Fri
Feb 27 2009

Focus RS: let's talk torque steer

Matt Prior
Some of you have expressed doubt that the Ford Focus RS can have 324lb ft of torque and be driven by its front wheels, yet suffer from no torque steer at all.

Earlier this week I spent two days in France with the RS and can report that, actually, you're right. It does torque steer.

A bit.

It's at its most prevalent near straight-ahead. Accelerate onto a motorway through third gear, and across cambers the RS will take nibbles at the steering wheel.



Which is about as surprising as finding it gets dark at night. The surprise is how little there is. The RS's traction out of tighter bends really is astonishing too.

With a lot of lock, out of a second-gear uphill corner it'll rocket away with no front-wheel slip at all and precious little torque effect on the steering.

There's less self centring than you might expect here – the first-gen Focus RS, which had a limited-slip diff that acted in the same fashion, would pull itself into a corner on the throttle.

The idea behind the RevoKnuckle suspension is simple when you see it – it reduces the distance between the steering axis (a line about which the wheel pivots) and the wheel's centre-line (where torque is applied to the road). It has the effect of shortening a lever, or pushing a door near the hinge rather than near the handle.

Renault has done something similar, it says, with the RenaultSport Megane. I'll be spending my evening delving into the intricacies of both so I can really understand them, before writing about the cars over the weekend.



That's why I was in France in the first place; to group test the RS against an R26 R and a Mitsubishi Evo X. But I suspect I am contractually obliged not to tell you the result until the story appears in the rag a week on Wednesday. Sorry.

Suffice to say it's no foregone conclusion. Yesterday we took the same R26R to MIRA and lapped our road test circuits, obtaining comparative times in advance of a full Focus RS road test.

Fast? We looked at the data and the R26 R loses out to an Aston Martin DBS only under power.

Ford hasn't quoted a Nurburgring lap time for the Focus RS yet, but reckons it'll be able to beat the Renault's 8min 17sec when good weather permits an attempt.

It might be right: the RS feels wickedly fast in a straight line and the Nurburgring rewards power.

But don't, in any contest, underestimate the car with the plastic windows.


Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Sign-in or register to add your comments

About Matt Prior

Runs Autocar's road test desk and an Austin Seven Special. Likes karting, small cars and big bikes. Doesn't keep wicket for England.

Comments

Orangewheels February 27, 2009 4:14 PM

Yes Matt, the Renault is fast, but shouldn't you be comparing the Focus RS with other cars you can actually live with day to day that have things like rear seats, no scaffolding, glass windows, a radio, air con etc.

I'm sure if you stripped most of these things from the Focus and saved another 120kg from its weight as Renault have, it's performance would be on another level. Maybe the standard R26 would have been a better comparison? or wait until Ford offers a clubsport version.

The DBS comparison isn't great either as wasn't it beaten in the 0-60-0 challenge by the much smaller and less powerful Vantage by some margin?

Lee23404 February 27, 2009 5:16 PM

The fact that it only torque steers a little is almost unbelievable.

I had a diesel vectra a couple of years ago (company car not temporary insanity) which only had 250lb ft of torque but the wheel would tug left and right like a pig if the wheel wasn't dead straight. It would also spin its wheels in 3rd year in the wet. Chassis sophistication - not much.

jerry99 February 27, 2009 7:55 PM

Looking at the (rather small) sketch of the Revoknuckle in the magazine it makes sense to me.

The hub carrier is not similar to that on Renault 12/15/17/18/20/25/30 models from 1970 to the mid 1980s. Those hub carriers were attached to double wishbones (rrather than struts) with a higher steering rack and these vehicles did not often suffer torque steer even when turbo charged, fitted with tuned engines or larger than standard wheels and tyres.

Obviously the double wishbone layout could be better still but Ford seem to have done a good job of overcoming at least some of the struts limitations and without turning the power train through ninty degrees there would not be much space for an upper wishbone.  

jerry99 February 27, 2009 7:55 PM

That should have been not dis-similar to

csmith319 February 27, 2009 9:03 PM

OrangeWheels - understand what you mean; but then what if Renault upped the power on there's to 300bhp (not exactly rocket science)? The point is, each company has taken a different route to what they consider is the ultimate hot hatch... and the best thing that it is different!

jl4069 February 28, 2009 7:49 PM

Matt,

I must say your 'prior' test of the R26 vs Cayman was a great idea. Its too bad you didn't explain just how the

two cars differed in their handling. Nor did you explain as many others more experienced than yourself have explained, how the toyo tires on the r26.r make the car more than a bit tricky to drive on wet wales roads as you drove. Indeed I spoken to several journalists who drove the R26.r in wales and almost lost control many times. Its not the friendly handling car you so such a thin description about- great as it is in the dry. So already I see a bias from you about the R26, its a great car but not near as well rounded as you make it out to be. Its not perfect and neither will the RS be. J

andylevitt March 1, 2009 5:11 PM

is it me or are you sick of car magazines and the press of talking about the new rs focus.

how long has it took ford to produce the thing when other manufacturers just get on and bulid more interesting cars without the fuss.

hi couldnt care less if its four wheel drive, rear wheel, front wheel drive or even one wheel drive.

i bought a focus st in 2006 and had it for 11 weeks as the thing was so poor, poor handling and the running costs are horrendous- 15 mpg sometimes at best.

i read that autoexpress tested the car in france and got 11 mpg and then when driving normally managed 14 mpg, well that is pathetic a hot hatchback is for the masses who cant aford a supercar. with these running costs lets see how long owners keep the cars.

jose capito you should hang your head in shame for allowing this car to be produced with the knowledge what it was going to cost to run.

you may think by reading this im a total bore or green well im not.

one last thing the renault megane r26r is tottally pointless. who wats to buy a car with scaffolding in with no rear seats and how exciting its the lap holder of the ring for front wheel drivezzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Dan McNeil March 1, 2009 10:54 PM

jl4069 said:  February 28, 2009 7:49 PM

"Indeed I spoken to several journalists who drove the R26.r in wales and almost lost control many times."

----------

Hmm...these boy journos getting all excited about a really fast car and not being able to handle it.

jl4069 March 2, 2009 8:13 AM

DAN:

"Hmm...these boy journos getting all excited about a really fast car and not being able to handle it. "

No nothing like that. Just the usual suspects who've been testing, and racing for the last 15-25 years. Guys more like Sutcliffe.  

Really now, lets try to grab hold of our senses here, the R26.r rides on cup tires, these don't do to well on rough wet roads. Just simple stuff mate. J

All about Autocar

Newsfeeds

Subscribe to our news with our RSS feeds

Advertise

To advertise with Autocar contact us

Buy our magazines

Discover our titles at themagazineshop.com

Autocar latest issue - cover 8.2.12

NEW ISSUE OUT NOW

FAST, EASY & SECURE
SUBSCRIBE NOW>>