According to Shell's own material data sheets, V-Power is guaranteed 99 octane, putting it on a par with Tesco's Momentum 99.
Does the Tesco stuff have more bioethonol in it? I've seen (over on the Mazda3 forum [yes, we have one folks!], though mainly owners of the 2.0 Sport and 2.3/2.5T MPS [very similar/same engines as in the Focus ST/RS]) others warn me off using that stuff, others say its ok as they now put other additives in it to counteract the negative effects of the bioethonol.
I'd rather go with the brand name stuff if I owned a performance car (why scrimp on the fuel when you're not on the car), especially as it'll keep the engine in better condition/last longer through its extra cleaning additives as well as the extra mpg/performance. I'm going to try and run my bog-standard 1.6 petrol 3 on it over the next month/1000 miles whilst on holiday in the South West and another long journey to see if has (V-Power) any effect on the performance, mpg or feel (smoother - injector cleaning?), in addition to putting a bit of Redex in once or twice. The stuff probably makes more of a difference on older cars that aren't well cared for (mine is though), so we'll see.
|
|
The Focus RS is an outstanding package, and point to point is hard to beat. There seems to be not many bargains about though if you are buying brand new as for many Ford Dealers a discount is out of the question for this model. If it was mine I would run it on 98 octane at a minimum to ensure I got every bit of performance out of the beast.
Hope you enjoy it, a really superb vehicle in all respects.
|
If it was mine I would run it on 98 octane at a minimum to ensure I got every bit of performance out of the beast.
I hope that would be on a circuit and not on a public road.
|
|
I might be tempted to cruise at a speedo indicated 72mph in 6th gear and be reckless! Taking the car trackdays would also be great fun. Having owned a string of performance Ford vehicles in the past I do feel that this current RS is the best yet to be released by the blue oval.
|
|
|
If it was mine I would run it on 98 octane at a minimum to ensure I got every bit of performance out of the beast.
I hope that would be on a circuit and not on a public road.
High acceleration can be used legally.
|
High acceleration can be used legally.
Don't disagree with that but where on a public road could you use the max acceleration a standard RS provides. Traffic is usually too dense and if you are doing say 30 mph the time taken to the legal limit on a A road (50 or 60 mph) would be seconds. Then after overtaking you need to brake to pull back into the gap. The extra performance gained by re-mapping the car is pointless.
My Caterham can overtake as well (if not better) than most cars on the road yet its difficult to use that performance these days. Even if traffic conditions allow many drivers take exception to being overtaken and close up the gap to prevent you getting back in. I have been left with nowhere to go on several occations, only the cooperation of the oncoming car has prevented disaster.
Ignoring the Caterham the 140 PS TSi Leon was without doubt the quickest road car I have ever owned and overtaking in that was easy using the adequate torque the engine has. I never felt that a huge increase would be of benefit and make A to B driving quicker simply because it wouldn't.
People need to get a reality check.
|
My Caterham can overtake as well (if not better) than most cars on the road yet its difficult to use that performance these days. Even if traffic conditions allow many drivers take exception to being overtaken and close up the gap to prevent you getting back in. I have been left with nowhere to go on several occations, only the cooperation of the oncoming car has prevented disaster.
People need to get a reality check.
If the gap is so small that it can vanish so quickly, then it probably wasn't really there in the first place.
The only times that has happened to me, it's, on reflection, almost certainly been my fault, in attempting an overtake that wasn't really on.
Furthermore, with the acceleration in the RS being so savage (for want of a better word), then surely it means that the person being overtaken will have even less of a chance to obstruct and close that gap. By the time they've started to accelerate, the RS would have completed the maneuver and be back in line.
|
If the gap is so small that it can vanish so quickly, then it probably wasn't really there in the first place.
Not the case at all. Been driving long enough to read the road ahead. Never happened in the Leon or other cars, the drivers being overtaken by the Caterham seem to take exception and I do wonder if this is simply envy or stupidity.
|
Not the case at all. Been driving long enough to read the road ahead. Never happened in the Leon or other cars, the drivers being overtaken by the Caterham seem to take exception and I do wonder if this is simply envy or stupidity.
There's a certain type of driver that simply doesn't like being overtaken, irrespective of the make / model of car that's doing the overtaking.
