What do you think of the Kia Stinger? Who doesn’t like a turbocharged car? They come in AWD as well (as well as DCT). Here’s a Car and Driver Facebook post.
It sounds good and it’s definitely tunable!
The new (2017 model) Ford Focus RS is the most hyped car I’ve ever seen. All last year, people saw the buzzwords “drift mode” and “350 HP”.
Well, I want to point out a few things.
Let’s talk about bullet #2.
If you view the above URL, and look at the quarter-mile stats, you’ll notice that all three cars (the Ford Focus, the Subaru WRX STI, and the VW Golf R) have almost identical times and trap speeds. The Focus has a 45-60 (crank) HP advantage, depending on the car being compared. The trap speed of the Focus RS doesn’t show that advantage at ALL. The Focus ran a 105 MPH trap speed, the STI ran a 104 MPH trap speed, and the Golf R ran a 105 MPH trap.
The car is rather new and hasn’t been compared/reviewed by other magazines (R&T, MT, Automobile). In fact, I’ve only seen two dynos.
Also, I saw someone post that the car has overboost and that it runs overboost at 15 sec intervals and resets after that time frame. It also resets after shifting, so if an RS is running a 1/4th-mile track, overboost will be reset at every shift, meaning overboost timing out isn’t a factor in the 1/4th-mile, yet it still only manages a 105 MPH trap.
Now, each of those three cars are designed for spirited driving, yes, but they are not designed with the quarter-mile in mind. But again, that applies to all three cars.
The bottom line is, the Focus RS is either over-rated from the factory (not an unusual thing for Ford, from what I’ve heard), or something is sapping all that power, because it’s like 50 HP is AWOL. It isn’t a gearing issue (the gearing is hardly aggressive enough to affect a 50 HP advantage). It isn’t a weight issue (the RS weighs just as much as the STI). A dyno chart I’ve seen hints that the RS isn’t peaky and doesn’t make a lot of power up high. Another dyno chart showed 270 peak wheel HP, which is only 20 more than what an STI typically makes. I’d like to see more dyno charts.
Another thing that people are hyping is that the Focus RS is far more upgradeable. I’m not so sure about that. This car is pretty much maxed out from the factory. You might be able to get some minor gains from it but you’re not going to see a giant leap in HP with bolt-ons. The argument against this is that the Mustang Ecoboost has high upgrade potential, so the RS will have the same. No. The RS is using more robust parts already, just to get 40 more HP than the Ecoboost engine in the Mustang. Any car that offers 350 HP from the factory is going to be over-engineered to the point that it’s going to be maxed out from the onset — that’s the case with the CLA45 AMG as well…it saw some gains in it’s latest iteration, but those weren’t all that significant.
Another thing I’ve heard: The Focus will make the STI obsolete. I doubt this. Subaru has always marched by their own drum beat. This isn’t the first time they’ve had competition. Some say that Subaru is stagnant, which is true, but what they have works well enough for them. Not every turbocharged AWD four-cylinder needs to make 350 – 400 HP. We hear the same thing about the BRZ and FR-S, but I think those cars do fine with the 200 HP they have…they aren’t meant to be powerhouse-type cars, and neither is the STI.
The Focus isn’t really bringing anything to the table that Subaru doesn’t already have. While the STI is using the old EJ257, the WRX uses the FA20DIT. The AWD platform in the STI is certainly going to be more robust, though. The Focus RS AWD platform is too “wizardly”. There’s too much hocus-pocus going on with it. It’s a GT-R wannabe. We know it’ll put all power to the left- or right-side wheels and put up to 70% of the power to the rears when needed, but it’s basically a FWD-biased AWD system…not particularly good as it applies to track usage (the CLA45 AMG isn’t a good track car either, but it wasn’t designed with the track in mind…the Focus RS WAS designed with racing in mind). The Focus RS’s AWD system is great for highway fuel economy because it’ll cruise with only the front wheels being powered. That’s cool, but not something that Subaru is interested in. If fuel economy is a major factor for you as an owner, the STI isn’t the best car for you and Subaru isn’t going to change their mind on that. If that’s what you want, look down toward the WRX instead, but the WRX and the Focus RS are hardly competitors, as the Focus RS is going to out-class the WRX in a major way (on the track and on the street). Those that are expecting Subaru to be afraid of the Focus RS don’t understand Subaru at all.
