Time for a change.....FN2 Type R?

Nasher said:
Depends what you mean by build quality, mechanically (the stuff that matters) Hondas are some of the best built cars you can buy.

Your very unlikely to get slapped with the kind of repair bills you'd see from a BMW. Same goes for most Japanese cars.
Click to expand...

This is the reason why I'm not going for a 335i and spending a little bit more. I'll end up spending even more trying to keep it on the road.

I've found a local Type R, hopefully taking it for a test drive Saturday morning.
 
FN2's look good. I had the old EP3 but despite all the praise I thought the handling was rubbish on road. The suspension always felt like it was too hard and lacking in travel plus the steering feel is non-existent. I only kept mine for 18 months as whilst I loved the engine, gearbox and styling to drive on a bumpy b road it was far too twitchy and quick to lose grip/traction IMO. It's the shortest length of time I've ever owned a car.

I remember the FN2 was criticised at the time for being heavier and slower than it's predecessor plus only having torsion beam suspension but I have a sneaking suspicion it might be a better road car overall.
 
Are there some recommended aftermarket suspension options that introduce some compliance without screwing over the handling?
 
From what i rememeber years ago for a different gen, full polyurethane bushes and either skunk2, buddyclub, tein, spoon or mugen but might have changed considerably since then.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
A geometry reset will improve compliance?
Click to expand...

The fast road setup is normally a set of eibach springs which lower the car 15mm and a geometry setup with some additional shims to help adjust beyond what you can normally change, I don't know the exact details but it's supposed to improve comfort and handling at the expense of slightly increased wear on the inside edges over time.
 
The whole model range is fairly crashy compared to rivals and I'd go as far to say the type r is no worse than the 1.8 in standard trim given the intended audience. It's nothing like as bad as a set of cheap to mid range coilovers in terms of compliance.
 
DazQ87 said:
The fast road setup is normally a set of eibach springs which lower the car 15mm and a geometry setup with some additional shims to help adjust beyond what you can normally change, I don't know the exact details but it's supposed to improve comfort and handling at the expense of slightly increased wear on the inside edges over time.
Click to expand...

It makes little difference to comfort tbh - possibly a tiny bit of improvement through having newer springs but it's marginal. A proper setup is worth it for obvious handling reasons all the same. They're a good handling car for the class even without the independent rear. Better than any golf I've driven, better than my old vrs and marginally better than my MK3 focus (at the expense of firmness)

Drollic said:
The whole model range is fairly crashy compared to rivals and I'd go as far to say the type r is no worse than the 1.8 in standard trim given the intended audience. It's nothing like as bad as a set of cheap to mid range coilovers in terms of compliance.
Click to expand...

Tbh the fn2 is a good bit worse than the standard models, I had a diseasel a couple of years before my FN2 and it was slightly firm, the FN2 is very firm, jarring and actually a little bit annoyingly low as standard.

I'd have another for the money so long as someobody had painted the front end at some point and sorted the roof rust/rubber
 
rodenal said:
It makes little difference to comfort tbh - possibly a tiny bit of improvement through having newer springs but it's marginal. A proper setup is worth it for obvious handling reasons all the same. They're a good handling car for the class even without the independent rear. Better than any golf I've driven, better than my old vrs and marginally better than my MK3 focus (at the expense of firmness)



Tbh the fn2 is a good bit worse than the standard models, I had a diseasel a couple of years before my FN2 and it was slightly firm, the FN2 is very firm, jarring and actually a little bit annoyingly low as standard.

I'd have another for the money so long as someobody had painted the front end at some point and sorted the roof rust/rubber
Click to expand...

Given the characteristics of the performance based models over the years, it's really not that bad although a tad firm would be fair. I'd personally rather slightly too low than high. The rake and arch gap visually on some mid to high end performance cars is truly shocking. The Focus ST of the time was almost silly visually - something like +15mm on the rear as if the wrong springs were fitted (they've done the same with the latest RS, just no).

ford-focus-st-3-53ad7a436d182.jpeg
 
Well I drove the FN2 and I couldn't get used to the power delivery at all. In all honesty it felt absolutely gutless until high up the rev range. I think coming from a torquey diesel to VTEC is too much of a jump for me so back to the drawing board.

Golf GTI Mk5
Focus ST 225
Megane R26 (didn't particularly want to go French)
 
The mk2 Focus ST isn't to bad on our roads, I had one for years. Though if you tune it you will probably need to upgrade the springs as it can get a bit lurchy with more power. A stiffer lower engine mount is a good idea too.

It's the opposite of the VTEC engines, loads of torque low down but not much at the top.
 
Last edited:
Nasher said:
The mk2 Focus ST isn't to bad on our roads, I had one for years. Though if you tune it you will probably need to upgrade the springs as it can get a bit lurchy with more power. A stiffer lower engine mount is a good idea too.

It's the opposite of the VTEC engines, loads of torque low down but not much at the top.
Click to expand...

Aren't they incredibly thirsty? Whilst I'm not doing more than 150 miles a week, I don't really want to be putting £40-50 in :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom