early on then tails off. Makes it easy to light the wheels up and feels quick at first till you get more used to it. Found Mountune and some of the Dreamscience Mod B+ maps to be similar really.

The amount of power they all give is up for debate depending what flavour of smoke and mirrors is used to guesstimate the power at the crank from torque measured at the wheels.

My money would go with the Collins maps for the ST, lot more linear usable power delivery imho :D

[FOCA]

All the software-only maps tend to be similar

Looking at the Bluefin stage3 the power and torque curves look progressive, with the power curve rising nicely to 6k (wish my diesel was like that!) and not much torque below 2.5k - so the revs need to be kept between 2.5 and 6k, it will tend to get through the lower gears very quickly, (so it seems like "lumps") with the middle gears with the car getting into its stride and seeming to pull for longer (on track of course, because by this time its into speeds that are illegal on the road) - often, the gearing is all wrong when you increase power a lot- eg - i often take off in 2nd

Whatever power you have you get used to it, and it seems "normal" / get bored with it- whether its 150/200/300/400Hp or more

I know what you mean about the dynos - some seem to be more "highly tuned" than others, and have to be taken with a "pinch of salt"

[troy45]

My old ST made a lot less torque running stage 3 than Superchips graph shows, power curve looked similar but down like 100Nm with the torque. But with the dyno lottery it gave 20 bhp difference on different dynos on consecutive weekends Sticking to wheel horsepower is a much better comparison - some dyno's run a coast-down to estimate transmission losses, others just apply an arbritary correction figure.

Generally as the gear ratios get higher and spread out further the car will feel like it's pulling for longer as it takes more time to reach peak rpms and you feel the boost for longer. ST's always tend to feel really punchy around 2500-4500 rpm, which is why power figures don't tell the whole story - you need to consider the torque curve too.

I always just found with Bluefin, Mountune and Dreamscience maps as well it was very difficult to get away quickly without losing traction, trying to get shifting in the wet and performance seemed to drop off sharply after that - the Collins maps feel very linear, progressive in comparison and tractable in comparison.

[Tomm Smith]

My old ST made a lot less torque running stage 3 than Superchips graph shows, power curve looked similar but down like 100Nm with the torque. But with the dyno lottery it gave 20 bhp difference on different dynos on consecutive weekends Sticking to wheel horsepower is a much better comparison - some dyno's run a coast-down to estimate transmission losses, others just apply an arbritary correction figure.

Generally as the gear ratios get higher and spread out further the car will feel like it's pulling for longer as it takes more time to reach peak rpms and you feel the boost for longer. ST's always tend to feel really punchy around 2500-4500 rpm, which is why power figures don't tell the whole story - you need to consider the torque curve too.

I always just found with Bluefin, Mountune and Dreamscience maps as well it was very difficult to get away quickly without losing traction, trying to get shifting in the wet and performance seemed to drop off sharply after that - the Collins maps feel very linear, progressive in comparison and tractable in comparison.

Ok so after everything that has been said I am considering just buying a full blown RS; however I still do like the idea if a highly modified focus ST. What's the cheapest way to bring the car up to around 300bhp?

Sent from my iPhone using Ford OC

[FOCA]

My old ST made a lot less torque running stage 3 than Superchips graph shows, power curve looked similar but down like 100Nm with the torque. But with the dyno lottery it gave 20 bhp difference on different dynos on consecutive weekends Sticking to wheel horsepower is a much better comparison - some dyno's run a coast-down to estimate transmission losses, others just apply an arbritary correction figure.

Generally as the gear ratios get higher and spread out further the car will feel like it's pulling for longer as it takes more time to reach peak rpms and you feel the boost for longer. ST's always tend to feel really punchy around 2500-4500 rpm, which is why power figures don't tell the whole story - you need to consider the torque curve too.

I always just found with Bluefin, Mountune and Dreamscience maps as well it was very difficult to get away quickly without losing traction, trying to get shifting in the wet and performance seemed to drop off sharply after that - the Collins maps feel very linear, progressive in comparison and tractable in comparison.

Are you sure the Collins map is more linear, progressive compared to the other maps or is it more tractable because there is less power? (i have no bias- not sure about others )

I would like to see some dyno graphs (taking into account the dynos are different., of course)

Is the ST restricted in the lower gears anyway? (and some maps remove this restriction?)

[troy45]

Are you sure the Collins map is more linear, progressive compared to the other maps or is it more tractable because there is less power? (i have no bias- not sure about others )

I would like to see some dyno graphs (taking into account the dynos are different., of course)

Is the ST restricted in the lower gears anyway? (and some maps remove this restriction?)

My seat of the pants dyno says the Collins map is at least as powerful as previous maps I've run on ST's but it's not exactly a calibrated measurement ;) It also definitely revs more freely as I've found on twisty roads I know well I can keep it in a lower gear and pull more revs rather than going up a gear. Quoted power is 320 bhp so it's not likely to be delivering less power and feeling smoother that way. In truth the time I drove a standard RS it felt more that way, linear and smooth but not as fast.

But with the ST the power figure doesn't tell the full story - as with driving the RS, probably equal on power but less torque low down and this is what you'll experience the most of the time in an ST. No need to bury the needle in the red to get it shifting, just make the most of the big pile of torque around 2-4K rpm.

I did lots of dyno runs with the pre-facelift ST but this one hasn't been near a dyno - too often people get worried about the power figures when they'd have been happy with the car not knowing what the dyno lottery came up with. For the linearity of power delivery I would say it's not going to show up so much on a dyno run, any work on refining the throttle map won't really show up when the dyno operator buries his foot to the floor for the power run.

The ST does have some torque limiters in it's software I believe but honestly can't say if tuners modify or remove these.

B)