What went wrong?

>>15251570
god where do i start
doors
curb weight
ugly
just a higher trim from a shitty FWD car, it will never ascend beyond humble beginning

You thought your opinion matters.

>>15251570
that they didnt make a fiesta version

File: jsilimweasljsmrc3dis.jpg (107KB, 800x592px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x592px

>>15251571
>fwd

rs is awd and has a drift button numb-nuts

File: 2017-Ford-Fiesta-RS-spy-photo-1011-876x535.jpg (135KB, 876x535px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 876x535px

>>15251578

>>15251600
when did I say it was FWD

File: 1464571203038.gif (2MB, 350x262px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x262px

>>15251608
well a whole different drive-train is a little more than a "higher trim" level

>>15251631
Highschool was hard for you wasn't it?

>>15251571
explain the curb weight

File: 8a8.jpg (30KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 640x640px

>>15251653
not as hard as it for you to make friends dickwad

maybe you should go outside once in a while?

>>15251570
Know one knows yet. But I suspect when it does go wrong the issue will be price.

File: image.jpg (156KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 640x640px

>>15251570
It wasn't a more appropriately priced Fiesta RS.

>>15251604
Also this was just the Fiesta ST200 they released recently, but a four door variant that was never completed as they decided to not bring the ST200 to the North American market (the 4door fiesta st market).

It's really a damn shame. With the Fiesta ST lauded as the more 'enthusiast' of the two ST vehicles, they really should have focused that platform for their RS variant.

>>15251600
>up to 70% torque to real wheels
>and 100% of available torque to each wheel

Does this mean one wheel could get 70% of all that torque? Sounds neat

>>15251709
yes
its gud
this thread is bait

>>15251695
i see more focus' on the road than fiestas, that's probably how they made their choice

>>15251745
where do you live??

>>15251745
california, los angeles area

>>15251570
Nothing. It's an awesome car.

Going to a car forum is a tough predicament today.

I feel like /o/ or r/cars are the only options I have since every car specific forums are only good for technical sharing of information and are otherwise cringe fests. With /o/, 75% of you are absolute retards with absolutely stupid, unwarranted opinions derived from God knows what. With r/cars you're stuck with a constant circle jerk of idealists, where everyone likes and accepts everyone and everything and if you actually want to communicate with people you need to say popular things that everyone accepts.

What the fuck does a guy do?

>>15252127
>unwarranted opinions derived from God knows
From car forums. And video games.

>>15251570
Only one thing. Car dealers. They upscaled the price too much.

>>15252159
People shouldn't buy them when that happens. It will stop. I'm a little surprised they do it, it shrinks their customer base to only those that can cover the markup with cash. No lender will finance dealer markup otherwise. Not even FoMoCo.

>>15251600
>>15251709
>>up to 70% torque to real wheels
I should remind you that this is stock torque. The drive shaft and clutch-based diff rear cannot handle more than that. If you tune the car, the ECU will bias the torque split towards the front, so the more power you add, the more front-biased the car becomes.

If you want more power you literally have to replace most of the drivetrain and replace the ECU since this limitation is hardcoded in the software.

LOL

>>15252206
yeah but think of it differently
you can get up to 70% of the power to the rear wheels so if you're upgrade it the car will become more AWD until you pass the point where you have the double of 70% the base power

Mostly dealer mark up.

I guess you can complain about Haldex AWD, but being able to send 70% of engine torque to any one wheel seems pretty cool.

>>15252206
can you provide the source of this information please

>>15252689
it's not haldex though is it

>>15252206
so if you reduce the power, you can make it rwd?

SICK

>>15252710
You're right it's another manufacturer: http://www.gkn.com/frankfurt/news-and-Media/Pages/GKN-supplies-innovative-AWD-system-to-Ford-Focus-RS.aspx

They wanted more than 30k OTD for a focus.

At the end of the day ford was charging V8 Prices for a car that didn't have a v8 and would get fucked six ways till sunday by v8's. all while having the same interior as a that only cost 25k. Why pay for a focus that will run you 45k after taxes and dealer mark up when you can by a camaro or mustang with a suspension and buttrape the focus around any track. for less.

