• Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

    Welcome to the #1 Fiesta ST Forum and Fiesta ST community dedicated to Fiesta ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Fiesta ST Forum today!


2018 Next Gen Ford Fiesta Revealed

Messages
315
Likes
87
Location
Weymouth
Of course, but IF AWD is such a disadvantage, even in all conditions (as you say), then WHY is it still the given drive train setup in WRC/R5/etc., despite NONE of the current cars competing in this series offering this configuration in the street/publicly available models which are used as a basis for the rally machines, making a complicated, and homologated, rally spec 'kit' a necessity to go with AWD?? [dunno]

Even when there was talk about changing the WRC spec rules to FWD ONLY in the recent past, there was MAJOR push back on that issue from the majority of the manufacturers AND competitors.

Do ALL of the fanboys of the Nippon 'rally twins' (Evos/STIs/WRXes) literally hate that their rides have drive going to the rear wheels as well as the front, and would actually prefer them to be ONLY FWD? [???:)]
Ok, I'm not saying AWD is a major disadvantage, I'm merely saying people would spill blood for something that has positives and negatives. I'm into drivers cars and weight is a major factor in that formula, along with distribution, AWD is not friendly to either of those. AWD became a thing in WRC because of the Quattro, but that is only because RWD is the worst set up when it comes to a loose surface. If you are trying to put down gobbles of power like WRC Supercars run, then AWD is a must, but if your not then it is a waste. When it comes to rally believe it or not a stock FiST is about the limit for FWD but remember to be fast in FWD you have to be perfect and that goes back to driver skill instead of being more biased to the vehicle when it comes to winning a race. Do I want the WRC to be FWD, hell no, but if you think a FiST with some good tires and a skilled driver wouldn't hold a candle to a STI on a Rally stage then you would be wrong.

I'm not an AWD hater per say, I merely look at what the vehicle is intended for and put my biases based on the application. If you think a sub 300hp car from the factory requires AWD to be an incredible hot hath then this is where I disagree. I would rather it be 200 lbs lighter and be able to change direction very quickly. We all have different opinions about vehicles and what they mean to us, I just more have a problem with people thinking FWD is rubbish when I know first hand it's potential across multiple conditions and surfaces.
 


M-Sport fan

9000 Post Club
Messages
14,000
Likes
6,697
Location
Princeton, N.J.
^^^Basically, I DO agree with what you've stated, and I can remember actually watching Tim O'Neil beating open class, AWD rally competitors in a FWD G5 spec car, or even production class FWD cars, in SCCA Pro Rally/Rally America events.

So YES, skill, being 'perfect', and determination factor MUCH more than having AWD in being quick.

But put two equally skilled rally drivers ('pilots') in a FWD, vs. an AWD car of similar power, on almost any surface, and guess who wins?
 


Messages
315
Likes
87
Location
Weymouth
^^^Basically, I DO agree with what you've stated, and I can remember actually watching Tim O'Neil beating open class, AWD rally competitors in a FWD G5 spec car, or even production class FWD cars, in SCCA Pro Rally/Rally America events.

So YES, skill, being 'perfect', and determination factor MUCH more than having AWD in being quick.

But put two equally skilled rally drivers ('pilots') in a FWD, vs. an AWD car of similar power, on almost any surface, and guess who wins?
Yes we will agree to disagree lol. Good thing for me is that their is a snowballs chance in hell of an AWD FiRS, I just hope there is a case for the FiRS in general. I think we can both agree no matter FWD or AWD it will be one worthy of the RS badge. Either way I already believe with aftermarket support I can get my FiST up to what I believe a FiRS would represent and plan to. The next Gen may be a toughie and a lot of open ended questions, weight, and powertrain being the biggest. You can only get so much out of a 1.0 (if that's true) and still be drivable daily, a FiRS may be the only way to get my but into a Fiesta for my next car. It will be interesting to see but so far my little FiST has amazing potential and I don't plan on getting out of it for a fancier version if it doesn't meet my performance potential requirements.
 


Messages
315
Likes
87
Location
Weymouth
^^^Is the exhaust manifold an integral part of the head (i.e.; permanently attached) on BOTH the 2.0 AND the 2.3 Ecoboost powerplants? [dunno]
Didn't see this, quote next time lol. Yes, for both. The 2.0 though was never really meant to be a performance engine, the 2.3 on the other hand was made just for that. That's kind of the problem and I have been out of the FoST game for a bit when I jumped to the RS world but people run some pretty decent size turbos for a 2.0 to break 400whp. The 2.3 does very decent even with a headifold, and kind of shows the difference between displacement and good engineering. Headifolds are not necessarily a horrible thing but are mostly done for emissions.
 


M-Sport fan

9000 Post Club
Messages
14,000
Likes
6,697
Location
Princeton, N.J.
Same here, Crooked Letta, as far as keeping THIS car, and being able to match, or even FAR surpass anything an actual official FiRS could provide performance-wise.

