New Focus ST 2.0 Turbo announced
15-09-2010, 03:57 PM
#1
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton Aycliffe
Posts: 1,693
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Focus ST 2.0 Turbo announced
looks quite tasty and getting rid of the big heavy 2.5 volvo engine aswell and being replaced with a 250bhp 2.0 ecoboost engine
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100...us-ST-to-debut
http://www.detnews.com/article/20100...us-ST-to-debut
16-09-2010, 09:18 AM
#3
Advanced PassionFord User
The volvo t5 is actually very light as its an all alloy block
Its lighter then the Zetec as I have both engines in my garage
The new Ecoboost engine looks interesting
Its lighter then the Zetec as I have both engines in my garage
The new Ecoboost engine looks interesting
Last edited by AustenW; 16-09-2010 at 09:19 AM.
16-09-2010, 09:51 AM
#4
That was my first thought as well 
Some people really do seem to have it in for that engine
I'm not sure on this. Obviously 250bhp is good, but the styling doesn't seem that good to me. Hope the 3dr Focus looks better than this thing does anyway.
Some people really do seem to have it in for that engine I'm not sure on this. Obviously 250bhp is good, but the styling doesn't seem that good to me. Hope the 3dr Focus looks better than this thing does anyway.
, it might grow on me.
Trending Topics
16-09-2010, 01:44 PM
#8
PassionFord Post Whore!!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Maldon, Essex!
Posts: 4,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it looks far too high at the front (possibly to comply with american regulations), and the grill shape reminds me of something, possibly a porsche cayenne jeep.
17-09-2010, 06:58 AM
#13
Advanced PassionFord User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cus its from a volvo, and while being a good engine its hardly advanced or very efficient is it? you could probably get better fuel economy/power out of a 20 year old YB engine on decent management with more power.
17-09-2010, 07:38 AM
#14
PassionFord Regular
Just reading the new Auto express mag feature on it and it says it won't be available as a 3 door but could be a estate model WTF.
Front bumber looks shite and rear lights.
Front bumber looks shite and rear lights.
17-09-2010, 09:45 AM
#16
ą§~Quadzackular~§ą
The inside looks like a shitty new ka... bumper is kack.
Where is the news on the 4x4 new RS? So if the ST is 250 BHP then the new RS will be near 350-400?
Where is the news on the 4x4 new RS? So if the ST is 250 BHP then the new RS will be near 350-400?
17-09-2010, 07:28 PM
#20
PF's Guitar God!!!
I want to see a 2L with 300bhp+ and a REAL 4WD system. No electrical crap!
17-09-2010, 07:39 PM
#21
but it's being killed off by emissions rules NOT that they can't make them
why make a car that will cost you more than you can sell it for to please a few purists? at least vw are making money on servicing the veyron every 5 minutes for Ł32k a pop!
why make a car that will cost you more than you can sell it for to please a few purists? at least vw are making money on servicing the veyron every 5 minutes for Ł32k a pop!
17-09-2010, 07:58 PM
#23
PF's Guitar God!!!
Its like Ferrari, they have Fiat for them to meet the emissions rules. Bugatti have VW for their Emissions etc
Ford should concentrate on using the other cars like the Ka/Fiesta/Fusion and SOME Focus' to reach emission goals. A RS isn't a car you expect to have a electrical motor. Its just not right.
17-09-2010, 08:16 PM
#25
PF's Guitar God!!!
Pretty sure Ford can have ONE model in the range that bends the rules a little. What RS Fanatics would like to see is a 2L 300bhp+ 4WD car. Like i said before, if you can't afford to run it, you should own it.
18-09-2010, 06:52 AM
#29
Advanced PassionFord User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never said it was a bad engine, just not the right one for a modern hot hatch, just imo.
keep it in a big heavy volvo- and age has everything to do with not wanting a big heavy barge to drive about in.
my comment was in regard to a volvo T5, read it again
keep it in a big heavy volvo- and age has everything to do with not wanting a big heavy barge to drive about in.
my comment was in regard to a volvo T5, read it again
Last edited by Chris69; 18-09-2010 at 06:54 AM.