They belong in the same class as those who sit in lane 3 of motorways doing exactly 70mph (according to their speedometer reading), because that's the speed limit.
|
|
|
"Not the case at all. Been driving long enough to read the road ahead. Never happened in the Leon or other cars, the drivers being overtaken by the Caterham seem to take exception and I do wonder if this is simply envy or stupidity"
Interesting to read that. I've never driven one but always fancied a wee blast in a Caterham. I've driven all sorts of other performance metal however, from genuine supercars (on hire) to hot hatches and I love a good B road blast. Doesn't have to involve much power either, often less is more fun and I've ran several MX-5's with this sort of escape in mind. Never once have I found myself on the wrong side of the road with nowhere to go however. If I seen someone driving recklessly (driving too close to me etc) I may be tempted to close up a gap but common sense would null that thought before I acted on it. You're better letting them go than holding them up...
|
|
|
|
|
|
"...only the cooperation of the oncoming car has prevented disaster."
That is such an admission of poor judgement. Co-operation? Evasive action? Defensive driving? Did the driver of the oncoming car have any choice? I bet they were uttering a few choice words.
|
|
|
High acceleration can be used legally.
Don't disagree with that but where on a public road could you use the max acceleration a standard RS provides. Traffic is usually too dense and if you are doing say 30 mph the time taken to the legal limit on a A road (50 or 60 mph) would be seconds. Then after overtaking you need to brake to pull back into the gap. The extra performance gained by re-mapping the car is pointless.
My Caterham can overtake as well (if not better) than most cars on the road yet its difficult to use that performance these days. Even if traffic conditions allow many drivers take exception to being overtaken and close up the gap to prevent you getting back in. I have been left with nowhere to go on several occations, only the cooperation of the oncoming car has prevented disaster.
Ignoring the Caterham the 140 PS TSi Leon was without doubt the quickest road car I have ever owned and overtaking in that was easy using the adequate torque the engine has. I never felt that a huge increase would be of benefit and make A to B driving quicker simply because it wouldn't.
People need to get a reality check.
I agree that, unless a person is buying a car like the Focus RS for 'posing' purposes (one-upmanship on their mates' cars) or as a 'weekend' and or track day car (perfectly fine), its of little day-to-day value over a Focus ST 2ltr or even ST-Line 1.5T, or similar engined Volvos (T3) & VAG cars, especially if you factor in the very low-slung and hard ride of the RS being used on the UK's pothole-riven, porly surfaced roads with its many speed humps.
The 'overtaking' problem, on both urban and country roads, is something many of us (including myself) have come across a lot - even with really high performance cars, its often nigh on impossible (unless you take BIG risks) if, as often happens, you get stuck behind a slow moving lorry followed by more than one other vehicle (especially if its an average or lower-powered vehicle or new/less confident driver).
If I were the OP, I would also forget about the remap if they are going to use the car every day for commuting, even if they use it as a track day car occasionally too, and spend the money on the best quality fuels, oils and maintenance. If it is to be mainly a track day car and only occasionally taken out (other than to go to the track) on weekends, then fair enough, as long as they can still easily afford the aforementioned costs (which will keep the car in great nick for longer and the eventual resale price higher) plus insurance. If its to be a 'modding car', well, like my former colleague with his 'DB5' project, that is a different kettle of fish altogether, as its not done to make money (mostly).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does the Tesco stuff have more bioethonol in it? I've seen (over on the Mazda3 forum [yes, we have one folks!], though mainly owners of the 2.0 Sport and 2.3/2.5T MPS [very similar/same engines as in the Focus ST/RS]) others warn me off using that stuff, others say its ok as they now put other additives in it to counteract the negative effects of the bioethonol.
I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe the Tesco Momentum is 10% ethanol, whereas most pump fuel in the UK is 5%, and Shell state that V-Power is max 5% ethanol content.
|
|
Thanks for all the positive replies guys!
I decided on V-Power, so we shall see how it pans out.
I don't care if people have faster cars, I drive for the sheer joy of it, and the RS has already provided plenty of that for me. I didn't even need to be going fast to feel the grin spreading.
We picked the car up yesterday and came home via Ladybower and Snake pass ( quite a detour considering we live in Scarborough ) and even being gentle with the car, it is an absolute monster and I seriously love it. I didn't go above 4000rpm either!
The smiles per gallon are seemingly endless, and we got several approving shouts coming back through the villages between Glossop and Holmfirth.
