GOLFMK8
GOLFMK7
GOLFMK6
GOLFMKV

2016 Ford Focus RS

corrado917

Go Kart Champion
Ford is just making business like any other brand, while this latest reincarnation of the RS is new for us here in the States, this is not the first RS badge around the world. This car might lose the comparo to the R in comfort, in the performance department is where it shines, a bit less refined. Not doubt the Haldex on the R is nice but the one in the RS is far superior Haldex'ish AWD system, with this later is the closest upper level you can get over the plain / rough mighty AWD EVO X system, A.K.A: poor man's GTR AWD

Note: I still refuse to acknowledge the STI is a good as the Evo X :laugh:
 

Gunkata

Drag Race Newbie
^ you're right.. it was never "as" good, it was close. It was the better DD, the evo was the better track day handler. Then again, I havent driven the 2015+ STI, but its supposed to be like an evo now, lol
 

MrFancypants

Autocross Champion
I don't know if you've owned both an STI and an EVO and can comment on daily drive-ability, but I can say with absolute certainty that the STI is an awful daily driver. The first generation ones in the US came with the worst seats I have ever experienced in any car. They weren't comfortable and unless you weighed 300 lbs the bolsters were so far apart you may as well have been sitting on a park bench.

As far as track day handling, I never had an issue keeping up or going faster than EVOs. The problem is that most publications that recorded times tried to drive it like an EVO, which results in pre-apex understeer. Set it up right and it comes out of corners harder and neutralizes the EVO's pre-apex flexibility. The thing that most people don't get about the STI is that all the rules about smoothness go out the window, you have to drive the car like a ham-fisted n00b, treating the throttle like an on/off switch to get the most out of it. Smoothness means understeer in an STI, aggressiveness means neutral to oversteer.
 

MrFancypants

Autocross Champion
your golf r doesn't have drift mode or 350hp or pilot super sports or brembos or recaros or or or


regardless it's not about value, it's about demand.

"But look at these performance features but but but"

The V-6 Camaro is faster on a race track.

V6 camaro doesn't have AWD or a hatch or 5 seats or or or

no matter what the car is going to sell. so it makes sense to somebody. it's not all about lap times or speed.

"But it's not all about speed look at these awesome practical features the RS has but but but"

What?

You're making a lot of excuses for this car.

I can only and will only speak for myself and what I choose to do with my own money.

For nearly $50k, if I want the fastest thing on a track I'm buying something else. For nearly $50k, if I want some practical features to go along with my sporty car I'm buying something else. There is not one thing about the Focus RS that appeals to me at over $45k.

For MSRP the RS is an amazing car and is absolutely worth the hype, as far as I can tell. But for *more* than MSRP? Well, if it's really selling for close to $50k now I'm having a look at the Mercedes-Benz GLA45 AMG and Porsche Macan. If I want to go fast for less money and I need five seats, AWD, and a hatch, I'm buying a Golf R and throwing some upgrades at it.

Because when I'm done with the Golf R I can at least get some of my money back by selling the upgrades. You'll never see the donation you're making to the local Ford dealership by spending more than a car is valued at ever again, it's gone.

It's cool with me that some are spending above MSRP for this car, but in my personal "value" equation it makes the car not viable.
 

snobrdrdan

former GTI owner
Because when I'm done with the Golf R I can at least get some of my money back by selling the upgrades. You'll never see the donation you're making to the local Ford dealership by spending more than a car is valued at ever again, it's gone.

Irrelevant to which car is better (I don't care).....but VERY good point here

Also, typically, the R's hold their value decently FWIW
 

Gunkata

Drag Race Newbie
I don't know if you've owned both an STI and an EVO and can comment on daily drive-ability, but I can say with absolute certainty that the STI is an awful daily driver. The first generation ones in the US came with the worst seats I have ever experienced in any car. They weren't comfortable and unless you weighed 300 lbs the bolsters were so far apart you may as well have been sitting on a park bench.

As far as track day handling, I never had an issue keeping up or going faster than EVOs. The problem is that most publications that recorded times tried to drive it like an EVO, which results in pre-apex understeer. Set it up right and it comes out of corners harder and neutralizes the EVO's pre-apex flexibility. The thing that most people don't get about the STI is that all the rules about smoothness go out the window, you have to drive the car like a ham-fisted n00b, treating the throttle like an on/off switch to get the most out of it. Smoothness means understeer in an STI, aggressiveness means neutral to oversteer.

