Changing car - any advice

Pinkchick03

fightin irish wrote:

i wont go into the pro's and con's of this debate....But the new Focus was launched last week meaning the mark 1 focus has and will come down in price considerbly in price. Never a better time to get a 02/03 Focus.

TBH i work in the motor trade and the Focus is streets ahead of a megane in terms of engine and most noteably(spelling?) handling on the road, which the Focus is famed for.

Well thats my 'tupenny bit'

I have been considering the focus - but is the 1.6 better than the 1.4 power wise?? some one said a 1.4 focus is just same as 1.2 clio cos its bigger car/bigger engine - no gain as ambro25 said! So how much would you reckon a focus will be next year - as in to buy a 2002 one???

fightin irish

Come Janurary i think tey are starting to go for 11,000(this is main dealer price)

so i would assume a private deal to be 10500 or so. 1.4 only.

There is a fairly big difference in the 1.6 to 1.4...as some one said the 1.4 IS very firey.

Pinkchick03

fightin irish wrote:

Come Janurary i think tey are starting to go for 11,000(this is main dealer price)

so i would assume a private deal to be 10500 or so. 1.4 only.

There is a fairly big difference in the 1.6 to 1.4...as some one said the 1.4 IS very firey.

Cool! Do you work in a garage - and get me a car for cheap??? LOL

BrianD3

I have to say that Renault have Ford beaten when it comes to the performance of their small petrol engines. A Focus 1.4 16v develops 74 bhp while the same size engine in a Megane II develops 98 bhp. The Focus is also beaten by a 1988 Renault 19 with its 1.4 litre 8 valve carburettor engine (output of 80 bhp)

Same story with the 1.6. Megane 115 bhp. Focus 99 bhp.

The Renaults are also torquier although the Fords do claw back some ground by developing peak torque and power at slightly lower revs. From driving the Focus it does feel quite lively in urban driving (maybe due to low gearing) however overall the Renaults are better performers.

BrianD3

fightin irish

BrianD3 wrote:

I have to say that Renault have Ford beaten when it comes to the performance of their small petrol engines. A Focus 1.4 16v develops 74 bhp while the same size engine in a Megane II develops 98 bhp. The Focus is also beaten by a 1988 Renault 19 with its 1.4 litre 8 valve carburettor engine (output of 80 bhp)

Same story with the 1.6. Megane 115 bhp. Focus 99 bhp.

The Renaults are also torquier although the Fords do claw back some ground by developing peak torque and power at slightly lower revs. From driving the Focus it does feel quite lively in urban driving (maybe due to low gearing) however overall the Renaults are better performers.

BrianD3

Thats a fair point!! TBH bhp is a thing of the past and cars are not measured by this anymore...only glossy car mags still do this.

Most modern engines(not carb engines..again a thing of the past) are measured by whats called 'P S'.
Anywho, each to thier own.

BrianD3

Most modern engines(not carb engines..again a thing of the past) are measured by whats called 'P S'.

That's true, but 1 bhp and 1 PS (which is a metric unit) are almost the same quantity and virtually interchangeable for normal family cars. I believe the conversion factor is 1 bhp = 1.014 PS. Hence A 1.6 Focus has 100 PS or 99 bhp.

Yes, I am a nerd

BrianD3

fightin irish

WOW I'M IMPRESSED :cool:

dcGT

BrianD3 wrote:

I have to say that Renault have Ford beaten when it comes to the performance of their small petrol engines. A Focus 1.4 16v develops 74 bhp while the same size engine in a Megane II develops 98 bhp.

I was just checking the specs for the Focus and Fiesta. The 1.4 Focus and 1.25 Fiesta produce the same power (75 PS), with the focus doing better in the Torque measures (123 Nm vs. 110 Nm). Interesting.

DC.

Pinkchick03

dcGT wrote:

I was just checking the specs for the Focus and Fiesta. The 1.4 Focus and 1.25 Fiesta produce the same power (75 PS), with the focus doing better in the Torque measures (123 Nm vs. 110 Nm). Interesting.

DC.

Holy god this post has changed into a mathematical one! he he! All i want is advice about changing the car - too many figures scare me LOL!! So....

Mayshine

Most modern engines(not carb engines..again a thing of the past) are measured by whats called 'P S'.
Anywho, each to thier own.