I never overtake in a situation where an idiot can make things difficult for me either, that would be silly. Having said that, nobody has ever tried to stop me getting back in after overtaking.
This car is fantastic, and I'm looking forward to getting a few more miles on it so I can open it up.
Awesome!
Edited by Finguz on 11/08/2017 at 08:18
|
"...only the cooperation of the oncoming car has prevented disaster."
That is such an admission of poor judgement. Co-operation? Evasive action? Defensive driving? Did the driver of the oncoming car have any choice? I bet they were uttering a few choice words.
I never overtake if conditions are not safe. But you cannot take into acount the stupidity of the person you are overtaking. A crash in a Caterham is going to hurt far more than crashing a modern saloon car and I would not put myself in such a situation.
I feel sorry for the person who had to cooperate to prevent disaster. They probably blame me without knowing its the idot who closed the gap for some unknown reason that created the situation.
If the road ahead is clear and there are gaps to pull into its safe to make an overtake, Its the person that closes the gap that has poor judgement not me.
It should also be noted that the people who do this have had their families in the car which they are putting at risk.
Sensible drivers leave room and do not stop people form pulling in after overtaking.
Do not put the balme on me.
|
|
<< If the road ahead is clear and there are gaps to pull into its safe to make an overtake, Its the person that closes the gap that has poor judgement not me .... Do not put the blame on me. >>
If you wipe out in your Caterham, Skidpan, an argument about blame is almost irrelevant. I suppose it's difficult to allow for an 'idot' closing your gap unexpectedly, but perhaps you have to consider the possibility.
|
|
|
|
"If the road ahead is clear and there are gaps to pull into its safe to make an overtake, Its the person that closes the gap that has poor judgement not me."
You're supposed to factor in the unexpected and drive defensively, not hope for the best - i.e. that the gap is still there when you need it. The idea is that every other driver is probably an idiot, but you're not supposed to be one.
"I feel sorry for the person who had to cooperate to prevent disaster. They probably blame me without knowing its the idot who closed the gap for some unknown reason that created the situation."
Of course they blame you - they see a car hurtling towards them on the wrong wide of the road. And if there was an accident, best of luck in trying to convince police, insurance companies et al. that you were "forced" into a collision.
|
|
|
"...only the cooperation of the oncoming car has prevented disaster."
That is such an admission of poor judgement. Co-operation? Evasive action? Defensive driving? Did the driver of the oncoming car have any choice? I bet they were uttering a few choice words.
I never overtake if conditions are not safe. But you cannot take into acount the stupidity of the person you are overtaking. A crash in a Caterham is going to hurt far more than crashing a modern saloon car and I would not put myself in such a situation.
I feel sorry for the person who had to cooperate to prevent disaster. They probably blame me without knowing its the idot who closed the gap for some unknown reason that created the situation.
If the road ahead is clear and there are gaps to pull into its safe to make an overtake, Its the person that closes the gap that has poor judgement not me.
It should also be noted that the people who do this have had their families in the car which they are putting at risk.
Sensible drivers leave room and do not stop people form pulling in after overtaking.
Do not put the balme on me.
Your attitude to overtaking is terrible.
The idiot in this case IS you, and you ARE to blame.
As others have also posted, you are supposed to anticipate the actions of others. Maybe one of those 'gaps' you're aiming for is being closed down by someone starting an overtake maneuver of their own - they've started accelerating, and all of a sudden there's this muppet in a Caterham trying to squeeze in.
|
|
Delighted that you're enjoying the RS, Finguz - clearly using it as it's meant to be used, with even more to come when it's fully run-in.
There's a sub-plot in this thread about overtaking, the crucial point of which I think either I'm missing or someone else is - "the co-operation of the oncoming car". Surely if you're planning to overtake, particularly if it involves more than one slower car, there shouldn't be any risk of any oncoming car?
|
There's a sub-plot in this thread about overtaking, the crucial point of which I think either I'm missing or someone else is - "the co-operation of the oncoming car". Surely if you're planning to overtake, particularly if it involves more than one slower car, there shouldn't be any risk of any oncoming car?
Nothing to do with the cooperation of the oncoming car. Its about issues caused by the deliberate closing of the gap by the driver being overtaken to prevent you getting in.
Your attitude to overtaking is terrible.
The idiot in this case IS you, and you ARE to blame.