What I’d like to see is the other magazine publishers (R&T, Automobile, and/or MT) doing a comparison similar to what C&D did. One thing that C&D didn’t do that seems very hokey is that they didn’t comment on the HP discrepancy of the Focus RS. It almost appears that they purposely ignored it. Fortunately, it was noticed by the readers and it has been heavily discussed in the comments of the article I mentioned above. I also found another forum (http://www.focusrs.org/) that has a thread of similar concerns, from actual owners of Focus RSs. So yeah, this is a real concern, especially for someone willing to spend between $30K-$40K on such a car. It means the product they bought isn’t as advertised.
Do I want Subaru to improve the STI? Yes, I do. Do I want a FA20DIT-engined STI? NO. Why? I believe that engine won’t do well in an STI. There’s a reason why the USDM and JDM STIs aren’t running the FA20DIT engines, and it’s probably because they want an engine that is just as peaky as the EJ207 and EJ257. The FA20DIT is not that engine. I believe I’ve said this in other posts on this website, too. Subaru’s Nurburgring car was powered by the EJ207. All of their recent JDM special editions have been powered by EJ207 variants. When I see Subaru using the FA20DIT in their STI variants (street and track vehicles), I’ll eat crow. A new version of the Focus RS isn’t going to push Subaru into desperation. I honestly think Subaru doesn’t care.
This was a pretty good read.
Do yourself a favor this winter and get a set of winter tires. Even if you don’t see snow, the rubber is optimized for lower-temp use.
Posted by Car and Driver on Saturday, November 28, 2015
The bottom line is, Porsche’s all turbo lineup of boxer four-cylinder engines will replace flat-sixes in all but the highest-tier, limited-edition cars.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/a26227/boxster-cayman-four-cylinder-power/
Boxster and Cayman turbocharged flat fours will have between 240 and 370 HP, per Road & Track magazine:
Here’s how the pie is being cut: base model cars should see 240 hp from their single-turbo two-liter. Step up to an “S” and displacement jumps to 2.5 liters, and output would be 300 hp. GTS models would receive a 370 hp 2.5-liter, a little below what Porsche CEO Mattias Müller indicated would be the theoretical maximum output of a turbo flat four in the Boxman.?
Car & Driver reports:
Only the ultra-high-performance Boxster Spyder and Cayman GT4 are said to retain their naturally aspirated flat-six engine, a 3.8-liter unit. Which is sure to make them even more highly desired than they already are. Meanwhile, one has to wonder whether the base, S, and GTS versions of the current Boxster/Cayman are destined to become depreciation-proof used cars, in the same vein as the final air-cooled 911 models.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/2015-subaru-wrx-sti-vs-2004-subaru-impreza-wrx-sti-feature
Car & Driver pits the 2015 and 2004 Subaru WRX STIs against each other, finding that although there’s more than 10 years of development between them, they’re still awfully similar in performance.
This was a great read. As well, the article comments can give reader insight (or laughs).
Enjoy!
The juicy tidbits:
The Volkswagen Golf R? The Subaru WRX STI? Ford rooster-tails sand in their faces with the announcement that the awesome new Focus RS will make a staggering 345 horsepower from its 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder. The VW packs 292 horsepower, the STI 305.
Ford claimed “more than 315 horsepower” when it first detailed the car in February, and this announcement more than fulfills that promise. The word comes ahead of the 2015 Goodwood Festival of Speed, where Ford rally driver and RS development consultant Ken Block will run the all-wheel-drive superhatch up the hill.
