Focus RS - How would it stand up to my 350bhp sti?
 

Hi guys been thinking about selling my 2003 impreza sti 8 and ive been offered a focus rs. I love the way they look but what they like? My impreza has only done 20k miles and running at 350bhp and dont want to get a car that feels slow.

I can't answer the question but the Focus RS is an awesome car imo.
It looks great, goes great and with it being limited edition they hold their price very well.
I would certainly consider the Focus as a future car for me.
Easily tuned I believe aswell.

again there good cars, however unlike the post above i couldnt handle driving a focus.

Evo mag seem to have a love/hate relationship with the RS - they have driven some that have been pretty poor and then one that they loved to bits.

I'd say test thoroughly before you buy.

I tried one and liked it but wanted 4WD so got an R32 Golf.

Sorry to say but it will feel slow compared IMHO.
The problem you have is most cars will feel slow after a 350bhp scoob.
Why do you want to change?

I had one a while back, very raw experience car, felt quicker than the speedo was reading if that doesn,t sound daft, great handling car, no spare wheel in these, anyhting over 250-280bhp i personally think the front-wheel drive setup gives you torqe steer, i had mine Bluefined by Graham Goode, made 239bhp similar torqe.

Good car but imo not a 350bhp sti........

I've tried both, you'll hate it and want to sell it within a week.

It depends on what you want and although it may initially feel slow, this will be mainly round bends as you've lost the mechanical grip of the Scoob but you'll soon get used to it again as you re-learn how to drive without the car helping you out as you do with AWD.

I regularly hop between 350bhp RWD and 210bhp FWD and in the real world (B roads etc) there's not that much difference in overall speed but a tremendous difference in handling/grip levels.

There is life after an Impreza.

:)

The New one imo is the better car, alittle heavier though, but tunning potential is better being the 2.5, i was VERY impressed when i went in one...

rs is a cracker of a car but imho the st is a better choice.at the min they can be bought for a reasonable price and just a ds map makes things very interesting indeed,far from slow.

:thumb: Ah the RS i had one that i swapped for my STI but the two are very different :) ,in the dry you wouldnt get near one mine had 310bhp and 379lb ft and it was anything but slow but was on the limit for torque steer being FWD you have to remember that although you have 350bhp you also have double the losses of transmission loss ect being AWD:( ,in the wet i much prefer my scoob just alot more mechanical grip going on.get yourself onto the RSOC and look in the sales section as this is where you will find the best examples and most would have been modified already,at the end of the day mate they both offer very different drives but i doubt you will be disappointed i wasn't just that mine had 85'000 miles on when i sold it and any more mileage and the prices plummit,also dont bother with the 'black book' or parkers guide as the prices they quote are a disgrace 6'500 -£8'000 for a low mileage one they dont recognise what the RS is :thumb:

The subaru transmission losses are a myth, you lose about 2% (so about 17-18%) more than a fwd car, thats about it :) but a focus rs is a stunning car, though people do complain about the suspension setup on slightly undulating roads :(

Tony:)

ive got a 330bhp frs, had it from new and i would say the car drives better the more power you give it (apart from in the wet but who wants to drive fast in the wet?)

as scoobyman (i remember you!) said, go on the rsoc, very active and informative/helpful forum for the FRS http://bbs.rsownersclub.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?f=134

when i went a rr with subarus they were losing about 100bhp and i was losing about 50bhp thtough transmission losses

wasn't just that mine had 85'000 miles on when i sold it and any more mileage and the prices plummit,also dont bother with the 'black book' or parkers guide as the prices they quote are a disgrace 6'500 -£8'000 for a low mileage one they dont recognise what the RS is

Its a Focus .......Trade value is what the car is valued at end of......Unless your car is very special trade value will apply to it the same as any other car

My last scoob varied slightly, between 255-265bhp@wheels, 316bhp@fly, thats about 50-60bhp ;)

Tony:)

A few peeps have got an ST on here, and rate them :) See here:
https://www.scoobynet.com/other-marq...st-vs-wrx.html But if you want sheer speed, the Scoob will be very hard to match.

Very few cars feel as fast as a 350bhp Scoob. Mine is a 2.5l Classic, running about 340. It's quick. Quicker than the 911s and M3s I've been test driving lately.

And big turbo cars always 'feel' faster than the bare figures suggest - it's the increasing rate of accelleration when the turbo spools up and massive low-end torque-shove-in-the-back - but 350bhp in a 1.2 ton Scoob is always going to be hard to beat in pure straight line terms.

Richard.

£ for lb/torque you'll not get close to the Scoob with any other car. Just acknowledge that your next car will be slower ;)

RS is a great looking car though.

