Gee, let's test 60's muscle cars only on original redlines...

 

Gees what in gods name is keeping this thread going for 115 pages lol... we just need the damn car to come out already

 

we start talking about tires until new info is released LOL

 

IIRC the stock EVO8 pulled .92G in corners in Car and Driver test. Let's use that as a baseline. I think most of us can handle one variable.

 

The earth's gravity varies depending on location. So unless we test it at the same spot then its not a true test

 

lol
😁

 

Also depends on density altitude having an effect on how much down force the car can make

 

I thought the Ford Focus RS AWD system is by GKN? That's the clearest article I could find on the AWD operation.

http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...ed-awd-system/

 

If you re interested in the AWD system, there is a guy on NASIOC called Scooby921 who is an engineer for GKN and worked on the Focus RS, and goes into some good detail about the system. I asked him which system he preferred between the Evo and the Focus. This is what he had to say:

"It's a bit difficult for me to compare the two systems to a really in-depth level. While GKN does make the hardware that is in the Evo X we don't write the controls. Mitsubishi does their own. Furthermore, that hardware / technology was developed in our Japan office and it was done before I began working at GKN. I don't have any of the detailed technical information. I only know the basics of how the technology operates.

The Evo is an open differential with planetary gears on each output shaft which are clutched. Under normal operation it is just an open differential. When the clutches engage they help to over-speed the shaft. By accelerating the shaft / wheel you create a yaw moment. This only happens when the system is calibrated to activate. I don't know those thresholds. I can't say whether it begins to vector as soon as the steering wheel is turned, or if the over-speed gears are only activated during high-g cornering maneuvers. I don't know the duty cycle of the active hardware. It could be 50%. It could be 90%. It could be 10%. Only Mitsubishi knows how they wrote and calibrated their controls. I expect the duty cycle is lower because the ratio / speed offset created by the gears is higher. A higher ratio offset has the potential to develop more yaw and develop it faster. Under normal, sub-limit driving conditions the use of this over-speed offset might make the car way to happy to oversteer and that can be dangerous for the vast majority of drivers. Thus the use of the over-speed gears is most appropriate and likely limited to high G limit cornering events where the vehicle begins to understeer and needs correction.

The Focus RS has no differential. When off the vehicle is FWD. Torque transfer is controlled by the active hardware. Vectoring happens any time you turn the wheel. It's inherent in the design of the system. If you engage a clutch to transfer torque you are also engaging the ratio offset. This ratio offset is much less than what the Evo uses, making it safer and possible to use all the time. In my opinion this has the potential to make the RS perform better as you get assistance in every corner which increases with demand and not just the high G corners. Because the couplings in the RS can disable / turn off and completely open to reduce drag you end up with high fuel economy while cruising down the interstate. The ability to open the clutches also improves the effectiveness of the brake controls. By decoupling the rear wheels a front or rear braking event doesn't transfer torque through the driveline and impact the other wheels.

I believe the RS has higher potential performance. It will be easier to drive fast around a road course. It will feel more neutral while cornering during your daily drive because it is always assisting. It will get you better fuel economy when disabled and reducing drag (cruising). It will provide better safety in cooperation with the brake controls."

I think this will help clear some confusion, just google his username and he comments on multiple focus forums too. Any information is helpful to make a decision if you are interested in switching to it.

 

I don't like that it he RS runs default FWD and definitely don't like that extra power beyond stock only goes to the front wheels.

SAYC ramps, it's not static. Any X owner's butt can tell him that. The graph has a gauge that shows a number of lights. I don't think it's precise, but the effect is much more pronounced in a high G corner. If you do something stupid like lift off the throttle when you're fully committed in a turn during torque transfer, you can easily spin an Evo X.

There's no argument against the fuel economy part; he's absolutely right. But I sure as heck don't want a car that is default fwd with an open front differential.

This stupid car needs to hurry up and go on sale. I want the aftermarket to get a hold of it so we can stop bench ricing and unwrap the real package.

 

Yeah, the problem with these kind of topics and arguments is that almost all the features on any car are purely subjective, and that's is the issue with this car. I personally don't think one system is better than the other, I think it just comes down to what you prioritize. Since we are in an Evo forum it will always be biased towards the set up we have which make more compromises for performance, but that is not everyone's cup of tea. I think the overall consensus should be we want more info and it should be exciting to see more competitive cars in this segment!

I personally might make the switch, but time will tell if that actually happens. Priorities do change :/ Love the Evo though, and look forward to seeing a comparison, despite everything I just said!!

