New Ford Focus

The_B_Man

I've the fabled 1.4 MK II saloon (in the default "tonic" blue) that people seem to think is bottom of the list.
Admittedly it's not gonna win any beauty contents but its a really nice car to drive.
I've had it 5 years and never once had a problem (touch wood) so I'd agree its bulletproof.

The only downside is the 79BHP from Factory, of which i'd say 10+ horses have escaped over the years.
So basically it's nice to drive, ugly as feck, and weak as feck (incidentally, does anyone know how I can increase the power, cheaply?).

So if this new Focus has carried on the tradition, then it'll sell well as it'll be a great car to drive, especially since they've bumped up the horses, so that's basically fixed the one downside it had. The looks are subjective, but the effort it takes to get up a hill is not!

Royale with Cheese

The_B_Man wrote: »

I've the fabled 1.4 MK II saloon (in the default "tonic" blue) that people seem to think is bottom of the list.
Admittedly it's not gonna win any beauty contents but its a really nice car to drive.
I've had it 5 years and never once had a problem (touch wood) so I'd agree its bulletproof.

The only downside is the 79BHP from Factory, of which i'd say 10+ horses have escaped over the years.
So basically it's nice to drive, ugly as feck, and weak as feck (incidentally, does anyone know how I can increase the power, cheaply?).

So if this new Focus has carried on the tradition, then it'll sell well as it'll be a great car to drive, especially since they've bumped up the horses, so that's basically fixed the one downside it had. The looks are subjective, but the effort it takes to get up a hill is not!

I drove one of these for 10 years, had it scrapped two months ago

I was quite fond of it in an odd way, despite the pathetic engine. I was sad to see it go in the end but its bulletproofness stopped at about 10/11 years old and it started needing €500-1000 per year to keep it on the road. The power steering went (for the second time) just before the NCT was up and that was it for me. Seemed like a waste to scrap a 13 year old car (at only 111,000km) that was working fine aside from that unit needing to be fixed, but there were so many of these for sale on donedeal that I doubt it was even worth €1000.

I like the look of that new Focus anyway, I could see myself going back to one in a few years when I'm looking for something again. I might go for a slightly more powerful engine this time though :pac:

carzony

Good point lads ,

Those 1.4 petrol focus's were so slow and under powered it was a wonder they were allowed to sell them like that.

Alun

jca wrote: »

Looks like the Mazda 3 to me which is an ugly looking brute.

All the current crop of Mazda hatchbacks and SUV's look weird to me. The length of the bonnet just seems out of proportion to the rest of the car.

TheBoyConor

jca wrote: »

If there's a boggo spec weedy 90 bhp diesel version with keep fit Windows, black door handles and black mirrors it'll sell like hot cakes here.

If only they would do one with unpainted black plastic bumpers too!

thierry14

No electric version

Strange

Dia1988

I would have been quite the Ford fan, owning several Fords over the years. I particularly like the current Mondeo as a good all rounder car.
But, surely Ford could have come up with a more creative design after 7 years of the current Focus, then again these cars are destined for the fleet market and merely a household appliance to a lot of families. Ford have been very reserved in their styling of the new Fiesta and this Focus. 
Hats off to Honda for daring to be different with the latest Civic, I'd seriously consider a Civic over a Focus now.
The new Focus looks too much like the i30. The interior of the new Focus even looks like that from the i30.

Spot the difference:

grogi

Dia1988 wrote: »

Spot the difference

In fairness the Hyundai is more interesting, with assymetric vents etc.

JohnBoy26

JoeA3 wrote: »

I remember when they came out and really loving the looks. The interior for sure though dated very quickly and looked really gimmicky and cheap next to the likes of the mk4 Golf at the time.

Tbh I think the MK2 that followed it years later dated much much worse. Those MK2’s look really tired now imo.

I think the pre facelift mk2 dated horribly. The facelift isn't bad though. It looks a lot fresher than the pre facelift and hasn't dated too badly

Andy Magic

It's nice in the picture but very few of the nicer models will be sold here, everyone will just pick the cheapest version!