As others have also posted, you are supposed to anticipate the actions of others. Maybe one of those 'gaps' you're aiming for is being closed down by someone starting an overtake maneuver of their own - they've started accelerating, and all of a sudden there's this muppet in a Caterham trying to squeeze in.
RobJP. For someone who normally posts sensible answers I am stunned at your post. The problems are caused by the dangerous driving of the slower car who for some reason seems to resent being overtaken by a driver who wants to press on. Its fine anticipating but when a driver carries out a totally irresponsible action i.e. preventing a car that has overtaken getting back in when there is oncoming traffic there can be no crystal ball on the planet that could forcast this action.
For suggesting that my attitude is terrible you deserve to go on my ever increasingly long list of total feckwits.
|
|
" Its about issues caused by the deliberate closing of the gap by the driver being overtaken to prevent you getting in."
Yes, we know. You said it before. The point is, you shouldn't assume anything about other drivers - and in fact it's well undersood by any experienced driver that that's what others sometimes do. Ignoring the possibility of it happening is idiotic.
"...you deserve to go on my ever increasingly long list of total feckwits."
Don't be so childish. That remark says more about you than anyone else.
Someone else who can't take criticism.
|
|
Impossible to know without being there whose fault it was, surely? There's too much judgement involved and it might not be easy even with a video of the whole thing.
It's not forbidden, or necessarily unwise, to overtake a vehicle with another one in front of it if there is a decent space to get back in.
If another driver is irresponsible and nasty enough to block an overtaker from pulling back in, then that driver is clearly at the very least a contributor to the consequences.
What I would say is that the overtaker is primarily responsible for ensuring that the manouevre can be completed safely but inevitably there some reliance on others not to behave obstructively.
I find it irritating to be overtaken when in a line of traffic as far as the eye can see (last happened yesterday on the A428 eastbound between the Black Cat roundabout and Ermine St where the A428 becomes dual) but I ease off as they pass to increase safety and just rebuild my safety gap.
I happens to me occasionally because I tend to drive 150m back from the car in front when there is clearly no real prospect of making faster progess. That way I can manage my own speed and braking rather than it being dictated by somebody else. Some people just can't bear to see that space without wanting to rush into it, it seems.
Edited by Manatee on 11/08/2017 at 15:55
|
Don't be so childish. That remark says more about you than anyone else.
Me being childish. That is the job of those that do not allow others to overtake safely.
Those who suggest that its not the fault of the persion who acts irresponsibly by creating a dangerous situation are also being childish.
If you seriously believe that the person who closes the gap is in the right perhaps you need to attend a driving course.
Overtaking is not illegal, on many roads there are signs tha say "Allow Overtaking".
|
|
Skidpan, arguing about whose fault it is, or what is illegal, is not really here or there. You could understandably complain at the car you are trying to pass moving into the space before you can. However that driver has every right to do so, though you might accuse him of being deliberately obstructive. If there were to be an 'incident', blaming that driver for not allowing you in just prompts the question of whether you misjudged the overtaking opportunity. Mr Toad would have done just the same, but more aggressively ?
And I suspect you may have an unusually lengthy 'list of feckwits'.
Edited by Andrew-T on 11/08/2017 at 19:43
|
You could understandably complain at the car you are trying to pass moving into the space before you can. However that driver has every right to do so,
So its perfectly OK in your opinion to block a car overtaking you from getting back in by moving into the space that was there when they began the manouvre.
Well that says it all. I hope you never get into a similar situation.
|
|
<< So its perfectly OK in your opinion to block a car overtaking you from getting back in by moving into the space that was there when they began the manouvre. >>
You are at it again (and again ...) - putting your own words into your opponent's mouth (keyboard). I never said (or even implied) that anyone's actions were 'OK', merely that the scenario we are discussing can happen - which you clearly agree with, as you say you have experienced it.
I remember, as a rather raw young driver, having to take to the verge to avoid an oncoming car trying to pass a string of traffic and having no escape route - rather like the imaginary oncoming vehicle in your own story. I can't remember whether it was a case of not being allowed to pull in, I was too concerned with saving my own skin.
|
You could understandably complain at the car you are trying to pass moving into the space before you can. However that driver has every right to do so,
So its perfectly OK in your opinion to block a car overtaking you from getting back in by moving into the space that was there when they began the manouvre.