PS - PferdeStarke - German for guess what -- hosre power. Still a little imperial don't you think.

Most car engines are measured by whats called an engine dynometer... The rating is in KiloWatts (KW) and usually coverted to PS or BHP depending on the market

Sorry to be a geek here




Anyway on the engine sizes here goes (all 5dr basic spec, current models) order in terms of power - Higher better

Stilo 1.4 - 1010Kg, 70Kw = 69.3 Kw/tonne
Corolla 1.4 - 1110Kg, 71Kw = 62.0 Kw/tonne
Megane 1.4 - 1165kg, 72Kw = 61.1 Kw/tonne
Civic 1.4 - 1125Kg, 66Kw = 58.7 Kw/tonne
Clio 1.2 - 965kg, 55Kw = 57 Kw/tonne
Astra 1.4 - 1178kg, 66Kw = 56.0 Kw/tonne
Peugeot 307 - 1170, 65 Kw = 55.6 Kw/tonne
Mazda 3 - 1180Kg, 62 Kw = 52.5 kw/tonne
Focus - 1154kg, 55Kw = 47.7 Kw/tonne
Leon 1.4 - 1161Kg, 55Kw = 47.4 Kw/tonne
Octavia - 1230Kg, 55Kw = 44.7 Kw/tonne
Golf 1.4 - 1319kg, 55Kw = 41.6 Kw/tonne

Big difference between 41 and 69. Thats a 70% difference, so as you can see not all 1.4s are created equal and your little clio sits nearer the top than the bottom.... The Golf and it older VAG sisters are lardy POS that need to hit the gym and shed some of those BigMacs, but the leader, the Stilo will fall apart before you drive off the forecourt so

Between the corolla, civic and megane, I'd probably take the Megane just over the civic - seems well spec'ed and keenly priced

Dave

dcGT

Pinkchick03 wrote:

Holy god this post has changed into a mathematical one! he he! All i want is advice about changing the car - too many figures scare me LOL!! So....

Heh yeah, sorry about that. Well I suppose without actually driving the various cars, performance figures are the best place to start if you're looking for something 'nippy'

DC.

BrianD3

Good list of specs. mayshine. Interesting to see that there is now a 1.4 Stilo presumably this replaces the 1.2 that was offered originally.

Also, the 307 must have gained some bhp since the last time i checked it had the same output as the VAG and Focus 1.4.

If you were to include older cars you'd get even better power to weight ratios. Eg the older Civics, the old Megane 1.4 16 valve (same engine but lighter body than the current car) and the Rover 214 which was offered with a 103 bhp 1.4 engine in a light body.

BrianD3

Pinkchick03

Too technical for me!!! LOL! I just a car with a bit of lift - none of this bhp smuck!!! HE HE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Anyone fancy buying/selling me a good car????? Or just giving me one

Pinkchick03

Mayshine wrote:

Stilo 1.4 - 1010Kg, 70Kw = 69.3 Kw/tonne
Corolla 1.4 - 1110Kg, 71Kw = 62.0 Kw/tonne
Megane 1.4 - 1165kg, 72Kw = 61.1 Kw/tonne
Civic 1.4 - 1125Kg, 66Kw = 58.7 Kw/tonne
Clio 1.2 - 965kg, 55Kw = 57 Kw/tonne
Astra 1.4 - 1178kg, 66Kw = 56.0 Kw/tonne
Peugeot 307 - 1170, 65 Kw = 55.6 Kw/tonne
Mazda 3 - 1180Kg, 62 Kw = 52.5 kw/tonne
Focus - 1154kg, 55Kw = 47.7 Kw/tonne
Leon 1.4 - 1161Kg, 55Kw = 47.4 Kw/tonne
Octavia - 1230Kg, 55Kw = 44.7 Kw/tonne
Golf 1.4 - 1319kg, 55Kw = 41.6 Kw/tonne

Big difference between 41 and 69. Thats a 70% difference, so as you can see not all 1.4s are created equal and your little clio sits nearer the top than the bottom.... The Golf and it older VAG sisters are lardy POS that need to hit the gym and shed some of those BigMacs, but the leader, the Stilo will fall apart before you drive off the forecourt so

Between the corolla, civic and megane, I'd probably take the Megane just over the civic - seems well spec'ed and keenly priced

Dave

Do you mean new or old shape megane??? or does it make a difference?? I really like new shape megane - anyone selling theirs??

