Ford Focus

Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2003
Posts
10,761
Location
Nottingham
[TW]Fox;12822179 said:
1.6 Focus is so slow you might as well walk. Get a 1.8.
Get a clue.
1.6 is fine for every day stuff. Less than 4k rpm at 90mph. ~£40ish to fill up and can get 420/440miles for that.

Yes it's not the quickest car in the world but its a decent car. 1.8 offers hardly any performance gain but has apparently 2.0 mpg... so either 1.6 or 2.0 as everyone but fox seems to be saying.
 

1CE

1CE

Associate
Joined
24 Jun 2004
Posts
1,278
Location
Essex
1.8 offers hardly any performance gain but has apparently 2.0 mpg

This...


I have a 1.8 and the fuel consumption is pretty naff tbh, but then I only get around 12 with the silly stuff I have on mine. If I could go back in time, I would take the 2.0l.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
159,661
Only if every day stuff involves waiting for hours at roundabouts for a huge gap, having to sit behind caravans on hills because if you use the crawler lane you'll hold up everyone else, etc etc.

A 2.0 is hardly much more expensive to run so why bother with the 1.6?

1CE said:
have a 1.8 and the fuel consumption is pretty naff tbh, but then I only get around 12

If you get 12 mpg out of any Ford Focus Mk1 then it is quite seriously broken.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2003
Posts
10,761
Location
Nottingham
Yawn. It's perfectly fine. I don't know why so many people are speed orientated yet they never plant their foot to feel the power.

When you are dealing with the lower end of the market, the 2.0 is (percentage wise) probably a fair bit more expencive to run. If I drive nice and sensible (which apparently, is all I can do in a 1.6?) I can get almost 45mpg, tax is £150, parts are uber cheap.

Can't figure you out. Sometimes you come across as a decent chap with good knowledge and other times a bit of a pudding.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
4,544
Location
Nottingham
Yawn. It's perfectly fine. I don't know why so many people are speed orientated yet they never plant their foot to feel the power.

When you are dealing with the lower end of the market, the 2.0 is (percentage wise) probably a fair bit more expencive to run. If I drive nice and sensible (which apparently, is all I can do in a 1.6?) I can get almost 45mpg, tax is £150, parts are uber cheap.

Can't figure you out. Sometimes you come across as a decent chap with good knowledge and other times a bit of a pudding.

Compare this with the 2.0L, an extra £60 tax and the following increase for fuel:

10k - £273
15k - £410
20k - £547

(working on your 45mpg and my 35mpg if I granny drive the Focus).

I'd certainly pay the extra few hundred quid a year to drive the 2.0L.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
159,661
I'd certainly pay the extra few hundred quid a year to drive the 2.0L.

Exactly my point. People happily spend thousands and thousands of pounds on a car but base the decision on a running costs difference of a couple of hundred quid a year, tops.

I find every time I drive a slow car I get terrible economy out of it, the throttle pedal doesn't really do anything so you end up mashing it rather than being careful with it as it seems to have nil effect.

The result being rubbish economy.
 
Joined
5 Aug 2006
Posts
11,326
Location
Derbyshire
[TW]Fox;12824676 said:
Exactly my point. People happily spend thousands and thousands of pounds on a car but base the decision on a running costs difference of a couple of hundred quid a year, tops.

I find every time I drive a slow car I get terrible economy out of it, the throttle pedal doesn't really do anything so you end up mashing it rather than being careful with it as it seems to have nil effect.

The result being rubbish economy.

I agree here. When on nights and using a completely empty dual carriageway I would do 60-65mph and get 45-48mpg in the micra. In day driving, I would get under 40 as I would have to rag the balls off it in order to keep up with the traffic. I mean seriously rag it- The long gear ratios did not help. The car does work as an A-B car, but never again, ever will I be buying a car with the smallest engine of the range.

Also people spending thousands more on a car to save a few hundred on a petrol is retarded, but it means I can get a nice petrol car for not a silly price when I finish uni:)
 
Soldato
Joined
19 May 2005
Posts
18,065
Location
Lancashire
The 1.6 isnt too bad, at least its not a 1.4 :eek:. Does me fine being a first car although ive got to admit ive got a taste for a bit more poke now after having a go in my mates CTR.

According to Parkers the 2.0 is a whole 1 second faster to 60 and the 1.8 is around the same as the 1.6.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
8 Dec 2003
Posts
697
Location
alsager, near crewe
Get a clue.
1.6 is fine for every day stuff. Less than 4k rpm at 90mph. ~£40ish to fill up and can get 420/440miles for that.

Yes it's not the quickest car in the world but its a decent car. 1.8 offers hardly any performance gain but has apparently 2.0 mpg... so either 1.6 or 2.0 as everyone but fox seems to be saying.

i agree the 1.6 is perfectly decent for everyday driving. you dont need to stay behind caravans in crawling lanes either, Fox!? £40is to fill up? are you mad, costs at least £50-55!!!

i agree the 2.0l is a better choice than the 1.8l but the 1.6l is a very good car, and also over the nex 3 years will save a considerable amount to people on a budget over the 2.0l (tax and fuel).

you will be very happy with a 1.6l focus.

p.s when it's time to change the tryes get goodyear hydragrips, they are absolutely brilliant, change the feel of the car.
 
Soldato
Joined
5 Mar 2003
Posts
10,761
Location
Nottingham
Compare this with the 2.0L, an extra £60 tax and the following increase for fuel:
10k - £273

I'd certainly pay the extra few hundred quid a year to drive the 2.0L.

Also factor in (for ease of maths) £167 extra for insurance (probably about right if you are ~22 with not much experience)... so £500 extra per year. on a car thats £3500 (say a 52/53 plate), thats almost 15% of the value of the car per year (excluding service / mot / wear and tear parts). Not everyone has a sizable chunk of money to throw at a car, so possibly every penny could count.

Think people on here sometimes drop into TopGear syndrome; I'd have the Aston Martin... it's only £40k more than the porsche but it's well worth it!!!

Bottom line - there are two options, my main point being - the 1.8 isn't one of them. 1.6 will be fine for pretty much anyone. If he wants a bit more poke and has a bit of surplus cash then the 2.0 would be a good buy. Bit more chase and the ST170 would be an even better buy. Bit more cash and the RS... etc etc.
 
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
159,661
Also factor in (for ease of maths) £167 extra for insurance (probably about right if you are ~22 with not much experience)... .

Probably about right? The 2.0 Focus is Group 8 insurance. At 22 moving between the low end groups wont cost you 167 quid extra!
 
Back
Top Bottom