As a variation on the scenario, the gap ahead which you intend to pull smartly into, may be closed because a vehicle 2 or 3 cars ahead has decided to slow down, maybe to turn. Where does the blame go then?
|
SYou could understandably complain at the car you are trying to pass moving into the space before you can. However that driver has every right to do so,
Not if he is deliberately preventing the other driver overtaking him, unless you think he has a "right" to drive dangerously.
Evidence might be a challenge, but I should think a court would come down quite hard on that. And of course if the worst happened and that evidence was available, it could be 'death by dangerous', minimum 2 years custodial.
|
Skidpan, arguing about whose fault it is, or what is illegal, is not really here or there. You could understandably complain at the car you are trying to pass moving into the space before you can. However that driver has every right to do so, though you might accuse him of being deliberately obstructive. If there were to be an 'incident', blaming that driver for not allowing you in just prompts the question of whether you misjudged the overtaking opportunity. Mr Toad would have done just the same, but more aggressively ?
And I suspect you may have an unusually lengthy 'list of feckwits'.
While your last point is almost certainly correct Andrew(!), if you look in the highway code (rule 168) regarding 'being overtaken', this is what is said:
"If a driver is trying to overtake you, maintain a steady course and speed, slowing down if necessary to let the vehicle pass. Never obstruct drivers who wish to pass. Speeding up or driving unpredictably while someone is overtaking you is dangerous. Drop back to maintain a 2 second gap if someone overtakes and pulls into the gap in front of you".
So if the driver being overtaken is aware that he (or she) is being overtaken, he does not have the 'right' to close the gap, in fact he definately should not be doing so. Of course, if an accident were to happen, proving who did what might be tricky.
I have to say though, i still find it difficult to believe that with a car as small and fast as skidpans caterham, how anyone would manage to react quick enough to close the gap before the overtake had been completed. Especially given how small a gap a caterham could fit into!.
|
|
"If you seriously believe that the person who closes the gap is in the right perhaps you need to attend a driving course."
I don't believe that, nor have I implied it.
The driver who deliberately closes the gap is an idiot, but I do not see why blaming them, failing to anticipate and relying on the approaching traffic to help you out of a tight spot is any less idiotic.
And who said anything about overtaking not being legal?
You seem to be thrashing around trying to grab at anything in this argument.
Edited by FP on 11/08/2017 at 20:36
|
|
Here are the facts again.
There is plenty of space between the car in front of me and the car in front of that.
The car coming towards me is more than far enough away to allow an overtake.
As per Roadcraft ( the Police driving manual for those who do not know) I carefully pull out and asess the conditions and since all is in order I accelerate hard to enable me to get back to a position of safety i.e. the left side of the road as quickly as possible. (i do not actually believe this is the best way in a low powered car but for a high powered car it most certainly is).
But the idiot I am overtaking closes up the gap to prevent me from pulling in and instead of being safe on my own side of the road I find myself in a dangerous position with a car heading towards me.
Since the Caterham is small and the oncoming driver pulls over to their left we pass with liitle but enough space between us.
Now please tell me what i did wrong?
|
Here are the facts again.
There is plenty of space between the car in front of me and the car in front of that.
The car coming towards me is more than far enough away to allow an overtake.
As per Roadcraft ( the Police driving manual for those who do not know) I carefully pull out and asess the conditions and since all is in order I accelerate hard to enable me to get back to a position of safety i.e. the left side of the road as quickly as possible. (i do not actually believe this is the best way in a low powered car but for a high powered car it most certainly is).
But the idiot I am overtaking closes up the gap to prevent me from pulling in and instead of being safe on my own side of the road I find myself in a dangerous position with a car heading towards me.
Since the Caterham is small and the oncoming driver pulls over to their left we pass with liitle but enough space between us.
Now please tell me what i did wrong?
Not backing off - there are times when it's necessary - and then go again afterwards.
It's no different to two lanes into one after traffic lights - go for it by all means, but be prepared to back off in the interests of everyone's safety.
I always overtake on full power, to minimise my time exposed in the "wrong" lane.
|
|
"Here are the facts again."
Repeating it all doesn't really add anything to the discussion. In fact, some of it has been repeated more than once.
"Now please tell me what i did wrong?"
Several of us have told you. Again, repeating it all just because you're being obstinate doesn't alter it or add anything to it.
Can we all move on, please?
|
|
Yes, we can. Thread closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
