1.4 Rover Vs 2.0 Golf GTi

[Russ]

i seriously cant believe what im reading, u sound like u write for Redline or Revs.

[Oxide]

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/ces/road...ice=£16654.00

Nice review of the Golf V5.

Says its unexciting to drive

Road handling is also slated

[Oxide]

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/ces/road...ice=£15814.00

Review of Focus ST170

Says supreme level of grip and awesome brakes.

Handling the ST excels in every department.

Stil lthink the golf is a better car?

[Skii]

Originally posted by Oxide
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/ces/road...ice=£16654.00

Nice review of the Golf V5.

Says its unexciting to drive

Road handling is also slated

http://www.topgear.com/servlet/tg?DE...Number=02.html

Its all down to what you read isn't it

[Oxide]

Yes it is about what you read

http://www.topgear.com/servlet/tg?DE...Number=09.html

[Skii]

" The trouble is, the engine simply doesn't seem to be delivering the goods to match the chassis' ability. You can rev it, and rev it, and then rev it some more, but it never seems to take off in the way that you'd expect of a decent hot hatch.

With a claimed 170bhp and 150lb ft of torque, you'd expect more bangs for your buck when pedal meets metal. Ford claims a 0-60mph of 7.9 seconds and a top whack of 134mph, but it never feels that quick.

The root of the problem is the six-speed gearbox, which although nice enough in operation, is geared way too tall - somewhat pointless for a hot hatch, especially considering the new engine's peaky power delivery "

[Russ]

but u dont own one of those u eejit

[Oxide]

Want a medal for pointing out the obvious?

I know i dont have an ST170, he claimed he would beat everything albeit a focus rs. So im simpy pointing out that the ST170 will beat the V5.

[sparky191]

Originally posted by Oxide
Want a medal for pointing out the obvious?

I know i dont have an ST170, he claimed he would beat everything albeit a focus rs. So im simpy pointing out that the ST170 will beat the V5.

Thats very useful on a race track if you have the right driver. The V5 is a GT the ST170 is a hot hatch for boy racers. Theres little point in comparing them. Unless your interested in some inane kind of pissing contest.

I find it sad that many 10yr 1.6 motors can all do 0-60 in around 8 sec with some excellent driving dynamics, whereas most of today's bloat mobiles need stupid amounts of power and weight to do the same thing generally with flawed dynamics. Of course its even less useful to have a fast car these days than it was 10 yrs ago with all the restrictions you have now.

[5lab]

you guys really need to chill. the focus is probably a better car than the golf, which is why its the best selling car in the country. if it was a worse car, then not as many people would buy it, would they?

[schrickvr6]

the focus is probably a better car than the golf, which is why its the best selling car in the country

there have always been more fords and vauxhalls on the roads,imo that doesn't mean they are better cars...some people wouldn't know a good car if it hit them in the face

[Skii]

Originally posted by 5lab
you guys really need to chill. the focus is probably a better car than the golf, which is why its the best selling car in the country. if it was a worse car, then not as many people would buy it, would they?

Which is why the Golf has been the one of the best selling cars in Europe for some time now.

[Giddy]

Originally posted by Oxide
My mates 1.6 zetec s with 103bhp which is virtually same as a 1.4zr beat a chipped mark 4 gti at santapod on oct 25th this year.

That would be the 2 litre Golf then ? Or was the Golf driving in reverse ?

[Angus]

Isn't the focus a rep-mobile - used by sales reps all over the country (might explain the fact that there's a lot of them - they're cheap)

Whichever spec focus you buy you're not going to escape the depreciation that this brings to the range.

[Oxide]

jaow have a look at recommended price for a ford focus 2 litre on a 2001 plate.

Then have a look on autotrader and try finding one, they will fetch at least 1k more then what the book prices them at. Depreciation on a focus is very low.

[Angus]

Depreciation is not how much more than book price you can get for the vehicle (and looking at autotrader is not really that good a reference as anyone buying a car should haggle the price).

If you go to Parkers and compare the book prices of a 3 year old focus and a three year old golf that had similar purchase costs when new you'll find that a focus brought for £13940 three years ago (2001 X plate 20000 miles, good condition) trade price is £5615. A Golf brought for £14050 three years ago (2001 X plate 20000 miles, good condition) has a trade price of £7395.

That's a difference of £1780 at trade. Dealer price difference is £2040. Even if you do get £1000 more for your focus than book price, you'll still get £780 less than the bloke that paid £110 more and got a Golf.

Even MGs (this surprised me actually); although I there's only listings for 2001/Y reg (they didn't make them before - but still almost 3 years old) a vehicle that originally cost £13455 will cost £7405 at trade. That's £1790 more for a car that cost more than £500 less (OK you've still got to bear in mind the fact that the vehicle is one plate newer); and MG-Rover are renouned for making cars that have high depreciation.

Parkers searches:

MG ZR http://www.parkers.co.uk/pricing/use...e=66&pay=false
Ford Focus http://www.parkers.co.uk/pricing/use...e=65&pay=false
Golf
http://www.parkers.co.uk/pricing/use...e=65&pay=false