Dia1988

From looking at this video the rear is very much like a Fiat Tipo, that's not good!
Side is like a Nissan Pulsar and Front a Hyundai i30 aswell as the interior dash fascia.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBVPBKwxits

Gwynston

I think the mildly SUV-styled "Focus Active" gives it a bit more of an individual look away from the identikit images so far that everyone has seen cut-and-paste from other models in:



More images here:
https://www.netcarshow.com/ford/2019-focus_active/

AMKC

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

The mk1 focus was overrated by the press. They were better looking than the usual escort astra megan etc but they were as bland as anything and dated very quickly. The saloon was also plain ugly.

I disagree. They were a revolution back then and looked like nothing else on the road. I thought they looked great back then and still do. I do not think it has dated at all. The saloon was an ugly shape alright. Megane Classic was far better looking and they still look good today.

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah I think that's down to personal preference.

I still think the mk1 focus is a nice looking car. Nicest as a hatchback, then the estate. Saloon wouldn't be the prettiest in the world but it still looks decent enough.

It is. I do think the saloon was ugly do. A Megane saloon looked much nicer.

JoeA3 wrote: »

I remember when they came out and really loving the looks. The interior for sure though dated very quickly and looked really gimmicky and cheap next to the likes of the mk4 Golf at the time.

Tbh I think the MK2 that followed it years later dated much much worse. Those MK2’s look really tired now imo.

I have to disagree with you about the interior dating quickly. A mk4 Golf unless it had some beige or was a very top spec was very dull inside.

carzony wrote: »

Good point lads ,

Those 1.4 petrol focus's were so slow and under powered it was a wonder they were allowed to sell them like that.

Can't be that bad. The brother got pulled over for driving to fast on the motorway in one with 2 other people in the car with him. Was aiming for 100 mph got too 92.

Alun wrote: »

All the current crop of Mazda hatchbacks and SUV's look weird to me. The length of the bonnet just seems out of proportion to the rest of the car.

I like them. Think they look great.

Andy Magic wrote: »

It's nice in the picture but very few of the nicer models will be sold here, everyone will just pick the cheapest version!

Well hopefully they are decently equipped.

I have to say I think the 2019 Focus is a big disappointment. I think its looks like a Subaru Impreza from the side. The MK1 Focus was a revolution compared to all the bland hatches that were out and it still looks great today. I think Ford should have kept the high tail lights. Would have looked great on the mk3 and would make the boring looking rear of this look much better.

JohnBoy26

It really wasn't the revolution it was a made out to be and as for a mk1 focus still looking good today? I think they are extremely dated today which isn't surprising given they are 20 years old but these were very dated even coming up to the mid 00's and even earlier.

The other poster is right about the golf's interior it definitely has stood the test of time better than the focus, in the way it looks at least.

It didn't help that bits of the focus's interior wasn't very hard wearing and I know that the golfs interior is a bit iffy too in the same regard but to a lesser extent.

Henry Ford III

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

It really wasn't the revolution it was a made out to be and as for a mk1 focus still looking good today? I think they are extremely dated today which isn't surprising given they are 20 years old but these were very dated even coming up to the mid 00's and even earlier.

The other poster is right about the golf's interior it definitely has stood the test of time better than the focus, in the way it looks at least.

It didn't help that bits of the focus's interior wasn't very hard wearing and I know that the golfs interior is a bit iffy too in the same regard but to a lesser extent.

Your dislike of the Focus is so well scripted and repeated that it's lost all impact.

This has been a game changing car over it's term, and your unbalanced scribblings are therefore easily dismissed.

colm_mcm

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Your dislike of the Focus is so well scripted and repeated that it's lost all impact.

This has been a game changing car over it's term, and your unbalanced scribblings are therefore easily dismissed.

The Mk1 Focus was a game changer to be fair. As were the Mk1 and Mk2 Escort.

No doubt there will be a similar revolution in a few years time.