Also confirmed: the RS’s torque figure, which comes in at 325 lb-ft between 2000 and 4500 rpm. An overboost function allows for a maximum of 347 lb-ft for up to 15 seconds when the driver’s right foot is buried against the firewall. (For further comparison, the Golf R peaks at 280 lb-ft and the STI at 290.) The EcoBoost’s rev limiter cuts in at 6800 rpm.
People continue to harp that this is more than the Subaru WRX STI. Yes it is…that’s extremely obvious. But there are some things that Subaru has going for it’s flagship.
The WRX STI will be a LOT cheaper and less limited, production-wise.
As well, the Subaru offers true AWD. Having 100% power directed to the rears or fronts means that the car isn’t really AWD. Yes, such a system gives better fuel economy, but I highly doubt it’s going to be as agile in inclement weather with such a system. Subaru’s AWD technology is very much second-to-none when compared to all cars in it’s category and several outside of it’s genre.
Resale value will be another item to ponder with the Focus RS, even with it being sold in limited qualities, will they retain value as well as Subaru’s STIs? Blue Book value one a 2011 Subaru WRX STI that was sold at $32,000 can be between $24,500 and $29,500 (low price being rough value and high price being excellent condition value)…that’s on a 4-year old JAPANESE make. In my opinion, that’s extreme value retainment for a car that isn’t really considered a limited edition model (they are sold in limited quantities but are not limited to such low counts as to be considered a limited edition model). The Focus RS may retain value just as well or even better, but only because it would be an actual limited production car, which probably makes comparing resale an apples/oranges comparison.
Subaru’s aftermarket is HUGE…much larger than Ford’s Focus aftermarket. The Focus may have better modification potential due to it’s more modern engine, but it’s a bit difficult to compare modification potential objectively since the technology between the two engines are so different. I doubt the Focus RS aftermarket will top Subaru’s, since the car will be sold in limited numbers.
There’s no doubt the Focus will be the better car, but that’ doesn’t mean the STI will become irrelevant. Ford will have to prove it’s better…on racing circuits and in video and e-zine reviews…not just on paper. And, again, there’s a drastic difference between the two cars. The Focus RS would better compare to the Mercedes CLA-45 AMG (which is a front-biased AWD car with 350-HP from a turbocharged inline-four — it has much more in common with the Ford Focus RS than a Subaru WRX STI).
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-subaru-wrx-long-term-test-intro-review
Car & Driver has blasted through 40K miles of review testing of the 2015 Subaru WRX. I’ve yet to read the review (I just woke up but will be reading through the review today while waking up to coffee). I’ll update the post with my thoughts afterward.
After-reading-the-article-notes:
This review just might help me better decide my next car purchase, as I’ve considered whether the 2015-2016 WRX would be a good choice of upgrade for me (considering that I’m coming from a 2011 STI sedan).
I want to highlight some of the article’s comments (the ones that jumped out at me). I’ll add my thoughts on some of them, but some of the comments might not need any comments from me —
…the WRX offers lively steering, confident grip, and a flat ride that rounds off the jolt on sharp impacts just so.
This is great, as most people think that the WRX’s handling would be watered-down compared to the STI. Remember, I’m comparing this car to my current ride.
By passing on the Limited trim, we missed out on a power driver’s seat, leather-trimmed upholstery, LED headlights, proximity entry, and push-button ignition.
This is interesting. I hadn’t thought on which trim level I might desire. My current car is a base model but offers enough options in base trim to make me happy. I might desire the LED headlights, proximity entry, and push-button ignition, though.
PRICE AS TESTED: $31,290 (base price: $29,290)
That’s a pretty hefty price for a WRX. I paid $34K for my STI and I can get a base 2015 STI for around the same price as I purchased mine. The question is, is a 2015 WRX actually worth $29K? Do WRXs have the same value retainment as STIs?