TX.

How would a RR tell you that? The RR person plugs in the transmission losses doesn't he?

TX.

Scoobs are ten a penny - Can't remember the last time a spotted a RS on the road. Its not all about performance. I have had as much fun if not more in cars half the power of my scoob.

Personally though for that reason I would sooner have a 3 door saph, or a Mk1 Mexico. Mmmm I miss my ford days.:(

Its to do with the drag off the wheels i think TX :)
The trouble is, fwd cars normally only run off 1 roller, where as 4wd cars run off 2, if the gear is intelligent then it works out the drag off the 4wd car better, its just that people dont take into consideration that the rear wheels on a fwd car cause drag, but the 100bhp v 50bhp losses, 2 similar powered cars, the 4wd one would need 300bhp to keep up with a 200bhp fwd car, and that doesnt happen :lol1:

Tony:)

You probably wouldn't notice it, just another Focus - a car every c*nts got..:D

I had a go of my mates FRS not so long ago. It's got a Bluefin reflash and a decat Blue Flame exhaust and RR'd at 255bhp. Felt slow compared to my car (I'm presently running 353bhp). Little big laggy between gear changes also.

Another friend of mine recently part ex'd his FRS in against a new Fiesta ST. I would've said it was in good condition, but not excellent with just over 40,000 on the clock. He was given £7200 for his car.

I reckon most cars would feel slow after a shot in yours,lol

mac

Trust me mate, most FRS now are running around the 300bhp mark, with 320-350bhp starting to become the norm too! They are set up well and on track are awesome, you won't be disappointed and it certainly won't feel slow against your 350bhp scoob!

What weight is your car?

The torque steer issue will disappear in the new Focus RS with the RevoKnuckle diffs, as driven round the Millennium Stadium before SS15 on Saturday night.

It looked the danglies, sounded awesome in the rehearsal and if the money was right will grab some Scoob buyers.

I managed to get a looksee and a chat to a certian Mr Gronholm who loved it.

The only people that ever had issues with torque steer in the MK1 FRS were, Top Gear watchers, people who've never driven a FRS and limp wristed drivers! ;)

One of the biggest, over dramatised pieces of rubbish ever to be written about a car IMO!

Well said :thumb:

I had 64bhp transmission loss on my recent RR

Agree, the only people who go on about the torque steer being a problem are people who have never owned one or been in one, the torque steer makes the car more raw and fun, makes you smile everytime you drive it(ask anyone who have owned a old school FWD car e.g Escort/Fiesta RST, 5 GTT), Ive owned big powered 4wd cars(scooby/evo's) and in comparrsion they do not feel as quick, as there is no fuss when you want to go quick, where as the Focus RS feels like its going to rip your head off, which is a great experience!!!!!!:D

My old FRS(sold to cossie mark on RSOC) and still to this day it was one of the best cars ive owned, when I owned it, it made 290bhp 320lb/ft on Powerstation RR and it would keep up with scoobys with 330bhp, I believe that my old FRS has 335bhp/385lb/ft now and the last time I went in it, it felt umbelivable quick, and that power is on standard internals, gearbox, injectors,fuel pump, just bolt on mods, and not a lot of money to get it to that power either!!!!!:luvlove:

If I could afford another FRS id have one in a shot, but a expensive mortgage payments,a baby, and a high maintence Girlfriend make it a bit out of my price range!!!!!!:Suspiciou

I'm confused. I've read on here lately about powerful FWD cars that never torque steer (except on tight B roads) and never lose traction (except when pulling out of slippery junctions) :wonder: And now that in an FRS "torque steer makes the car more raw and fun" and that it "feels like its going to rip your head off". Which is it? Do they torquesteer, and is that good or bad?

I say they do, and it's bad. I don't like the car veering off in a direction all of its own, or understeering uncontrollably, or having the wooden steering needed to keep the thing in check, or, worst of all, lift-off oversteering into a hedge backwards. These are all fundamental FWD charcteristics <lights blue touch paper and runs :D >

I've been really enjoying an Audi TT 3.2 with 4WD lately and love the way you can feel the diff transfer power to the rear and tighten its line. Put another way, you can apply more power and the car corners tighter (a bit like RWD, but not so lary ;) ). No FWD car can ever do that, and it's a key driving dynamic forever lost to FWD drivers.

This TT (which I'm planning to steal from the missus) goes where you point it, and drifts all four when pressed hard. It's neutral when you lift and easy to control. I'm no hero, but this is fast and fun :D RWD is good (if you're good), 4WD is better (if you're not), and FWD is the unfortunate consequence of cars designed for efficient packaging IMHO :)

Richard.