Mayshine

New shape Megane, go take a test drive of it.

Probably a good bet. Very good safety record and probably the most toys of all the cars in the list.





BTW
I took the data from carzone.ie. In fact once I was bored and wrote a java program to read the whole site and generate all the Kw/tonne off all their cars in their database. After that i knew which cars has the 'cheapest' horespower. How sad is that..

Pinkchick03

I had test in new shape megane - its lovely!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Handbrake bit strange!
Think i might get an 03 one in Jan depending on price range.

That isn't sad - its extremely intelligent!!!! Fair play to ya!

ZENER

All this conversation about relative engine performance got my google button working and came up with these figures which relate to the cars that have been mentioned. Many makers now quote engine power in KWs which is a little easier to work with.

All the cars below with the exception of the Almera are 1.4 16V models. As you can see the power output of the individual engines varies wildly! Comparing BHP is not an accurate way of comparing engine performance. HP is calculated as follows:

Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5252.

The type of driver you are should decide the type of engine you opt for. For example a driver who likes to get into high gear as soon as possible should avoid V-Tec or VVTi engines who only come into their own at high revs. City drivers my fall into this category making diesel engines popular.

Drivers who like to work their engine through the revs up to red-line may appreciate more the merits of V-Tec and other engines that generate most of their power at high revs. This may explain the difference in opinion of the Focus and the Megane above. The focus generates it's power lower down than the Megane so probably making it feel nippier to certain types of driver.

A friend of mine bought a 2.2 V-Tec Accord a few years ago and I knew immediately he wouldn't like it he changes gear religiously at 2,500 RPM - I was right - he sold the car off 4 months later.


Ford Focus 1.4L:
Power: 55 kW , 75 HP ISO @ 5,000 rpm; , 123 Nm @ 3,500 rpm

Renault Megane 1.4L
Power: 72 kW , 98 HP EEC @ 6,000 rpm; , 127 Nm @ 3,750 rpm

Honda Civic 1.4S
Power: 66 kW , 90 HP SAE @ 5,600 rpm; , 130 Nm @ 4,300 rpm

Nissan Almera 1.5L:
Power: 72 kW , 98 HP EEC @ 6,000 rpm; , 136 Nm @ 4,000 rpm

Peugot 206 1.4L:
Power: 55 kW , 75 HP EEC @ 5,500 rpm; , 120 Nm @ 2,800 rpm

Toyota Corolla 1.4VVT
Power: 71 kW , 97 HP EEC @ 6,000 rpm; , 130 Nm @ 4,400 rpm

Citroen C2 1.4L:
Power: 54 kW , 75 HP EEC @ 5,400 rpm; , 118 Nm @ 3,300 rpm

ZEN AKA The Nerd !!

Edit: Oops didn't notice there was a third page . . Sooorrry !

Pinkchick03

ZENER wrote:

All this conversation about relative engine performance got my google button working and came up with these figures which relate to the cars that have been mentioned. Many makers now quote engine power in KWs which is a little easier to work with.

All the cars below with the exception of the Almera are 1.4 16V models. As you can see the power output of the individual engines varies wildly! Comparing BHP is not an accurate way of comparing engine performance. HP is calculated as follows:

Horsepower = Torque x rpm / 5252.

The type of driver you are should decide the type of engine you opt for. For example a driver who likes to get into high gear as soon as possible should avoid V-Tec or VVTi engines who only come into their own at high revs. City drivers my fall into this category making diesel engines popular.

Drivers who like to work their engine through the revs up to red-line may appreciate more the merits of V-Tec and other engines that generate most of their power at high revs. This may explain the difference in opinion of the Focus and the Megane above. The focus generates it's power lower down than the Megane so probably making it feel nippier to certain types of driver.

A friend of mine bought a 2.2 V-Tec Accord a few years ago and I knew immediately he wouldn't like it he changes gear religiously at 2,500 RPM - I was right - he sold the car off 4 months later.


