Notices
The Loft / EvoM Car Talk Corner The landing pad for automotive discussions, news, articles, and opinions. A place for the community to kick back and chat.

Focus RS

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 12:43 PM
  #3991  
ambystom01's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 75
From: Canuckistan
Seriously, are we not going to acknowledge the fact that every dyno has shown higher than stated torque numbers? Looks like the evidence shows that Ford is not over inflating the power numbers, if anything, it is understating how much power the RS makes.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 12:49 PM
  #3992  
nemsin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 50
From: PNW
I am just trying to get to the bottom of what is going on. Some people think there is no problem. Others continue to report problems with consistent power. Cobb's analysis doesn't jive with what Kaizen and Mishimoto are reporting.

Some have said Ford and Cobb are aware of the issue, which so far as I can tell, has not even been clearly articulated.

Is it the boost control strategy, the RDU, safeguards, or people's imagination ???
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 12:51 PM
  #3993  
ambystom01's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 75
From: Canuckistan
Originally Posted by nemsin
I am just trying to get to the bottom of what is going on. Some people think there is no problem. Others continue to report problems with consistent power. Not even Cobb's analysis jives with what Kaizen and Mishimoto are reporting.

Some have said Ford and Cobb are aware of the issue, which so far as I can tell, has not even been clearly articulated.
No you're not. Nobody believes that you're "just trying to get to the bottom of what is going on".

Once this issue is answered, you'll be on to some other aspect of the car to complain about.

Mishimoto is reporting consistent dyno results. Cobb was able to get good dyno results.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 12:57 PM
  #3994  
nemsin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 50
From: PNW
Originally Posted by ambystom01
Mishimoto is reporting consistent dyno results. Cobb was able to get good dyno results.
Mishimoto initially had lower results following using drift mode. (Which supports the RDU overheating theory)
Cobb was able to get consistent FWD dyno results. (Cobb thinks the car limits power when it "thinks" it detects traction loss)
Kaizen thinks the boost control strategy is garbage.

So...
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 01:00 PM
  #3995  
RazorLab's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,094
Likes: 1,092
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
Originally Posted by nemsin
Kaizen thinks the boost control strategy is garbage.
if you saw the tables and such for boost control in the ECU you might think that too. It's very complex, over engineered and stumbles over itself a lot.

Cobb rewrote the boost control strategy for all the Ecoboosts so far so I'm sure they will/already have with the RS.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 01:02 PM
  #3996  
ambystom01's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 75
From: Canuckistan
Originally Posted by nemsin
Mishimoto initially had lower results following using drift mode.
Cobb was able to get consistent FWD dyno results.
Kaizen thinks the boost control strategy is garbage.

So...
Exactly, so what? Mishimoto has since reported consistent results that are actually very good given the advertised power rating.

Cobb was able to find a way around the reported issue and again, get consistent results. What Cobb has noted is that due to the specific drivetrain used by the RS, it does not like dynos because of the specific way dynos function.

Kaizen can think whatever it wants. Kaizen's opinion is not automatically right.

In seemingly every comparison, the RS comes in first. Let's ignore all of that though because nemsin hates the car.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 01:04 PM
  #3997  
nemsin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 50
From: PNW
Originally Posted by ambystom01
In seemingly every comparison, the RS comes in first.
ORly?
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 01:13 PM
  #3998  
ambystom01's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 75
From: Canuckistan
Originally Posted by nemsin
Do you not understand the word "seemingly"?

You really need to check your sources, cause you look like a complete idiot right now.

http://www.topgear.com/car-news/big-...s-rs-vs-rivals

Never the sore loser, I rack my brain for excuses and realise our little race actually shines a light on the Focus’s core philosophy. Who cares if the manual ’box loses it a race or two or if the interior is a bit scratchy in places? Its job is to make serious performance accessible, pleasurable and affordable to the man in the street. It achieves that, no question, but to leave it there would be damning it with faint praise, because it’s fundamentally a better driver’s car than the other three here.

