Mk1 Focus 2litre vs 1.6 or 1.8

But then all of that is negated by going to petrol station X amount of times to fill up more often.

This argument has been done to death!

Cos I'm bored... Technically, if the petrol station you visited was always on route, then it wouldn't cost you any more fuel.

As a disclaimer, I always brim the tank because my time is worth more than the extra potential 1% maximum fuel efficiency.
 
I had the 1.8 focus because 1.6 has rear drums were as 1.8/2.0 had rear discs.

If you get zetec try and get one that had heated front screen, not all of them did until the '04 facelift.
 
Another couple of minor points to bear in mind, the 0-60s are misleading as the 1.6 and 1.8 get to 60 in 2nd, the 2.0 needs 3rd and the 2.0 has a better gearbox (MTX75 rather than IB5).
 
Last edited:
i had a 2.0 mk1 focus

round town the fuel economy was barely better than my 330ci

on a long run at higher speeds it was actually worse
 
The way people are going on about economy you'd think it did 5mpg. I know it's not the best relative to performance, but ~35mpg (which I get around town and a/b roads last count) is not massively worse in terms of cost than a smaller engined car if doing average mileage. I get 40mpg+ over the tank if exclusively on the motorway at 70-75.
 
My guess is you're not talking about the 2litre version or if you are you've put a brick behind the accelerator. I get 26/27mpg average from mine (mixed driving).
 
I had the 1.8 focus because 1.6 has rear drums were as 1.8/2.0 had rear discs.

If you get zetec try and get one that had heated front screen, not all of them did until the '04 facelift.

Not true, my brother's 2000 plate 1.8 had drums. My 1.6 had drums as you stated, but I don't see what difference it makes on a car like this, my 1.6 brakes very effectively (now the linglongs are gone, anyway).
 
Having owned all three engine sizes in 3 door focuses at some point I can categorically say the 2.0 is the one to have
as said previously the 1.8 IS totally pointless, Offering next to no improvment in performance but using more petrol than the 1.6.
The 1.6 alwats felt underpowered to me, having almost zero torque which leads to using a lot more juice as it needs to be revved quite hard everywhere to make any sort of decent progress.
The 2.0 seems just about ok performance wise IT IS NOT quick but definitely adequate. BUT None of them could be cosidered frugal
 
I can confirm that the 1.8 should not be considered, pointless engine really in comparison with the 1.6 and 2.0.

I owned a 1.6 Mk1.5 and it felt quicker, and more responsive than the Mk1 1.8 I had as a company car. Can't comment on the 2.0, but it depends what you want really. The 2.0 will provide you with more grunt on the motorway, but on A and B roads with the minimal power difference you are only as quick as your skill/confidence will let you....

You need to weigh up if fuel efficiency is a big factor in your choice, if so, get the 1.6. I used to get 400miles from a tank, before I stuck some big wheels and lowered it that was...
 
Im coming from a car that rarely got me over 150 miles to a 60 litre tank, so anything is an improvement to mpg. Dont think i have ever owned a car that can do 30+mpg.

I would look at the RS but they held there price to well, got about £3k to spend on the car and insurance. Mondeo ST24 comes in on budget but hated driving it.
 
My guess is you're not talking about the 2litre version or if you are you've put a brick behind the accelerator. I get 26/27mpg average from mine (mixed driving).

Yes, the 2.0. I think you must be driving with your foot flat to the floor everywhere :p

Don't get me wrong, I'm trying to be relatively economical, but not stupidly so, still overtaking and "making progress" when appropriate. If you accelerate hard, the MPG does definitely drop like a stone though, which is a given really.
 
Not true, my brother's 2000 plate 1.8 had drums. My 1.6 had drums as you stated

Thought I would clear this up.
The 1.8L came standard with drums, however there was a 'reflex option' pack which fitted rear discs, the 2.0 litres had rear discs as standard. I brought that focus 1 year old and all the ones I viewed then had rear discs fitted, sorry for any confusion caused.
 
Back
Top Bottom