Mountune ST vs Focus RS

thepharcyde · 1 Oct 2009 at 21:06

Makes for some interesting reading. Somewhat makes that £25k basic list seem expensive for the RS

Focus ST Mountune = 256bhp
Focus RS = 300bhp

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evolongtermtests/237880/ford_focus_st_mountune_and_focus_rs.html

Gerard · 1 Oct 2009 at 21:10

I thought the rs top speed was around 162 or so. :confused:

ajstan · 1 Oct 2009 at 21:10

Surely the RS should be faster than the ST in more or less every situation ... I reckon the RS had a fat driver

jamief · 1 Oct 2009 at 21:13

I don't think the RS is designed for 0-60 challenges either.

thepharcyde · 1 Oct 2009 at 21:15

It would be interesting to get a rolling road readout for these Mountune cars. A Dreamscience chip alone makes a claimed 270bhp so unless Mountune are being very conservative on the map they load up, let alone the filter and new intercooler then they are possibly higher than their claimed 256bhp?

thepharcyde · 1 Oct 2009 at 21:16

Gerard said:
I thought the rs top speed was around 162 or so.

Those figures above are what they achieved with the space they had

Sukh · 1 Oct 2009 at 21:43

Isn't the RS about handling as well, or do we all drive cars in straight lines?

Sin_Chase · 1 Oct 2009 at 23:22

The RS is faster than that to 60.

Skeeter · 1 Oct 2009 at 23:25

I think the feeling has been that Ford took Mountunes initial estimated figures as fact and didnt seem to fussed because they werent close to the RS. But in reality it turns out the Mountune is a bit better than they were letting on.

Eliot · 1 Oct 2009 at 23:26

those figures seem dubious

Vigoro · 1 Oct 2009 at 23:30

Sin_Chase said:
The RS is faster than that to 60.

It is still slower than that mountune though, as same equipment and no doubt same drivers were used to record the data

Skeeter · 1 Oct 2009 at 23:35

Id take figures from real people driving them on a real track over manufacturer supplied figures any day...