Ford Focus RS Forum banner

Who's gonna be the first to break the RS

10K views 44 replies 28 participants last post by  MidCow3 
#1 ·
Anyone on here have any plans of pushing the platform from the get go. Just want to see who plans on breaking what and then making parts for it. Any guesses on the first thing that breaks?

Ps. I cant wait to get my RS.....coming on this forum is like an addiction and im a fiend.:star::star::star:
 
#7 ·
If I had two RS's, ide treat one like a cheap hooker and one like an escort.
 
#12 ·
Who's going to be the first person to stance one?!
Ugh.
 
#15 ·
 
#17 ·
Now I want to read Caswell's review......
 
#24 ·
Extended warranty + regular Ford maintenance (Gkn fluid change when needed).
Box of donuts maybe for the trusty ford guys working on my beloved RS
= piece of mind to drive it as it was intended without "what if" scenarios.
1st model year for a lot of fancy German parts.
 
#27 ·
exactly, I wont worry bc the car will stay stock and I will enjoy it. If I still like after 50k I will get the extended warranty, and if there are reliability issues I will just trade it in on something else.
 
#30 ·
Well, a friend at Ford that worked on the 2.5 yr development project for the new RS said: the tq boasting system sends tq also independently to each wheel when needed. Oh, and when talking about tq, it's lb/ft kids, not ft/lbs. Anyway, he said the rear dif overheats and shuts down, diverting to fwd only till it cools off. This after hard driving on a track. The other issue is the drivetrain. It's rated at a safe 425 crank hp. Which is a average of 345 at wheels. There is no real way to get to a actual, accurate whp number, it's impossible so manufactures use estimates with an error of upto 15 hp +/-.... The intercooler is fine. And they don't add power anyway, they just prevent power loss when heating up. All told, he said it'll be safe with an extra 50-65 hp crank. Keep in mind too, that 350 hp is 93-95 octane. Those in 91 only states, will have 337-338 hp. Same for Mustang. -10-12 hp on 91.... Based on the numbers coming out, and so far no official road test of a U.S. spec RS, in the U.S., it's slower than the golf R, which did a 4.5 0-60 with 3440 lbs of curb weight and 292hp/282tq. The tested numbers in the UK of 4.7 sec are for 0-100 kph which is 62.5 mph. So....
 
#31 ·
Oh, and when talking about tq, it's lb/ft kids, not ft/lbs. Anyway, he said the rear dif overheats and shuts down, diverting to fwd only till it cools off. This after hard driving on a track. The other issue is the drivetrain. It's rated at a safe 425 crank hp. Which is a average of 345 at wheels. There is no real way to get to a actual, accurate whp number, it's impossible so manufactures use estimates with an error of upto 15
I'm new around here but it seems to me this post has a few issues.

1. WT(heck) are you talking about on the torque units? Torque is the product of force and distance so it is absolutely not lb/ft. Ft-lb or lb-ft are both accurate and equivalent.

2. The drivetrain s not "another issue" separate from the RDU. The RDU is part of the drivetrain.

3. A chassis dynometer is a way to get actual wheel horsepower numbers.
 
#34 ·
I'm afraid Toys'RS was fairly accurate on his post when it comes to the three points that you attempted to correct.

1. Torque is a measurement of pounds per foot, not feet per pound. Usually refered to backwards but completely understood in the automotive community. But I figured if you were going to attempt to correct him I would correct your correction. Technically ft-lb (as it was wrote) is a measurement for energy (or work), how many feet something travels with a pound of force, distance. Torque is lb/ft, as originally posted, how many pounds of force are required or produced at a foot from the pivot or rotation point, twist/pressure.

2. I think when he stated "the other issue" (not "another" as you quoted) he was simple referring to the rest of the system other than the diff, probably wasn't expecting to run into the grammar police.

3. He either meant there is no actual accurate way to get a specific breaking point or maybe that chassis dynos aren't very accurate and seldom used by the automobile manufacturing industry compared to a crank dyno. This is also why when using chassis dynos people use them back to back to compare anything. Otherwise it's just an estimate and tuning tool. Bottom line, no its not accurate, hence the 15 hp error factor he included.
 
#35 ·
Brand new account, did you just make this to try to back up what you said on your Toys'RS account?

Torque, in its simplest form, is a quantity of force (pounds) multiplied by a displacement from the rotation (feet)

The units are pound*feet, not pound/feet.

All of what he said was either already known, or hearsay/rumor.

Also, an intercooler can definitely add power. Lower IATs allow for further spark advance; more power without fear of detonation. It depends on whether or not the ECU can supply that spark advance. That's just a silly statement in the first place. Run a car on a hot humid day, then again on a cold day.

Sorry, but he lost all sense of credibility when he tried to say torque was a divisional unit, then even moreso when he said an intercooler can't add power.

Unless the person who works at Ford is an intern, or a software engineer, I can safely assume 99% of what he said is made up.
 
#36 · (Edited)
After correcting my son's units-cancelling homework for lo' these many years (with some more still to go), this infotainment approach to Units is making me crazy.

People, google is your friend (quoted from Wikipedia):

"One (ft·lb) is the unit of energy transferred on applying a force of one pound-force (lbf) through a LINEAR DISPLACEMENT of one foot." (Caps added by me).

I draw your attention to the words "LINEAR DISPLACEMENT".

Compare this with:

"One (lb-ft) is the TORQUE (aka 'twisting force') created by one pound force acting at a perpendicular distance of one foot from a PIVOT POINT."

I draw your attention to the words, "Acting at a distance from [and rotating around] a Pivot Point."

Meaning the creation of a twisting force, aka the Torque that we all love so well.

So to describe pushing a driveshaft across the floor with your foot (aka linear displacement), the Unit of ft-lb is correct.

To describe twisting a driveshaft, lb-ft is the correct unit to use.

And to be clear, the formula to calculate Torque is really Force multiplied by Distance, so using a "*" to denote multiplication (lb*ft) rather than a "-", would be more correct.

Lastly, using a "/" (or the word "per"), which indicates division, is just completely wrong in all circumstances.

So using "(lb*ft)", or at least "(lb-ft)", is the way to go.
 
#37 ·
No Cam but thanks for asking, I've been reading this forum for a couple months and meaning to sign up, which is my habit with forums (familiarization before joining). And just to clarify, I did not say all of what he said was correct, just pertaining to the three points, but thanks once again. As for an intercooler being a power "adder", well that's up for debate, you will by no doubt get more power from a more efficient intercooler though. And I do not know what he does or doesn't know, I was just correcting the three points that someone called him on that I knew were not that off. As for the "/ or per" AtsuiBoshi, although you are basically correct it is just commonly seen like that so forgive me for the way I put it. I was also thinking of it at the one foot mark so I didn't think of correcting the division concept, most crank measurements are done as if at one foot.
 
#39 ·
But what makes a turbo spin? Is it heat or mass flow?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk
 
#43 ·
I thought that it was hopes, dreams, and a little bit of magic.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top