|
Buy a Golf, its a nicer looking car. (said he being totally biased and having defended the ugliest BMW in history by saying it doesn't matter when you're sitting in it) :-0
|
|
|
|
At £5k, it's the Focus all the way. Ford reliability is at least as good as VW. In fact I had far less problems with a Mk 2 Mondeo over 5 1/2 years than 3 Mk IV Golf owners I know had with their cars. On that small sample, I would be tempted to suggest that the Ford may even be better.
|
|
I suppose in the end it comes down to whether you like blue or green dash lighting at night.
|
I suppose in the end it comes down to whether you like blue or green dash lighting at night.
The trouble is the Ford interiors look and feel 'low rent' in comparison with equivalent VAG products. Admittedly, some of the plastics in my 'new' Golf aren't as good as they used to be perhaps in earlier marques but the overall solidity of the car makes up for this.
|
OG:
The interior of Focus Mk2 was improved compared to Focus Mark 1. And Mk 2 continues with the same advanced suspension design.
As has been documented in the motoring press over the years, Focus Mk 1 has an inferior cabin to Golf Mk4 because Ford spent much of its Focus budget on developing the Focus' sophisticated multi-link suspension which, of course, gives this vehicle such a great ride and handling.
My comparison, VW spent more money on Golf Mk 4's interior but kept the older-style suspension. That's why Golf Mk 4 isn't such a good drive as Focus Mk 1.
By the time Golf Mk 5 arrived (which I guess is the version you own), VW had realised its mistake. So it spent less on the cabin but more on the suspension. In other words VW also adopted Focus' multi-link suspension for Golf Mk 5.
The question to ask here is ... would VW have spent a fortune on improving Golf Mk 5's suspension had not Ford developed such an outstanding ride and handling for Focus Mk 1 and Mk 2 ?
|
In a similar vein. Is the improvement to the Ford Focus Mk II interior down to Ford now employing a designer who was previouly employed by VW?
BTW I'd still have a Focus!
|
In a similar vein. Is the improvement to the Ford Focus Mk II interior down to Ford now employing a designer who was previouly employed by VW? BTW I'd still have a Focus!
Well, the MK II Focus isn't THAT bad, I grant you, but the reports I read suggest that the ride is somewhat on the firm side and I get fed up with reading car tests that report similarly. I don't like hard rides in my cars. After all, we are not all trying to emulate rally or racing drivers.
BTW. My Golf is the MKV and has a superb ride, combining excellent level cornering and yet not jolting the living daylights out of you as you traverse the ever worsening road surfaces that are now to be found throughout the UK.
|
OG
I agree with you about the Mk5 ride and handling as I hired a diesel Jetta (similar suspension to your Mk 5 Golf) a few months ago.
I've also hired several Mk 2 Focuses and not found the ride to be that firm.
But as I said earlier, would Golf Mk 5 be so good today had Ford not done such a good job with the Focus ?
|
Another recommendation for the Focus.
I put 99,000 miles on a (company owned) 02 reg Focus LX estate (1.8 TDDi) in 3 yrs and apart from routine servicing, it needed only a pair of headlight bulbs, and an auxiliary belt tensioner (squeaking on cold starts). Never failed to start, never let me down, and the only things that ever needed topping up between services were the fuel tank, and the screenwash. This was the most reliable car I've ever had by a country mile, and actually have ever heard of, come to that. Still taut and rattle free when it went back as well, with a lovely well-oiled, "free" feel to everything, but without a hint of feeling tired.
SWMBO's family have several mk4 Golfs, all of which are the higher powered TDI variants. The mkIV Golf is an effortlessly quick car with the bigger TDI engines, and is more comfortable, and better trimmed than the Focus, but in all other respects, particularly dynamically, the Focus is in a different league. You don't really get in a Focus and go "wow", but after familiarisation, you get out of a Focus and in to something else and get annoyed. Or I did anyway. You really miss the steering feel, properly servoed brakes, and wonderfully taut, sharp chassis when you don't have it any more. Or when you get out of a Focus and into a Golf.
The Focus isn't perfect. It suffers from road noise, some of the plastics look no different to those on a Sierra my dad owned 20 years ago, and there are some truly woeful Ford dealers about, but cars don't drive like this by accident. This car had time and attention lavished on it by people who really care about driving. There isn't one control that is not weighted, damped or modulated to perfection.
The mk5 Golf is a big improvement over the mk4, but I read somewhere that Vw's engineers spent a very long time dissecting a mk1 Focus while it was being developed, and that the rear suspension of both cars has more similarities than differences....
Cheers
DP
|
>>Is the improvement to the Ford Focus Mk II interior down to Ford now employing a designer who was previouly employed by VW?<<
I think the chassis designers went to VW and the interior designers to Ford.
End result:- 2 cars with high quality interiors and cracking chassis's.
Win Win
|
|
I totally agree with OG - too many cars are produced with firm sporty rides and this seems to satisfy the young motoring journalists for their one off test drive and no-one else.
As OG says particulalrly with the worsening road conditions in this country then VW have done well to maintain good handling and comfort with the Golf.
|
Aren't the 1.6 Golfs the ones with the exploding plastic belt tensioners?
