Incorrect

Sierra RS width: 1730mm
Escort Cosworth RS width: 1738mm
Focus RS width: 1823mm

Sierra RS length: 4460mm
Escort Cosworth RS length: 4211mm
Focus RS width: 4390mm

Sierra RS height: 1380mm
Escort Cosworth RS height: 1405mm
Focus RS height: 1472mm

 

And cars like the Golf R and Miata show that affordable modern cars do not have to be heavy. Weight is the last frontier for increasing mpg on internal combustion autos. More and more manufacturers are moving to modular platforms with weight reduction as a goal (see VW and Subaru). The Focus RS is based on a dated chassis with almost zero weight saving components added on (the one exception is the twinster, though its weight savings means its at/near its hp limit - per GKN engineer).

 

Poor horse.

For the 4th or 5th time, I'll repeat: The 'Ring imposed speed limits in certain sections and put a soft ban on manufacturer timing last June. The Civic Type R and Golf R were tested before that, so they have a time. The RS was not tested before then, so it doesn't.

Lap times around the 'Ring might be the most meaningless measure possible, unless you know somewhere to drive that allows you to go over 150 MPH for long periods of time.

Aluminum is not free. $5k to save 300 lbs isn't worth it (both WAGs, but based somewhat on the F-150). It also drastically increases repair costs (See: NSX).

 

lol, look who's talking

 

The Focus RS it listed as 172.8" x 71.8" x 58" http://www.caranddriver.com/ford/focus-rs

The awd Sierra RS was
449cm x 170cm x 138cm, which equals 176.77" x 66.9 " x 54.33" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Sierra_RS_Cosworth

So the Sierra was longer. While the Focus is wider and taller.

 

And now we are comparing other Ford models that aren't a Focus.

Let's talk about the F150 and it's aluminum...

Legit thread

 

So if we can't compare the car to an Evo, or other RS models, what should we compare it to?

 

you didnt mind it until you got again, bumps on the road.
talking about not arguing about numbers either. lololol

this is really legit thread.


About the Sierra, i think it was def. the worst of all Ford RS models.
Specially because they were build for rally.

 

f150 lost 630-730lbs depending on trim level and options. And it wasn't really worth as far as fuel economy goes. My 2011 is rated 14/19 and I average 15. My friends 2015 is rated for 15/21 and he averages 15.5. We traded truck for a week and we got the same mileage out of each others trucks. This little comparison made me happy I saved $25k going with a used truck. And he wasn't too happy about it...lol.


It's somewhat relevant because the weight savings on the f150 did almost nothing for fuel economy...

 

So if the Focus RS offered a track version (as there is speculation that they might), you would not be interested because it might have little effect on mpg?

 

The VW isn't that much lighter.

I seriously do not understand why you are *****ing and whining this much about a few hundred lbs on a car you have no interest in buying. You're basically *****ing about the entire car, from the ground up, and all the decisions Ford has made. You haven't driven the car, you haven't seen the car in person, yet you're stilling *****ing.

I see that you completely deflected by point about the Evo. According to your logic, the Evo IX is garbage because it gained 500 lbs over the Evo I.

 

Cool, brah.

 

Because to me, weight is an important stat in a self proclaimed "performance" car. While others in this thread seem to think weight reduction is not that important because it has little effect on mpg

 

Yet you don't give a **** that the Evo IX is 500 lbs heavier than the Evo I. Nor do you give a **** that the Evo X weighs more than the RS. Don't try to bull**** us now by claiming weight and MPG are that important to you. If that were true, you wouldn't be driving a ****ing Evo in the first place.

 

No, I'm saying 10% weight reduction has a very small effect on performance. The new f150 also doesn't accelerate that much faster, even with more power and less weight.