Tuco88

I think the mk1 focus was a revolution for Ford. Not to mention it put Ford back in the WRC, iconic car with many a driver.

In comparison to the last of the Escort's it was radically different.

We have a mk2 Focus for 8 years now. One of the best cars we ever had.

JohnBoy26

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Your dislike of the Focus is so well scripted and repeated that it's lost all impact.

This has been a game changing car over it's term, and your unbalanced scribblings are therefore easily dismissed.

As is your love for them.

Henry Ford III

JohnBoy26 wrote:

As is your love for them.

I'm on my 11th currently. Must be something good about them

jca

When the term "game changer " gets dragged out it's time to unfollow....

JoeA3

It wasn’t difficult to be a “game changer” in 1998 when the car it replaced - the Escort - and most of its competition were by and large, horrific.

This new version is no “game changer”, but I don’t think the manufacturers are pretending to be either. The differentiator these days seems to be how much tech you can stuff into the car.

dr.fuzzenstein

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I'm on my 11th currently. Must be something good about them

Well, they just go, are easy to fix, reliable and not as horrid as a lot of the Japanese, Korean or French stuff out there. And it's not Opel thank Christ.
My list so far:
04 TDDI focus van, a handful of 1.4 rentals, an 09 Connect, a 99 1.8 TD Focus Estate, 06 Cmax, 05 Connect and an 06 Cmax.
I put somewhere between 500 to 700000 on the above list, the first Cmax had 380k km on it in the end.
Pub wisdom has it I should have been replacing DMFs, DPFs, injectors and pumps on a weekly basis.
Well, I did have to replace one clutch that was knackered after 250k km, shock horror.
One thing you will replace a lot with Fords is wheelbearings. But that's hardly the worst thing in the world.

GavRedKing

I'm not a fan of the new Fiesta but the ST version has grown on me, so much so, I might consider trading in my Mk 7 ST for a new Fiesta ST, price depending.

I'd say the new Focus ST could be a cracking car, I only know of 1 person with a 16 plate Focus ST petrol and he loves it.

The new generation Focus and Fiesta, especially the interiors, are considerably better than what they replaced, even if the looks are subjective, the interior is far more modern, thankfully.

dr.fuzzenstein

Yeah, but it has some kind of 3 cylinder engine like a Cuore. (Shudders)
I cannot understand how everyone seems to mess their underwear in excitement over the new wave of 3 cylinder or 1 liter engines.
It's like all petrol heads have been replaced by clones.

grogi

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Yeah, but it has some kind of 3 cylinder engine like a Cuore. (Shudders)
I cannot understand how everyone seems to mess their underwear in excitement over the new wave of 3 cylinder or 1 liter engines.
It's like all petrol heads have been replaced by clones.

V8 replaced by V6, which got replaced by R4, which are pushed away now by R3... Even in Australia they are not getting anything bigger than 1.5...

Nothing new - and always the same song: those are not real cars, they are toys. Progress.

ION08

grogi wrote: »

V8 replaced by V6, which got replaced by R4, which are pushed away now by R3... Even in Australia they are not getting anything bigger than 1.5...

Nothing new - and always the same song: those are not real cars, they are toys. Progress.

Nothing got "replaced" by anything :rolleyes:

majority of petrol heads just dont find 3 cylinders appealing.

I would certainly rather a Golf with the new 1.5 TSI 4 cyl engine than a 3 cylinder focus.

The 3 cyliner ONLY line up along with Petrol Particulate Filters is a complete turn off for me

Royale with Cheese

GavRedKing wrote: »

I'm not a fan of the new Fiesta but the ST version has grown on me, so much so, I might consider trading in my Mk 7 ST for a new Fiesta ST, price depending.

I'd say the new Focus ST could be a cracking car, I only know of 1 person with a 16 plate Focus ST petrol and he loves it.

The new generation Focus and Fiesta, especially the interiors, are considerably better than what they replaced, even if the looks are subjective, the interior is far more modern, thankfully.

