|
So glad my Focus does not have a DPF, I recently decided not to buy a Volvo V50 with the 2.0 136 ps engine because it had a DPF.
|
|
I understood the Ford DPF system operates differently to Citroens and Peugeots so that may explain why Cits & Pugs seem to have more reported issues.
|
Mike,
If you like everything else about the Focus but find the road noise a problem, it can be quite heavily subdued by aftermarket products, around the rear wheel arches and the boot floor, also in the front footwells where they face the front wheel arches. I've used "damplifier" elastomer sheets on the bare metal, followed by "teklite" closed cell foam.
You could in theory keep going and do the whole floorpan, the door skins and the A, B and C pilars. I really went to town on my current S-Max and brought the noise levels at 70mph down to about 67db on my sound level meter, which is the same as I get from a current Audi A8 ! That may be a bit OTT though.
The 2.0d in the Focus, pre and post facelift, is quite refined most of the time, but harsh (i) at idle when very cold and (ii) under full aceleration above about say 2500rpm. I had a couple of C-Maxes with this engine, plus a Galaxy, and always used to change up by about 2500rpm and ride the torque instead. Much more civilised. The pull from about 35 in 4th in a 2.0d Focus is quite something.
Edited by morellomax on 21/07/2009 at 12:55
|
I test drove a used 2008 Zetec 2.0 136 ps, must admit I was impressed with the overall refinement and the noticable reduction in noise levels compared with the Focus II 2005 version I currently drive. The engine is gusty throughout the rev range and it's smooth whatever the revs, the engine software updates have helped driveability.
The sound insulation improvements Ford made on the upgraded Focus from around 2008 onwards do help and as "morellomax" has pointed out further improvements can be achieved if required. A lot of the rest of the car is so similar to the original Focus II it was like driving my own car, nothing much new to learn just get in and drive.
I still don't consider the central information display is clear enough, the font is too fine for anyone who needs reading glasses but doesn't need driving glasses. Also the fuel and temperature gauges are too smaller, they were just the right size on the original Focus II, now they are upsidedown and too small, attention to these types of detail need to be addressed for the Focus III. Also the silver central surround looks a bit tacky.
Moving the indicator lights to the inside of the headlight cluster rather than leaving them at the extreme outer edge is a negative aspect as are the clear lens rear light clusters which rely on coloured bulbs rather than proper lens covers, this setup takes away from the visual appearance as well as being functionally questionable. Plus point is the indicators on the door mirrors, they are more visible than the previous version, downside is if a mirror is damaged the indicator is likely to not work whereas a door panel indicator is less prone.
Overall, the handling and driving experience are superb, attention to design detail needs reconsidering/improving, would I have one, oh yes. It's a bit of a wait before the Focus III is due out and that has a huge amount of spec changes including new engines.
|
Moving the indicator lights to the inside of the headlight cluster rather than leaving them at the extreme outer edge is a negative aspect
Good Point MT!
Anyone know the thinking behind this? I first saw it on the Golf about 10 years ago. The only reason that I can think of is that the indicator is more prone to being damaged on the corner of the car. However, if that were the thinking behind it, then why put an indicator on the wing mirror? As MT says "...downside is if a mirror is damaged the indicator is likely to not work whereas a door panel indicator is less prone."
|
|
Mike torque - dare I suggest you compare and contrast a 2litre TDi Golf??
|
|
Good idea woodster, do you mean constrast the Focus verses the new Golf Mark VI or the Golf mark V verses the mark VI ?
|
|
I have had the 2.0TDCi in a C-Max for 40,000 miles and now in a Volvo V50 for over 20,000 (08 model). I really like this engine as I find it very smooth and torquey through the gears. The C-Max was slightly quicker but was less tractable in sixth gear while the Volvo is more stable on a twisty road. As far as economy I would agree the egines are not exceptionally economical but adapt to a given driving style. My old Golf IV 150Tdi was consistently more economical while much quicker than both. The C-Max really changed after 20k miles and economy leapt from around 40 mpg to mid 40s. The Volvo is even more economical but relies heavilly on driving style. A heavy right foot and no thought - 38-40 mpg. Let the spped build more gently and no standing starts and low 50s achieveable. I am looking forward to getting one of the DrivE 1.6D next week when the V50 is in for service and will post comments.
|
|
Anyone know the thinking behind this? I first saw it on the Golf about 10 years ago. The only reason that I can think of is that the indicator is more prone to being damaged on the corner of the car.
SQ
The answer is obvious. No need to make a hole in a body panel so less rust, cheper to build as there nothing to do other than to press it and paint it, its more reliable as there is no wiring where it can get wet.
In the mirror, it can be built in as part of the mirror assembly, the wiring is there (usually) for the electric operation and heating of the mirror, so eay to build, very reliable, less rust. And if it gets hit, simply replace the unit. QED
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 22/07/2009 at 12:31
|
It'll be fine! The 2.0 Ford/PSA diesel seems quite quiet and smooth when I tried one in a 407 and it was subjectively quieter than the 1.9 GM/Fiat diesel engine I have in my Astra.
The engine seemed a little underpowered in the 407 but thats considerably bigger than the Focus so I suspect it will "go" quite nicely.
P.S. The 407 I drove definately hadnt aged well for only 40K miles - "a bag of bolts" springs to mind, but the engine was fine!
|
How does it the Focus 2.0 TDCi 136 ps compare with a Golf Vi 2.0 ?
Well I've now tested them and have to say the Golf 2.0 engine is a gem. The Golf TDI 110 and 140 are smooth and quiet from tick over, the throttle response is instant, they are superb engines. The ride is good although road noise is well suppressed it can still be heard on rough surfaces, however, the Focus Style is similar whereas the Zetec is slightly more noticeable. The Golf VI overall quality and attention to design detail is also superb. The driver information dials etc. are clear and easy to see, nothing fancy but clarity and straight in the eye information flow is excellent. Seating is spot on, nice comfort and shape. Steering is slightly heavy and could do with Focus like steering options. The Golf's brakes are over assisted and lack feel, you only have to breath on them and the car does an emergency stop, nice for some people but I prefer a little less assistance and more feel. The Golf's handling is predictable and involving but the Focus is more so.
Golf negative points, not enough colours in the range to choose from, used mark VI's are rare so expect a 2 to 3 month wait for a new one, more expensive to buy than a Focus but used values hold up better.
The Focus Zetec front centre arm rest needs height adjustment or a flexible side inner storage box to allow the arm rest to be lowered. It's a pain reaching over the top of it to change gear and apply the hand brake, and it becomes noticeably worse the further back the drivers seat is positioned. If the arm rest top is raised (to get it out of the way) it then wobbles and can creak due to vibration, it's now heavier than the original Focus II front arm rest, anyway I don't need a centre arm rest so for me it's a waste of space. The build quality of the upgraded Focus II and Golf are similar.
Conclusion, both the Golf VI and Focus II each have their merits as well as their weaknesses. The Golf is marginally the better packaged, the Focus is the better drivers car and cost less to purchase new, plus lots of used ones available.
|
Both very good cars, with different pluses and minuses as people have pointed out.
A VW is better value bought new, a Ford secondhand, as VWs hold their value better (partly through perception of build quality, mainly because there are lots of ex-fleet Focuses around). If you're buying used, I should think there are some good bargains to be had if you go for a Focus.
|
|
|
|