18-09-2010, 07:09 AM
#30
PassionFord Post Troll
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: You will never know. Now fook off
Posts: 3,089
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Its the same engine. The volvo isnt that heavy. You really don't know anyhting baout them. I had cars that weigh a fair bit more with smaller engines.
18-09-2010, 07:13 AM
#31
PassionFord Post Troll
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: You will never know. Now fook off
Posts: 3,089
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Don't call this a good comment .
And yes you say it is a good engine but after that you are starting to complain? Doesnt really match does it
They are good engines and can have a lot of abuse. I had a N/a 20v which was running 400.000 km on LPG with his first HG. The engine runs like new. Even with a heavy trailer i didnt had any problems. THey are good and you get good MPG from them. Was getting more MPG from that 2.5 20v then from my old 2.0 dohc sierra .
All and all the 5cyl was a good choice. They made a good step forward. But since they sold volvo to some bami maker, i think they couldnt use the engine anymore. Hence the 2.0 4 pot. Which isnt really a rs if you ask me. It looks shit. THey really dind something stupid this time. But that started when they stopped making RWD/4WD cars. Plus why can brands like volvo and audi still can make big hp cars within the eco rules? As volvo uses the same engine?
.And yes you say it is a good engine but after that you are starting to complain? Doesnt really match does it
its hardly advanced or very efficient is it? you could probably get better fuel economy/power out of a 20 year old YB engine on decent management with more power.
. All and all the 5cyl was a good choice. They made a good step forward. But since they sold volvo to some bami maker, i think they couldnt use the engine anymore. Hence the 2.0 4 pot. Which isnt really a rs if you ask me. It looks shit. THey really dind something stupid this time. But that started when they stopped making RWD/4WD cars
. Plus why can brands like volvo and audi still can make big hp cars within the eco rules? As volvo uses the same engine?
Last edited by Mr.T; 18-09-2010 at 07:23 AM.
18-09-2010, 07:31 AM
#32
Boosting around the NE
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: County Durham
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chris69; you have some (lets call them interesting) opinions - the Focus ST hasnt got a full fat T5 as wouldnt fit in the engine bay so a short block 2.5 T5 engine is fitted.
Some interesting points raised about the engine but as mentioned above - the engine fitted in the Focus ST/RS is light (thanks to the alloy block & cylinder head). Plus because it is shrunk downt to fit it is lighter than the Volvo full fat T5.
Weight is 1317kg - an Escort Cosworth is 1360kg. Look at a mk1 Focus RS and weight is 1278kg so really there isnt much of a weight problem is there. The new Focus RS is lardy and has alot of weight over the ST - see the evo road test where a Mountune Focus ST is pitted against a new RS and beats it in nearly every acceleration discipline.
Under heavy cornering you cant tell there is a 2.5 engine up front as handling isnt compromised.
As for the thirst comments - I am running approx 320bhp / 365Ib/ft in mine and can still get 300 miles to a tank (55 litre tank). On my recent run to Brighton & Milton Keynes got 375 to the tank.
It is far from a bad engine - becoming popular with transplants as well - this is probably because it is reasonably cheap & Light.
Just my thoughts as I actually own an ST
Rob
Some interesting points raised about the engine but as mentioned above - the engine fitted in the Focus ST/RS is light (thanks to the alloy block & cylinder head). Plus because it is shrunk downt to fit it is lighter than the Volvo full fat T5.
Weight is 1317kg - an Escort Cosworth is 1360kg. Look at a mk1 Focus RS and weight is 1278kg so really there isnt much of a weight problem is there. The new Focus RS is lardy and has alot of weight over the ST - see the evo road test where a Mountune Focus ST is pitted against a new RS and beats it in nearly every acceleration discipline.
Under heavy cornering you cant tell there is a 2.5 engine up front as handling isnt compromised.
As for the thirst comments - I am running approx 320bhp / 365Ib/ft in mine and can still get 300 miles to a tank (55 litre tank). On my recent run to Brighton & Milton Keynes got 375 to the tank.
It is far from a bad engine - becoming popular with transplants as well - this is probably because it is reasonably cheap & Light.