I've owned 2 STI's, a WRX, and an Evo IX MR ;)

There is more lag in the evo, imho - it feels more floaty.

Seats in the STI - I recall the 04-05 seats being much nicer than the seats that came on the GR :iono:

yes, the seats suck in the STI, but it is still considered the better DD by most/many/car mags, so on and so forth. But yes, if you grab the bull by the horns, the STI can be driven very well, sure - like most cars.
 

MrFancypants

Autocross Champion
I've owned 2 STI's, a WRX, and an Evo IX MR ;)

There is more lag in the evo, imho - it feels more floaty.

Seats in the STI - I recall the 04-05 seats being much nicer than the seats that came on the GR :iono:

yes, the seats suck in the STI, but it is still considered the better DD by most/many/car mags, so on and so forth. But yes, if you grab the bull by the horns, the STI can be driven very well, sure - like most cars.

The seats in my '04 STI were the worst seats I've ever had in any car (perhaps excepting the Geo Metro I had in high school). It's like the springs were chosen to maximize bounce. When I autocrossed it or ran it at the track it was absolutely necessary to do the "seatbelt jiggle" trick where you yank on the belt to activate the lock, and then move the seat forward into it to hold yourself into place. Otherwise I found the car to be undriveable. So if the seats in the GR were worse.... holy crap, deal breaker.

After years driving an STI that floaty feeling your referring to sounds pretty welcoming. I can't really say like you can because I haven't owned an EVO, but just like when we talk about track performance between the two cars, I believe that saying one is better or worse than the other is splitting hairs.

In hindsight I think I would have preferred an EVO. But one thing I had too much fun with in my STI was taking advantage of how strong the transmission was.... 5000 RPM drop clutch all-wheels-spinning launches were too much fun. The EVO drivers I knew all said they had to be more careful and slip the clutch more to protect the gearbox.
 
Last edited:

Gunkata

Drag Race Newbie
The seats in my '04 STI were the worst seats I've ever had in any car (perhaps excepting the Geo Metro I had in high school). It's like the springs were chosen to maximize bounce. When I autocrossed it or ran it at the track it was absolutely necessary to do the "seatbelt jiggle" trick where you yank on the belt to activate the lock, and then move the seat forward into it to hold yourself into place. Otherwise I found the car to be undriveable. So if the seats in the GR were worse.... holy crap, deal breaker. - Yes, agreed on the bouncy suspension. I didn't have an issue with the seats back then, but no,they werent as nice as Recaros, or what have you. Aha, yes - the seatbelt trick! I've just used a G-Force Torso strap for years now, best $20 you can spend without buying /going harness setup, etc.


After years driving an STI that floaty feeling your referring to sounds pretty welcoming. I can't really say like you can because I haven't owned an EVO, but just like when we talk about track performance between the two cars, I believe that saying one is better or worse than the other is splitting hairs. - Evo turbo just seems slower/laggier and floatier when driving, STI always felt like there was some lag too, but then the hammer hit. They are very similar cars tho, yes.


In hindsight I think I would have preferred an EVO. But one thing I had too much fun with in my STI was taking advantage of how strong the transmission was.... 5000 RPM drop clutch all-wheels-spinning launches were too much fun. The EVO drivers I knew all said they had to be more careful and slip the clutch more to protect the gearbox.

yes sir, STI trans was bulletproof back then.
 

Stinger

Ready to race!
Price sensitivity is key here. The demand for the RS far outstrips supply, which explains the $48 asking price. All brands with hot ticket items will do the same (3-4 years ago my local BMW dealer had a new M1 for $20k over MSRP which sat on the floor a while but eventually sold).
I've been considering the RS and the R but the greater the price difference, the more I lean towards the R. $3k gets a Stage 1, good set of tires and a short shifter which probably still isn't enough to beat the RS on a track but is plenty fun for the occasional spirited driving in the hills and looks civilized in town.
 

kern417

Go Kart Champion
"But look at these performance features but but but"

The V-6 Camaro is faster on a race track.



"But it's not all about speed look at these awesome practical features the RS has but but but"

What?

You're making a lot of excuses for this car.

I can only and will only speak for myself and what I choose to do with my own money.