Unless it somehow was a 3 door, with huge, WRC style box flares/aero on it (like the pic above^^^), with a STANDARD Quaife diff, while being even lighter, and much more powerful yet than the current ST, AND still NOT stupid amounts of coin more to buy, I am NOT interested in a FWD 'FiRS'. [wink]
 


Messages
105
Likes
19
Location
palm harbor
Yeah, I'm good with mine. I'd probably just go with the FoST at this point. Not a fan of the rear at all.
First thing I thought! I was pissed that I just bought a new 16 and the next body style was coming out but I'm not a fan of that rear end!
 


jayrod1980

Active member
Messages
776
Likes
189
Location
Viva Las Vegas!
Hopefully to meet these Tier 3 particulate standards, EVERY EcoBoost engine will be both Direct and Port injected. Adding port injection, like they have done on the RWD based 3.5 Ecoboost, and next year's 2.7 will solve the dirty valve issue, and give the car some room for more power.
 


jayrod1980

Active member
Messages
776
Likes
189
Location
Viva Las Vegas!
Give us a real ST with some minor improvements, and I'll take one sans sunroof. Please update the 1.6T to port/direct injection like the 3.5 and 2.7 in the F-150 and the 5.0 Mustang and I'll be happy. The interior is a HUGE upgrade.

Another perspective on the floating touchscreen: It's not the prettiest design, but companies are using it because it allows for a significantly larger screen, placed closer to the driver without having to sacrifice interior room with a giant dash or housing. Since I've seen it on Mazda's it has definitely grown on me. Please increase the amount of soft touch materials though to beyond the dash. The dash was fine... it was the hard door cards and the rest of the hard plastic. Hard touch plastic scratches if you even look at it wrong, and the lack of any color contrast in the interior is also amps up the cheapness factor.

I still love my ST, but I will definitely be looking at this car if it comes out with a true ST replacement. I think I would trade mine in tomorrow if it had an AWD version with at least the 1.6T.
 


M-Sport fan

9000 Post Club
Messages
14,000
Likes
6,697
Location
Princeton, N.J.
I think I would trade mine in tomorrow if it had an AWD version with at least the 1.6T.
+1!
But, most on here think that Ford will NEVER, EVER make this car AWD (and they have some really compelling reasons/arguments as to WHY), and some who actually do not want AWD (think it is useless, and will "ruin" this car [???:)]).

I agree with you, and will take it any/every day of the week over FWD (despite the added weight!), and yes, even if it is a "crappy"/not 'true' system (as many claim) as in the FoRS.[thumb] [wink]
 


Brura22

Active member
Messages
579
Likes
145
Location
Clovis
Ugh, I really really don't like the body style.
Interior is a huge thumbs up from me, and the possible standard LSD from the factory.

Always seems to happen with next gen cars. One things goes to shit and the other things get better.
If they go any smaller than 1.6 on the engine I'll be extremely disappointed.
 


Messages
453
Likes
156
Location
West Bloomfield
+1!
But, most on here think that Ford will NEVER, EVER make this car AWD (and they have some really compelling reasons/arguments as to WHY), and some who actually do not want AWD (think it is useless, and will "ruin" this car [???:)]).
If Ford makes the Fiesta ST AWD I will send you a 6-pack hehe. Performance products are not big sellers/money makers and the physical chassis was not designed for AWD. The R&D cost will be way higher than any revenue that could be generated from making an AWD ST.
 


Waterfan

Active member
Messages
565
Likes
171
Location
SoCal
What would people want to see from an ST off this new model?

Horsepower & Torque numbers, new equipment or upgrades to existing
Only read half the thread, didn't see these mentioned yet:
1. New ST would be awesome with ample space in the wells for 225 rubber (or better). (17" wheels would then make much more sense and provide 10x more performance tire choices. And open the door to the almighty PSS)
2. 4x100 bolt pattern instead of our goofy 4x108, for ~100x more aftermarket wheel options.
3. Don't NEED IRS, but it would be a nice performance and ride-comfort upgrade at the expense of cost, weight, complexity.
4. Lighter-weight construction materials. Drop another 100lbs from this thing and even if the power is the same it will be faster and more economical. (Save ~30lbs on the nose with a hi-po version of the 1.0T? ~220 whp, 45+mpg hwy. Sounds awesome to me at least!)

I love the LSD for FWD idea too.

Not for me, but it would grow the community/popularity 2x+ if they offered a Dual-Clutch Automatic option.

EDIT: So I finished the thread and now see more than half of my above WERE already mentioned. [:p]
 


M-Sport fan

9000 Post Club
Messages
14,000
Likes
6,697
Location
Princeton, N.J.
Performance products are not big sellers/money makers and the physical chassis was not designed for AWD. The R&D cost will be way higher than any revenue that could be generated from making an AWD ST.
Only two of the many reasons/arguments against the possibility of an AWD FiRS I was referencing. [wink] [:(]
 


Similar threads



Top