Just my thoughts as I actually own an ST
Rob
18-09-2010, 10:39 AM
#33
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: redditch
Posts: 966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chris69; you have some (lets call them interesting) opinions - the Focus ST hasnt got a full fat T5 as wouldnt fit in the engine bay so a short block 2.5 T5 engine is fitted.
Some interesting points raised about the engine but as mentioned above - the engine fitted in the Focus ST/RS is light (thanks to the alloy block & cylinder head). Plus because it is shrunk downt to fit it is lighter than the Volvo full fat T5.
Weight is 1317kg - an Escort Cosworth is 1360kg. Look at a mk1 Focus RS and weight is 1278kg so really there isnt much of a weight problem is there. The new Focus RS is lardy and has alot of weight over the ST - see the evo road test where a Mountune Focus ST is pitted against a new RS and beats it in nearly every acceleration discipline.
Under heavy cornering you cant tell there is a 2.5 engine up front as handling isnt compromised.
As for the thirst comments - I am running approx 320bhp / 365Ib/ft in mine and can still get 300 miles to a tank (55 litre tank). On my recent run to Brighton & Milton Keynes got 375 to the tank.
It is far from a bad engine - becoming popular with transplants as well - this is probably because it is reasonably cheap & Light.
Just my thoughts as I actually own an ST
Rob
Some interesting points raised about the engine but as mentioned above - the engine fitted in the Focus ST/RS is light (thanks to the alloy block & cylinder head). Plus because it is shrunk downt to fit it is lighter than the Volvo full fat T5.
Weight is 1317kg - an Escort Cosworth is 1360kg. Look at a mk1 Focus RS and weight is 1278kg so really there isnt much of a weight problem is there. The new Focus RS is lardy and has alot of weight over the ST - see the evo road test where a Mountune Focus ST is pitted against a new RS and beats it in nearly every acceleration discipline.
Under heavy cornering you cant tell there is a 2.5 engine up front as handling isnt compromised.
As for the thirst comments - I am running approx 320bhp / 365Ib/ft in mine and can still get 300 miles to a tank (55 litre tank). On my recent run to Brighton & Milton Keynes got 375 to the tank.
It is far from a bad engine - becoming popular with transplants as well - this is probably because it is reasonably cheap & Light.
Just my thoughts as I actually own an ST
Rob
20-09-2010, 07:26 AM
#35
Advanced PassionFord User
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,962
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i'l put my ford blinkers back on sorry i had a lapse.
yes it was/is the perfect engine and i shall bow down to the volvo derived lump for it is the most amazing engine ever to sit in a ford
yes it was/is the perfect engine and i shall bow down to the volvo derived lump for it is the most amazing engine ever to sit in a ford
20-09-2010, 08:21 AM
#36
Advanced PassionFord User
Chris69; you have some (lets call them interesting) opinions - the Focus ST hasnt got a full fat T5 as wouldnt fit in the engine bay so a short block 2.5 T5 engine is fitted.
Some interesting points raised about the engine but as mentioned above - the engine fitted in the Focus ST/RS is light (thanks to the alloy block & cylinder head). Plus because it is shrunk downt to fit it is lighter than the Volvo full fat T5.
Rob
Some interesting points raised about the engine but as mentioned above - the engine fitted in the Focus ST/RS is light (thanks to the alloy block & cylinder head). Plus because it is shrunk downt to fit it is lighter than the Volvo full fat T5.
Rob
It is NOT a shortened down version at all, (do you realise the cost implications if this was the case)
In fact it is exactly the same bottom end layout as the 20 year old 850's (even the 10v)
The only exception for the RS/ST is the plastic inlet manifold (for cheapness) and a slightly different rocker cover with different location for the filler cap to mask the fact it is a Volvo engine
They also cast the exhaust manifold into the turbine housing to save costs too
The engine found in the Volvo is much better animal as they havent cut corners
And how do I know all this? because i've got 5 variations of this engine siting in my garage at home
LOL
Last edited by AustenW; 20-09-2010 at 08:23 AM.