For nearly $50k, if I want the fastest thing on a track I'm buying something else. For nearly $50k, if I want some practical features to go along with my sporty car I'm buying something else. There is not one thing about the Focus RS that appeals to me at over $45k.

For MSRP the RS is an amazing car and is absolutely worth the hype, as far as I can tell. But for *more* than MSRP? Well, if it's really selling for close to $50k now I'm having a look at the Mercedes-Benz GLA45 AMG and Porsche Macan. If I want to go fast for less money and I need five seats, AWD, and a hatch, I'm buying a Golf R and throwing some upgrades at it.

Because when I'm done with the Golf R I can at least get some of my money back by selling the upgrades. You'll never see the donation you're making to the local Ford dealership by spending more than a car is valued at ever again, it's gone.

It's cool with me that some are spending above MSRP for this car, but in my personal "value" equation it makes the car not viable.

it's not excuses. it's literally the same thing people say about the gti. this car is faster, this car is cheaper, blah blah blah but the gti is the perfect combo. it's the same thing. nobody offers the same package that the focus rs offers and clearly it's selling. so maybe i'm not the one that doesn't get it.

people must really not understand how business works. just the other day i had a guy tell me how dumb it is that his focus st didn't come with a catch can. "catch cans are only like $300, i would pay $300 more for it to come with my car from the factory. so stupid to leave it off." i mean, really guys? there's a reason why some cars make a profit and some get axed after 2 years because they're not making money. and like gunkata said, ford has done this forever it's nothing new. people are paying above msrp for a car they haven't even seen or driven yet. if you could get away with that would you charge less?
 

MrFancypants

Autocross Champion
it's not excuses. it's literally the same thing people say about the gti. this car is faster, this car is cheaper, blah blah blah but the gti is the perfect combo. it's the same thing. nobody offers the same package that the focus rs offers and clearly it's selling. so maybe i'm not the one that doesn't get it.

people must really not understand how business works. just the other day i had a guy tell me how dumb it is that his focus st didn't come with a catch can. "catch cans are only like $300, i would pay $300 more for it to come with my car from the factory. so stupid to leave it off." i mean, really guys? there's a reason why some cars make a profit and some get axed after 2 years because they're not making money. and like gunkata said, ford has done this forever it's nothing new. people are paying above msrp for a car they haven't even seen or driven yet. if you could get away with that would you charge less?

Except the GTI isn't priced so far above the competition that it no longer makes sense.

The problem here is that I'm talking about cars as a consumer, and you're talking about product as a business. I understand why a business would charge more, but that doesn't mean I have to care. The Focus RS only makes sense if you're one of the few people who want that specific car, and no other will do. For the rest of us it's significantly overpriced.

Saying "but think of the dealerships!" over and over again will not change my opinion that the Focus RS doesn't make sense at nearly $50,000. Are there a few people that will pay that much for it? Yes. Do I think they're wasting their money? Also yes.
 

kern417

Go Kart Champion
we aren't saying think of the dealerships. we're saying think of the consumers that are buying it. they are paying that much because they want it and it's worth that much to them. i wonder what they see?

but we can ignore the dealership then and just look at value. which car will hold it's value better? which car is more exclusive/harder to find? which car offers options that aren't offered elsewhere in it's entire fleet/legacy?
 

MrFancypants

Autocross Champion
we aren't saying think of the dealerships. we're saying think of the consumers that are buying it. they are paying that much because they want it and it's worth that much to them. i wonder what they see?

but we can ignore the dealership then and just look at value. which car will hold it's value better? which car is more exclusive/harder to find? which car offers options that aren't offered elsewhere in it's entire fleet/legacy?

What do they see? They see a car that they absolutely must have and are showing that they'll pay ridiculous amounts of money to get. It's their money, they're free to use it how they wish.

I'm sure many non car enthusiasts look at the thousands of dollars on upgrades some of us spend on our cars and think the same exact thing.

Ford has come out and said that they're not restricting the number of RS's produced, they'll build as many as they can sell. So this car, ultimately, will probably not maintain the inflated value it currently does because it's still rare. When dealerships have more than one sitting on the lot I can say with a fair degree of certainty that they'll back off on the price because now they have to compete with the dealership across town that has the car in stock.

But just because I understand why someone would charge an inflated amount and why someone would pay an inflated amount doesn't mean that I have to adjust my personal thoughts on what I consider to be a good value and a fair price on the car in question.
 
Top