The interior has always been what ruined the ST for me. Those recaro seats with a massive ST logo stitched into the headrest... just no. If the mk4 ST interior was a bit more grown up I couldn't definitely be tempted.

GavRedKing

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

The interior has always been what ruined the ST for me. Those recaro seats with a massive ST logo stitched into the headrest... just no. If the mk4 ST interior was a bit more grown up I couldn't definitely be tempted.

The new Fiesta ST has recaro's too with an ST logo although its a bit more discreet, so I'd say the Focus will follow suit.

TBF though, in a hot hatch you're going to get leery or understated in styling, its hard to get the balance right.

Royale with Cheese

Understated is definitely my preference, I understand others will feel differently. But there's no way to option those seats out of the car which is pretty stupid imo. I agree the mk3.5 interior is a massive improvement on prior models, I'd be fairly happy to go with the regular interior of the ST-Line and everything else from the ST.

Actually I definitely prefer the slightly more understated exterior styling of the ST-Line too. If you could give me the ST-Line with an actual ST underneath I'd probably already have one.

dr.fuzzenstein

Engine is the no-no for me.
I get excited when I think about buying a Fiesta ST with a 2 liter engine.
I don't when I think about the 1.5 3 cylinder.
I'm old fashioned that way. No replacement for displacement.
OK, so there's a smaller engine with 17 turbos and a particulate filter, which are all Gubbins that want to go wrong plus it's higher stressed. So how knackered will it be at 200k km?

carzony

Looking at the comments under the youtube videos and the comments are not very complimentary in relation to the styling. The most common comment is that it looks like a cheap Hyundai. It'll be very interesting to see how this car sells here.

Mc Love

carzony wrote: »

Looking at the comments under the youtube videos and the comments are not very complimentary in relation to the styling. The most common comment is that it looks like a cheap Hyundai. It'll be very interesting to see how this car sells here.

Very well I reckon

Noccy_Mondy

I had a 2004 mk1 focus for a few years, few subtle changes such as the St front fogs and upgraded 16 focus 5x2 spoke alloys, alongside keeping the navy paint popping. I think it looked fairly fresh and nice looking...

Henry Ford III

ION08 wrote: »

Nothing got "replaced" by anything :rolleyes:

majority of petrol heads just dont find 3 cylinders appealing.

I would certainly rather a Golf with the new 1.5 TSI 4 cyl engine than a 3 cylinder focus.

The 3 cyliner ONLY line up along with Petrol Particulate Filters is a complete turn off for me

Whilst your opinion is respected whats the reasoning behind it?

You won't have seen nor heard this engine presumably, and won't have driven a car powered by it either.

Here's a car driven by a 1.0 3 cylinder engine which goes and sounds great.

p.s. How can you claim to speak for the "majority of petrolheads"?

colm_mcm

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Whilst your opinion is respected whats the reasoning behind it?

You won't have seen nor heard this engine presumably, and won't have driven a car powered by it either.

Here's a car driven by a 1.0 3 cylinder engine which goes and sounds great.

p.s. How can you claim to speak for the "majority of petrolheads"?

I haven’t seen the specs for the new Focus, but I’d assume they haven’t got the kerbweight below 500kg?

Henry Ford III

colm_mcm wrote: »

I haven’t seen the specs for the new Focus, but I’d assume they haven’t got the kerbweight below 500kg?

I'd say you'd be spot on there, but that's not really my point.

Dia1988

Noccy_Mondy wrote: »

I had a 2004 mk1 focus for a few years, few subtle changes such as the St front fogs and upgraded 16 focus 5x2 spoke alloys, alongside keeping the navy paint popping. I think it looked fairly fresh and nice looking...

Is this post supposed to be in this thread?

If so, it's another pointless irrelevant pompous post by Noccy Mondy!

ION08

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Whilst your opinion is respected whats the reasoning behind it?

You won't have seen nor heard this engine presumably, and won't have driven a car powered by it either.

Here's a car driven by a 1.0 3 cylinder engine which goes and sounds great.

p.s. How can you claim to speak for the "majority of petrolheads"?