While the Golf R still has flashes of magic in its bones and can smoothe the edges off the real world better than the other three, it’s too staid in the face of more exotic competition. The same can’t be said of the flamboyant Civic, but its main contribution on this test was to highlight the shortcomings of front-wheel drive. The recent changes have done the Mercedes a world of good, it’s still the most unhinged hatch in the world and it’s learned not to take itself too seriously. But despite the *****-waving rear wing, double diffuser and silly exhaust (kept permanently in its shouty setting, of course), it still lacks a layer of interactivity at and beyond the limit – space that the Focus RS now officially owns. The tectonic plates are shifting alright, and it’s the RS that’s moving them.
So even though the RS wasn't the fastest in the drag race, the reviewer still preferred it to the other cars.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 01:14 PM
  #3999  
RazorLab's Avatar
EvoM Guru
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 14,094
Likes: 1,092
From: Mid-Hudson, NY
Here are all the boost control tables in the Fiesta. Note some of the folders aren't expanded and they have a ton of tables within them as well.

It took me a long long long time to understand it all.


Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 01:50 PM
  #4000  
moparfan's Avatar
Evolved Member
 
Joined: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,066
Likes: 29
From: Tri-State NY/NJ/CT
Originally Posted by nemsin
Are the trap speeds consistent with the listed horsepower? Easier than arguing about dynos.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 02:11 PM
  #4001  
nemsin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 50
From: PNW
Originally Posted by moparfan
Are the trap speeds consistent with the listed horsepower? Easier than arguing about dynos.
C&D tested lists ¼-MILE @ MPH times as follows:
Focus RS 13.4 sec @ 105
2015 STI 13.4 sec @ 104
2016 Golf R 13.6 sec @ 105
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-5

An RS owner, who also noted inconsistent boost, ran a 13.9 @ 99 mph. http://www.focusrs.org/forum/9-focus...mile-et-s.html

He later notes more consistent dyno results, but still not understanding why he had inconsistent results on track.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 02:30 PM
  #4002  
ambystom01's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 75
From: Canuckistan
Originally Posted by nemsin
C&D tested lists ¼-MILE @ MPH times as follows:
Focus RS 13.4 sec @ 105
2015 STI 13.4 sec @ 104
2016 Golf R 13.6 sec @ 105
http://www.caranddriver.com/comparis...e-specs-page-5

An RS owner, who also noted inconsistent boost, ran a 13.9 @ 99 mph. http://www.focusrs.org/forum/9-focus...mile-et-s.html

He later notes more consistent dyno results, but still not understanding why he had inconsistent results on track.
So you just gonna pretend that you weren't wrong above?

What 1/4 mile times and trap speeds are people expecting on a stock RS?
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 02:49 PM
  #4003  
nemsin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 50
From: PNW
Originally Posted by ambystom01
So you just gonna pretend that you weren't wrong above?

What 1/4 mile times and trap speeds are people expecting on a stock RS?
What was I wrong about? I don't care if a reviewer prefers the car because it has more room in the boot.

You don't think its "odd" that the RS traps at the same speed as cars that supposedly have ~50 less hp? The RS and STI weight are nearly identical.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 03:52 PM
  #4004  
ambystom01's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (7)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 15,634
Likes: 75
From: Canuckistan
Originally Posted by nemsin
What was I wrong about? I don't care if a reviewer prefers the car because it has more room in the boot.

You don't think its "odd" that the RS traps at the same speed as cars that supposedly have ~50 less hp? The RS and STI weight are nearly identical.
So you are going to ignore the fact that you were wrong. Nowhere does the reviewer say he preferred the RS because of trunk space. He preferred the RS for the exact thing we all presumably care the most about; the experience it offers the driver.
Reply
Old Jul 1, 2016 | 03:59 PM
  #4005  
nemsin's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 50
From: PNW
and yet it loses to a Golf R in a drag race.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:37 AM.