Ford Focus 1.4L:
Power: 55 kW , 75 HP ISO @ 5,000 rpm; , 123 Nm @ 3,500 rpm

Renault Megane 1.4L
Power: 72 kW , 98 HP EEC @ 6,000 rpm; , 127 Nm @ 3,750 rpm

Honda Civic 1.4S
Power: 66 kW , 90 HP SAE @ 5,600 rpm; , 130 Nm @ 4,300 rpm

Nissan Almera 1.5L:
Power: 72 kW , 98 HP EEC @ 6,000 rpm; , 136 Nm @ 4,000 rpm

Peugot 206 1.4L:
Power: 55 kW , 75 HP EEC @ 5,500 rpm; , 120 Nm @ 2,800 rpm

Toyota Corolla 1.4VVT
Power: 71 kW , 97 HP EEC @ 6,000 rpm; , 130 Nm @ 4,400 rpm

Citroen C2 1.4L:
Power: 54 kW , 75 HP EEC @ 5,400 rpm; , 118 Nm @ 3,300 rpm

ZEN AKA The Nerd !!

Edit: Oops didn't notice there was a third page . . Sooorrry !

He he - don't worry!
Now who wants to explain the figures!
Figure wise the best car is ???
What is with all the maths?? Its so funny in school people were like - why would we ever need maths outside of school ... so this is a typical use of maths!! LOL!!
All I need is an explanation .... who is willing?

BrianD3

Zener; why is bhp not accurate for comparsions. AFAIK bhp is just a unit, there's a fixed conversion factor to convert between KW and bhp and both are determined using the same principle of torque * rpm/x and using a rolling road. KW, bhp and PS (is this the same as bhp EEC?) are all just different ways of expressing the same thing. Confusion may arise if power is determined at the flywheel rather than at the wheels but from what I know no car manufacturer does this nowadays.

BrianD3

fightin irish

Pinkchick03 wrote:

He he - don't worry!
Now who wants to explain the figures!
Figure wise the best car is ???
What is with all the maths?? Its so funny in school people were like - why would we ever need maths outside of school ... so this is a typical use of maths!! LOL!!
All I need is an explanation .... who is willing?

JUST LOOK AT THE MONSTER U CREATED..SHAME ON U

ZENER

BrianD3 wrote:

Zener; why is bhp not accurate for comparsions.

I suppose it depends on your POV, but in my opinion it makes it obvious the relative outputs of each engine. Of course the true characteristics of the engine only become obvious when you consider the other figures like torque and RPMs. BHP can be very misleading, for example a Honda V-Tec or Mitsubishi MiVEC engine display very impressive BHP figures on paper but you know that these engines suffer from low torque figures that are reached at 6000+ RPM so making the BHP figure look amazing - by contrast diesel cars produce all their torque very low down the Tacho and as a resuld show low BHP ratings by comparison, hence my example of the friend who bought the Accord V-Tec !

Sorry to turn this into a nerdy lesson but I was simply trying to make the point that BHP figures don't tell the whole story and a persons driving habits need to be considered when commenting on a cars suitabilty for the task. The original poster could perhaps tell us what his/her driving habits are !

ZEN

unkel

ZENER wrote:

a persons driving habits need to be considered when commenting on a cars suitabilty for the task

Sound conclusion! About 4 years ago I was thinking about changing cars. I wanted a saloon with a bit of performance. My father-in-law had had a Rover 620TI from new, which is a true performance saloon and a very nice car indeed

I test drove one and realised a car with that kinda engine is not for me. Sure it was fast, but only if kept revving the bejaysis out of it

Have been on a diet of high power, high torque, V8 petrol saloons since...

In dubio about Diesels at the moment but they just might be an alternative

I dunno if we've been of any help to Pinkchick03 here though

ZENER

*/ Pokes PinkChic03 !!!

Wake Up!! You're back in Kansas !!!!!



ZEN

BrianD3

Good explanation Zener. You'r right about the revs and torque influencing how fast a car feels, gear ratios are a big factor too.

I'd say though that in the lists of family cars that yourself and mayshine posted, most of them produce peak torque and power at reasonably similar revs and all the engines are naturally aspirated petrol units. Gear ratios are probably relatively similar too. Knowing this and for the sake of simplicity I'd say pinkchick would be advised to look at cars which have the highest KW/weight ratio (i.e. the ones towards the top of mayshine's list) if she wants a car with a bit of "lift"

BrianD3