Autocar - First for car news and reviews

The official specifications for the new Ford Focus RS have been released, and the car makes the expected full 300bhp from its 2.5-litre five-cylinder engine.

The key stats for the Ford Focus RS are, along with 300bhp, 324lb ft of torque, a top speed of 163mph and 0-62mph in 5.9sec. The Ford Focus RS also manages 30-60mph in fourth gear in just 5.3 seconds.

The five-cylinder engine in the Ford Focus RS produces full power at 6500rpm, while all the torque is available between 2300rpm...Read the full article

300bhp and a barely sub-6 second 0-60?

It seems a little bit underwhelming- obviously its still pretty darn fast but shouldnt a light family hatch with 300bhp really be nearer the 5second mark. Wouldnt that be a real breakthough? Maybe my expectations are simply too high now given what is about and available but I suppose it will be still be a lot of bang for your buck.

Autocar:

The key stats for the Ford Focus RS are, along with 300bhp, 324lb ft of torque, a top speed of 163mph and 0-62mph in 5.9sec. The Ford Focus RS also manages 30-60mph in fourth gear in just 5.3 seconds.

Has to be said, very slow and very heavy(nearly 1.5t). 300 hp suggests low 5 secs not nearly 6s. Perhaps it can't get the power down off the line and has to throttle back or Ford are deliberately pitching out very conservative figures, which everyone then beats in roadtests. The ordinary ST clocks 6.5s 0-62 mph with almost 80 hp less and the Audi S3 with 4wd creams it with a large hp disadvantage? and why the approx. 130kg weight gain over the standard ST, with basically the same powertrain?

0-60 is a lot to do with traction, so FWD cars can only perform so well.  Hence why the RS is beaten by the S3.

To me, that is a quick hatch!

Lookswise, its a shame it lacks the subtlety of the previous Focus RS.  Although I'm sure it will gain a similar instant classic status.

What did they fill the tyres with.. lead?   what a bloater!

The Volvo S60R they nicked the engine out came in lighter at 1455kg with a 4 wheel drivetrain, and the Volvo is a substantial car. They have ramped the torque up a bit but the S60 could do 0-60 in 6.3 so the Focus' weight clearly kills it. Where did they get this superduper new diff from?  another Volvo part perhaps - Volvo Trucks!

 

 

I'm inclined to agree the performance stats seem a little conservative. A Mazda 3 MPS (which shares a platform with the focus if I remember correctly) has 256 bhp and 280 lb/ft, so a 44 bhp and 44lb/ft defecit, with a slightly higher kerb weight at 1483kg.

 

The Mazda also manages 5.9 sec to 60 with FWD and narrower 215 section tyres, so i'd be very surprised if the focus couldn't do better.

The Apprentice:

What did they fill the tyres with.. lead?   what a bloater!

The Volvo S60R they nicked the engine out came in lighter at 1455kg with a 4 wheel drivetrain, and the Volvo is a substantial car. They have ramped the torque up a bit but the S60 could do 0-60 in 6.3 so the Focus' weight clearly kills it. Where did they get this superduper new diff from?  another Volvo part perhaps - Volvo Trucks!

According to the Volvo brochure the S60R had a minimum kerb weight of 1637Kg, not the 1455Kg you stated. Is the Focus RS really that bloated? Here are the kerb weights for it's 'rivals':

• Audi S3 - 1455Kg
• VW Golf R32 - 1510Kg
• Subura Impreza WRX STI - 1505Kg

I think people feel the Focus should be lighter because it lacks 4WD, but I wonder how much the control blade rear suspension, body alterations, wheels, etc add to the weight?

I think the performance is probably affected by the FWD element of the car as others have suggested. Having driven a 280HP version of the current ST I would say that the RS is going to have big mid-range punch and that will be the big figure, more than the 0-60.

 

stuart74:

According to the Volvo brochure the S60R had a minimum kerb weight of 1637Kg, not the 1455Kg you stated. Is the Focus RS really that bloated? Here are the kerb weights for it's 'rivals':

Apologies if I got my figure wrong... thats what you get for using Autocar as a reference!

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/RoadTestsData/Volvo-S60-R-AWD/217818/

Although impressive - I still think it's a missed opportunity - especially as it's badged as a RS - But has very little in common with the Focus RS WRCar - the car it is meant to be based on, i;e 2L Turbo 4WD.

Personally it'll never be up there with the Escort RS Mki &Mk2, Sierra RS Cosworth, Escort RS Cosworth.

How can some of you be passing judgements like these when no-one has actually driven the car? Have you driven it? I agree 5.9s sounds slightly higher than expected, but with a 2.5 litre turbo it's the 30-70mph time that'll be interesting to me. Should we reserve judgement on how good this car is and whether it'll be a classic until someone's driven the damn thing?

The article is ok but there is no word for the engine's origin.Well this engine is a VOLVO engine and you should have mentioned that in the article!

I really thought Fords were a cheap, naff awful looking range of cars before I saw this.

 Now I know it for sure. Looks like it came straight out of Max Power.

Even if it was unreal to drive, I'd still say no!!!

Since the RS200, they've only made 1 good looking car, this one's predecessor.