 

I respect your opinion fully , but I do disagree on this. Plenty of system in cars are different, but designed to do a same thing/things, and many clearly better then others. Including AWD systems.
The Evo AWD set up/system became a bench mark for in this car segment for a good reasons. It is remains capable- reliable - affordable from stock all the way up to a very high TQ / HP level without compromising drivability really. Doesn't get nervous or sudden / snappy etc. Remains a very capable and user friendly set up.
So far clearly the best, and the most reliable affordable. These things are just as important then a stock track numbers in this car market.
Ford will bring a "new" approach, which is exiting at least, but I am not sold on the rest I mentioned above yet, but they are clearly try to get a crown for this segment. For that they do have to go further then a stock vs stock numbers on track.

Hope fully they home work will pay off, and they not rely on too much of they "extras" to prove it with they track times for magazines, stock vs stock testings...

Because this is a tricky market, basically very few buyers run they car stock. And lets face it many many people switch parts fast, then we will see the real capabilies of the car itself and perhaps in my( and most of the buyers) interest in racing.

I have huge hopes for this car, but so far what I am reading, makes me nervous about the AWD set up for racing. I am sure this system clearly will be fast - very capable on street. But as some disagree with me on this since early in this thread, this car made really not for street use in mind mainly. And that is where I hope will keep up its reputataion from the street .

I am talking about my experience here, there are some very capable car in stock form against stock cars on street fails to bring they reputataion on track against others and vica versa.

I am sure soon , about a year or two this comment will be answered, just as happened with the X they new 4B11T engine etc.
So I am really hoping the RS will be tested, and approved in hardcore racing too. My hesitation is mainly on the cost, we will see. The Evo X AWD system is actually pretty cheap to maintain or replace when you do mid to hardcore racing, since we mostly or almost everybody dump the AYC, and we replace it with a still a factory option: the mechanical rear LSD, which so far is not an option for the RS.

finger crossed.

 

I get your hesitation regarding FWD being default but with technology today being able to transfer power to the rear almost instantly!..... that doesn't bother me.

Allot of newer cars have cylinder deactivation on cruise but the instant throttle is depressed power comes on....there is no noticing that added power is lost or any stumbling on throttle application. The tech works. The front open diff bothers me a bit more. The torque vectoring system is needed to (cover) for the lack of torque transfer capability in that axel. The rear is covered by the clutches as they "act" similar to a locking diff when commanded by software. In my "bench race" eval it seems like you will always have a 3 wheel drive system at best. Software mitigation will be needed through brake vectoring to "assist" the deficiency of a open front diff.

I am curious about your statement regarding " extra power beyond stock only goes to the front wheels." Do you feel the new RS's cpu will not be able to handle added power in correct proportions?

That sounds very Volkswagen like....

 

NOS (new old stock) too.....

 

Thanks for that information!

I thought I had read in my surfing something like 2% over-speed potential for Evo X and the number 1.8% over-speed - according to GKN (referencing Ford) in the article for the Focus RS.. Also, that the RS is pretty much always "over-speeded" through a fron/rear ratio mismatch if the AWD is active to get the rear-drive feeling. I'm going to guess the AWD is pretty much always active in the driving situation we are usually considering on this forum (higher throttle, turning).

I was also a bit concerned to read about the system electronics monitoring Over-heat conditions. I mean I'm glad it monitors it, I just didn't want to hear that factor at all.

From the article:

“ The system for the Focus RS has additional torque capacity and has a gear ratio offset,” he said. The rear has a taller gear ratio than the front, which allows overspeeding the rear wheels, which, in turn, allows “true torque vectoring,” Kuczera said.

But the Focus RS does not have the Evoque’s decoupling driveshaft, Fritz said.
“It’s permanently attached. The front/rear ratio mismatch is unique to the Focus RS -- to get more torque to the rear. During normal operation or straight-line driving, the overspeed isn’t really doing anything. The clutches slip to take up the difference in the ratio mismatch. But during handling events, we try to vector or send torque to one rear wheel -- the outside rear wheel in a turn. We take advantage of the ratio mismatch to get more torque to the rear axle than without a ratio mismatch,” which Ford says is about 1.8 percent. "

Clutch slip to offset the ratio mismatch in a straight line - comments??

I know the EvoX non-modded Twin Clutch trans have their issues, but I haven't really heard about overheat issues with the Rear or ACD diff in the evo. As a side note, even if racers usually remove the AYC rear for track, i'd rather not. It's part of what makes the Evo X what it is for me. So hopefully the RS ultimate solution/development keeps it operational to a very high level. I'm interested in the best moron-mode (me) Track setting.

A bit more info on the two clutch packs (skip the video):
http://www.evo.co.uk/ford/focus-rs/1...isode/page/0/1