I don't see how many more posts this guy needs to read before he realises the Focus is the far better buy.
|
Our 2000 Focus 1.6 estate - new rear wheel bearing at 45,000, corrosion on 3 of the 4 doors behind the rubber strip along the bottom, but still v pleased with it, feels a thoroughbred [which is surprising for a Ford]. 1.6 is perfect size for this nippy little car - and 40mpg is v welcome!
The best bit is easily getting 2 large suitcases alongside each other - this was impossible in our Passat 'cos of rear suspension intrusion.
|
The best bit is easily getting 2 large suitcases alongside each other - this was impossible in our Passat 'cos of rear suspension intrusion.
I managed a double divan bed (in 2 sections) and mattress once on a run to the dump! It's a brilliant estate car.
Cheers
DP
|
focus every time>I bought at auction in january 06 a Y reg 1.8 ghia with 115.000 on the clock for £2800.High mileage I know but it was a lease car and probably was mostly motorway mileage.I assume this as the previous owner lived 50 miles from where all the service history is.So probably a commute.I received a full service history printout showing the mileages at which every service, change of tyres etc was recorded. It was mot for 6 months.It has not used a drop of oil and is the quitest car I have had in 50 years of motoring.I also fitted an underbonnet sound felt.!!what ever you call it.Also changed the cam belt and tensioner.It has not given me any problems and has now done 125000 miles. Driveability is superb. Why anyone wants a Golf I dont know but it is probably down to personal choice,but I would go for the Focus every time. I would mention that I have a part time job and drive 2 or 3 different cars a day including Golfs but I get in my Focus at the end of the day and it still brings a smile to my face!!
|
|
re above-forgot to add that the bodywork was unmarked without a chip in sight and certainly no rust.It does 35mpg.
|
|
Jeremy Clarkson has owned a 1999 Focus 1.6 from new and has repeatedly written that it has been literally faultless and the most reliable car he has ever owned.
|
|
Re: some of the comments above, people are claiming high-quality interiors in the Focus mk2. I strongly disagree. It's but no means badly built, though there is a creak somewhere, and yes, it has a soft-touch fascia but unlike my mk1, the drinks holders are hard plastic and as such don't grip as well as the previous rubber ones, the door trims are again hard plastic, unlike the soft-touch materials used in my standard mk1 LX. Having heard raves about the increased interior quality - and having an 05 Mondeo in the family I was a touch disappointed with the Focus interior. That said, the mk5 Golf interior is apparently worse than the mk4, so perhaps this is how the alleged gap has closed.
|
evie_b, go for whichever one you feel most comfortable with. If you can't stand the looks of one of them then go for the other one.
The Focus is the better car all round and cheapest to run and own, but if your heart is set on having a Golf then go for that instead but don't blaim any of us for not telling you so when/if you get hit with bills.
|
I get the impression - particularly from many years of reading owners' comments on here - that a Focus is less likely to give trouble than a Golf, and will be cheaper to fix if/when it does go wrong. But you prefer the looks of the Golf to those of the Focus. In that case may I introduce the Mazda3. Focus platform (as per Golf/Leon/A3/Octavia), but different and in my opinion superior styling. Should be around long enough by now to depreciate to your price range.
--
andymc
Vroom, vroom - mmm, doughnuts ...
|
Problem with the Mazda 3 is that it suffers from "Skoda syndrome", namely that although actually a bit better built than the Focus, it doesn't look it. For someone who prefers the Golf to the Focus, this may be an issue.
But yes, nice car.
|
I think the answer lies in the following:-
2000 Golf (early-mid build if I'm not mistaken)
2002 Focus (late build so any glitches will have been ironed out by this stage)
IMHO FOcus wins hands down. Great car.
SWMBOO had a standard 1.8 as a courtesy car many years back when her Mk4 Golf GTi was in the garage for one of it's many visits. Ok obviously not as quick in a straight line, but roomier, more comfortable, better equipped (if not finished) and an absolute joy to drive especially on the local back roads. Superior car in almost every way.
|
|
Neither of these, find a car with a chain driven camshaft that has had main dealer servicing, with no missed oil changes.
|
Neither of these find a car with a chain driven camshaft that has had main dealer servicing with no missed oil changes.
Have you ever seen an engine thats chain / hydraulic tensioner has let go? The whole thing is near scrap, pulley, idlers, tensioners, castings etc etc on top of the usual valves, followers, guides. Complete carnage and on a car having covered 24K miles with full MDSH
|
"Have you ever seen an engine thats chain / hydraulic tensioner has let go?"
No, because they are much, much rarer than snapped cambelts (I've seen and heard of a few of them). And the post to which your're replying is quite clear in mentioning no missed oil changes - so even less likely to be a fail point.
V
|
What engine was that Dox ?
And did it have scheduled oil services ?
|
Full Ford history 2L twin cam 8V K plate Sierra 24K miles. It was my fathers car and I dragged it home on the end of a rope behind my inferior Golf. I dragged my brothers Orion home several times too.
VW VR6s are known for chain problems as are the current corsa 3 pots, my bro in law has just traded his in, it was less than 3 years old and has already had the chain and tensioner replaced twice under warranty and it still rattled like mad on start up.
|
Many thanks Dox - that is interesting as I had always considwered chain cams to be bullet proof.
You learn something new every day.
|
|
|
|
|