>>15252785
because they (supposedly) target different demographics

one is a hot hatch with AWD, and the other is a 2+2 RWD coupe

>>15251570

The interior is typical Ford shite.

Brilliant vehicle, but I would hate sitting in one.

>>15251695

Know 'why' the Fiesta was the more enthusiast friendly? Every dealer had a fucking advert of a 'racing' spec warranty accepted upgrade that made the ST as fast as the Focus ST. The Focus ST didn't have that shit and the current generation ST is like 2 years old, and thus any enthusiast that tinkers with the engine or changes shit will void their warranty, which was something that the Fiesta Red/Blacks needed due to a turbo hose being shittily done and coming off.

Generally, the enthusiast market doesn't kick in for non-racing spec cars until at least the first generation of a specific model is warranty voided by time.

There are exceptions ofc like I imagine alot of the engine remappers took a Focus ST and are fucking about with their shit to eek out 20 BHP extra etc and seeing what off the shelf turbos are suitable but from a purely consumer standpoint, it's not happening until the end of this year, start of next for the majority of Focus ST drivers.

>>15252866
doesn't change the fact that they were charging fully loaded v8 dollars for a car that would get buttfucked by cars that cost the same.

>>15253171
Who gives a fuck about V8? I don't like V8s
You're just benchracing either way.

>>15253171
>falling for the v8 meme

>>15253179
>falling for the cuck meme

You probably let someone else fuck your boyfriend too.

>>15252127
The best forums are any of the ones with really rich guys. Seriously. The obscenely rich car fans are always the coolest guys. I think it's because they know they can just get whatever they want so they never have sour grapes over anything and very few of them really look down on other cars.

You can't go to forums of cars that people use to look rich though. Like 718 Boxster forum people are complete snobs to MR2s. Car forums in general are shit.

File: Ford-Focus_RS-2016-1600-0c.jpg (354KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 1600x1200px

>>15253067
I can only hope it's well made because it's coming from Germany.

>>15251570
too many doors, do not want.

>>15252710
You have to realize that the rear diff is clutch-based. It will have thermal and friction limits.
>http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a28036/what-tuners-need-to-know-about-the-2017-ford-focus-rs/
Here's the first bit. The car has built-in thermal safeguards so that the clutch-based rear diff is "lifetime" ie it's not a wearable component. The rear diff will deactivate if it gets too hot, turning the RS into a front-drive car until the EMS believes the diff has cooled enough to warrant reactivation.
Then:
http://blogs.youwheel.com/2015/03/06/exclusive-2016-ford-focus-rs-awd-system-analysis/
>Because there is always sliding friction between the input and output friction plates of the clutches, to prevent overheating and premature wear, the clutches can only be “slightly” engaged in most of the time, which means the rear wheels will get meaningful amount of power only in some special circumstances, such as: hard acceleration, cornering etc., so it can be considered as an “on-demand” type AWD system.
Meaning the on-demand AWD system can only cope with high torque inputs for a limited time. The twinster system in the RS is managed by a computer, so if you put too much stress on it, it will deactivate.

Tuning the car will only put more stress on these components, meaning it will switch off sooner, or maybe not even activate.

In the same article:
>Then our conclusion is: under normal driving conditions (all 4 wheels have reasonable traction), the clutch-coupling-type AWD system cannot transmit more than 40% of torque to the rear wheels, no matter how you enhance that AWD system.
This comment is speculative based on the same system being employed in the Range Rover Evoque, and how that operates. The RS has a more sturdy Twinster system to cope with the higher power output so it can handle 70% of the torque and power, but it also has the same system as the Evoque, so it also has programmed limits just like the Evoque.

>>15253372
It's like that on Pistonheads. The guys with fucking richfag cars are proper cool and will shoot the shit and natter with anyone, even a guy who drives a 1.1 T-reg Clio. The guys driving M3s and Audi S cars (usually on lease) are fucking snobbish at everything else unless it's massively more expensive and only because they want to suck up to the owners.

>>15253438
the engine is from america. 2.3 first in the mkc and then mustang.
the awd systwm ia from the uk. gkn automotive.
its more of a ford-family-frankenstain car

>Plastic mouth guard

No thanks