TRANSMISSION: 6-speed manual
This is good. I also wanted to highlight that because Subaru also offers a CVT option for WRXs (not that I care for it…I just wanted to note that that’s not the version of transmission I care for).
PERFORMANCE: NEW
Zero to 60 mph: 5.0 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 13.4 sec
Zero to 130 mph: 26.5 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 6.4 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 11.1 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 7.8 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 13.7 sec @ 101 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 144 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 157 ft
Roadholding, 300-ft-dia skidpad: 0.91g
That’s strong performance and is very close to pre-2015 STI stats. That’s not saying that 2015 WRXs will offer the same track experience or road feel as pre-2015 STIs, though.
With the 1000-mile break-in cleared, we spun the engine to the 6700-rpm redline and dropped the left pedal with only a whisper of clutch slip. Then we did it a dozen more times looking for the quickest acceleration time. We used this technique—combined with short-shifting into second gear at 5300 rpm—to great effect during an earlier WRX road test, recording a 4.8-second zero-to-60 time. Yet in more than a dozen attempts, our long-termer couldn’t quite match that feat. Instead it peaked at 5.0 seconds in the run to 60 mph and 13.7 seconds through the quarter mile with a trap speed of 101 mph. Not too shabby for a $30,000 four-door, eh? The chassis numbers were equally impressive with our WRX stopping from 70 mph in 157 feet and rounding the skidpad at 0.91 g.
The above is interesting. I remember the ruckus that C&D generated in their testing procedures. Not everyone is going to be willing to flog their car off the line at redline. Mags don’t own the cars they test…they return them after testing. And if an owner takes their car in for an issue and it is found that the cause of the issue was due to them launching the car in such a manner, the warranty claim will be denied due to abusive driving. Another interesting tidbit: the long termer couldn’t match the 4.8-sec 0-60 time…that’s certainly understandable, though, since atmospheric and road conditions may have been different (along with a different driver).
Drivers have called out the excellent electric power steering (which was first perfected on the BRZ) and a more polished cockpit. You won’t mistake the interior for a Volkswagen’s, but our staff has noticed better fits, improved finishes, and a quieter ride than in previous WRXs.
I wish everyone would be as generous in making such comments. Most people expect every GTI competitor to have a similar interior as the GTI. That’s not going to happen. Besides, it is better to compare the new WRX to the old to highlight changes in the model-year…that’s the best way to measure progress, IMO. VW’s interior is the exception, not the norm, obviously.
While the output of the turbocharged 2.0-liter flat-four—268 horsepower and 258 lb-ft of torque—is nothing to scoff at, power delivery is lumpy and peaky. We shift early in first gear for our testing because the power falls off above 5300 rpm. Lower in the rev range there’s a sudden surge of boost indicative of turbo lag. In an age when turbocharged engines are practically mainstream and their power curves have been smoothed out, this Subaru flat-four still drives like an R&D experiment from the early 1990s.
Hrmmm…that’s not a particularly good note. I wonder if Cobb has smoothed this out (the lag and lumpiness that C&D claims is prevalent). I’m not sure how this car can produce turbo lag, with it’s lag-lessening equipment such as the twin scroll turbocharger, which ensures the turbocharger begins to work low in the rev range (the car produces 258 lb-ft of torque at 2000 RPM). But every WRX enthusiast knows that this particular engine is not a revver, which is why Subaru nuts usually shift earlier than 6K RPM. USDM boxer engines are not particularly rev-happy. The article only mentions the 1st-2nd gear shift, though…which makes me wonder if the ECU is limiting power in 1st gear (either on it’s own or due to purposeful mapping). In fact, I think that the map might well be the cause, as someone else in the article’s comments mentioned “boost threshold”. That’s not the first time I’ve heard someone mention that Subaru purposely limits the WRX so that it won’t overshadow it’s halo car, the STI. So that lumpiness and lag are more than likely purposely implemented. That still doesn’t explain the mention of the 1st gear limitation…is it just first gear, or is it gear-agnostic?