Dont need to see nor hear it. It’s personal preference based on preferring the “feel” of a 4 cylinder over the feel of a 3 cylinder.

Same reason i would prefer a 6 cylinder over a regular straight 4 in a larger car, irrespective of power output or the fact that a turbo’d 4 can match the 6cyl in terms of performance.

Give me an old 3.0 I6 BMW 528i over a 2.0T 528i anyday of the week

Noccy_Mondy

Dia1988 wrote:

Is this post supposed to be in this thread?

If so, it's another pointless irrelevant pompous post by Noccy Mondy!

Who stepped on your toes?!

I was merely pointing out the fact that with a few subtle mods, the mk1 focus can be a fresh looking car. I guarantee you there's nothing pompous about me, couldn't be further from it. The only arrogant thing around here is your attitude, and it's not just confined to this thread.

I've posted very little around here of late, I'll post even less from now on, you have an opinion, it gets shut down, post a pic of your car, it gets criticised, suggest something, you get belittled....

I give up

Darwin

New Focus prices are now available on the UK site, anybody know when we will get pricing information here? For fun I spec'd a Focus ST line 120ps Diesel with metallic paint for £23,145. As new Fiesta prices are known here, I spec'd a UK Fiesta to £22,140 and did the same with an Irish one and the price came out at €28,380. So I figure the Irish price for the Focus ST line with metallic paint will be in the region of €29,500. Sound about right?

Isambard

too many doors

testicles

This post has been deleted.

Bigus

ION08 wrote: »

Dont need to see nor hear it. It’s personal preference based on preferring the “feel” of a 4 cylinder over the feel of a 3 cylinder.

Same reason i would prefer a 6 cylinder over a regular straight 4 in a larger car, irrespective of power output or the fact that a turbo’d 4 can match the 6cyl in terms of performance.

Give me an old 3.0 I6 BMW 528i over a 2.0T 528i anyday of the week

Ironically a 3 cylinder, is much more reminiscent of a straight six, but a 4 cylinder never has similarity to a V8.

In a BMW I8 they managed to get a 3 cyl that sounds like a very good V6.

So I'd say try one before , casting aspersions, but I agree on 4 cyl BMWs being crappy,in performance models.

Henry Ford III

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/ford/focus/103834/new-ford-focus-2018-review?_mout=1&utm_campaign=autoexpress_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter

The ST Line 1.5 Ecoboost (3 pot 180bhp + overboost) might be a fun car.

MarkN

Dave Humphreys motoring journalist put some pics of one up today, looks well.

https://twitter.com/LordHumphreys/status/1011606125828034561

ION08

Henry Ford III wrote: »

The ST Line 1.5 Ecoboost (3 pot 180bhp + overboost) might be a fun car.

Don’t know. Seems awfully slow for a light car with 180bhp + overboost

0-100kmh in 8.3secs

Henry Ford III

ION08 wrote: »

Don’t know. Seems awfully slow for a light car with 180bhp + overboost

0-100kmh in 8.3secs

Compared to what?

Isambard

ION08 wrote: »

Don’t know. Seems awfully slow for a light car with 180bhp + overboost

0-100kmh in 8.3secs

a proper St would be better than a bogus one surely

Gwynston

Isambard wrote: »

a proper St would be better than a bogus one surely

Of course - but the ST-Line is not trying to be a "proper ST".
It's a pretty standard moniker used in Fords on sale now - they're standard cars, but with bits of sporty kit added - no performance upgrades.
That's no different to what VW do with their R-Line variants too.

The fact that those testers have the 180hp engine is probably an anomaly. I'm sure most ST-Line Fords sold have the entry level (or next best) engine. So they'll go a bit faster and be a bit more fun than the tester probably expected to get, but they're not performance models.

ION08

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Compared to what?

Nothing in particular, but the performance figures just don't corelate to what I would expect when I think of a Hatchback with 180bhp and "overboost"

Upon quick research though, the 1.4 TSi Golf which is not an insignificant -30bhp down on the Focus still manages 8.2 seconds.