20-09-2010, 09:35 AM
#37
PassionFord Post Troll
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: You will never know. Now fook off
Posts: 3,089
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
The Ford Focus ST / RS 2 engine is EXACTLY the same as the new Volvo T5
It is NOT a shortened down version at all, (do you realise the cost implications if this was the case)
In fact it is exactly the same bottom end layout as the 20 year old 850's (even the 10v)
The only exception for the RS/ST is the plastic inlet manifold (for cheapness) and a slightly different rocker cover with different location for the filler cap to mask the fact it is a Volvo engine
They also cast the exhaust manifold into the turbine housing to save costs too
The engine found in the Volvo is much better animal as they havent cut corners
And how do I know all this? because i've got 5 variations of this engine siting in my garage at home
LOL
It is NOT a shortened down version at all, (do you realise the cost implications if this was the case)
In fact it is exactly the same bottom end layout as the 20 year old 850's (even the 10v)
The only exception for the RS/ST is the plastic inlet manifold (for cheapness) and a slightly different rocker cover with different location for the filler cap to mask the fact it is a Volvo engine
They also cast the exhaust manifold into the turbine housing to save costs too
The engine found in the Volvo is much better animal as they havent cut corners
And how do I know all this? because i've got 5 variations of this engine siting in my garage at home
LOL
5? why?
20-09-2010, 09:45 AM
#39
Advanced PassionFord User
Why not? they were cheap
Volvo have made a number variations/updates to the block over the years with oil squirters etc
There are several variations to the cylinder head casting too (3 main types) which include larger ports, valves, stem size, bucket size, solid v's hydraulic etc
Cranks are also slightly different too (they have made them cheaper over time) the early 850 cranks are stronger than the newer type IMO
I bought a few engines cheap from a local scappy to find out more about them before I started to do my 5 cylinder engine build so I used the right bits
I bought an engine with 280'000 miles on it and it was mint inside
The local dealer has trade ins with over 400'000 miles on them and they still run sweet
They are alot better engineered than most Ford engines I have come across to be honest
The swedes are getting well over 1000bhp out of them in turbo form
Volvo have made a number variations/updates to the block over the years with oil squirters etc
There are several variations to the cylinder head casting too (3 main types) which include larger ports, valves, stem size, bucket size, solid v's hydraulic etc
Cranks are also slightly different too (they have made them cheaper over time) the early 850 cranks are stronger than the newer type IMO
I bought a few engines cheap from a local scappy to find out more about them before I started to do my 5 cylinder engine build so I used the right bits
I bought an engine with 280'000 miles on it and it was mint inside
The local dealer has trade ins with over 400'000 miles on them and they still run sweet
They are alot better engineered than most Ford engines I have come across to be honest
The swedes are getting well over 1000bhp out of them in turbo form
20-09-2010, 09:57 AM
#40
PassionFord Post Troll
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: You will never know. Now fook off
Posts: 3,089
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Why not? they were cheap
Volvo have made a number variations/updates to the block over the years with oil squirters etc
There are several variations to the cylinder head casting too (3 main types) which include larger ports, valves, stem size, bucket size, solid v's hydraulic etc
Cranks are also slightly different too (they have made them cheaper over time) the early 850 cranks are stronger than the newer type IMO
I bought a few engines cheap from a local scappy to find out more about them before I started to do my 5 cylinder engine build so I used the right bits
I bought an engine with 280'000 miles on it and it was mint inside
The local dealer has trade ins with over 400'000 miles on them and they still run sweet
They are alot better engineered than most Ford engines I have come across to be honest
The swedes are getting well over 1000bhp out of them in turbo form
Volvo have made a number variations/updates to the block over the years with oil squirters etc
There are several variations to the cylinder head casting too (3 main types) which include larger ports, valves, stem size, bucket size, solid v's hydraulic etc
Cranks are also slightly different too (they have made them cheaper over time) the early 850 cranks are stronger than the newer type IMO
I bought a few engines cheap from a local scappy to find out more about them before I started to do my 5 cylinder engine build so I used the right bits
I bought an engine with 280'000 miles on it and it was mint inside
The local dealer has trade ins with over 400'000 miles on them and they still run sweet
They are alot better engineered than most Ford engines I have come across to be honest
The swedes are getting well over 1000bhp out of them in turbo form
quality from Sweden 