In the early stages of planning replacing the S60 with a Focus mk1.
It's a bit more complex than that. Basically, I'm doing loads of miles, SWMBO is doing hardly anything since giving up work last year. I've been using the Golf more and enjoying the 50+mpg very much, but SWMBO thinks the S60 is the spawn of the devil (too big, too cumbersome) and can't stand driving it. So, the logical step is for me to take the Golf on, to flog the Volvo, and get SWMBO another Golf-sized car. The one car we both agree on (apart from another Golf) is a Focus mk1.
We'll go petrol because the mileage won't justify diesel, but I'm not sure which engine to go for. I'm thinking the 1.8 or 2.0 because I know the old Zetec-E engine is a tank of a thing which runs forever, whereas the Sigma (1.4/1.6) can have issues as it ages. The only question is which engine to go for. There seems to be precious little in it price-wise, and the 2.0 would seem to be a closer match on power for the Golf than the 1.8, but equally the car is going to spend a lot of time on short runs (I will take it to work once a week to give it a run), so is the 2.0 significantly thirstier than the 1.8 in urban work? Is there much of a performance difference in the real world?
Looking to spend £2k ish which will be an early noughties car with 90k or so on the clock. Either a 1.8 or 2.0 Zetec 5dr hatch.
Any advice/opinions welcome.
Cheers
DP
Edited by DP on 13/01/2010 at 20:54
|
Based on a very small and unscientific study, involving a sample of 2 cars, I'd go for the 2.0 as it is more economical.
I got 37mpg from a Focus 2.0, and 31 from a 1.8.
|
I got 37mpg from a Focus 2.0 and 31 from a 1.8.
I dream of getting 37mpg from my 2.0 :-)
Ok it's an estate, and I'm going by the trip computer, and I can just about get 37 on a motorway run. But with the urban driving it does mostly, the computer hovers around the 30 mark.
However, it doesn't do that many miles, and I like it - torquey rather than sporty IMO, although you can rev it if you feel inclined. I did have a short drive in a 1.6 estate before getting the 2.0 and definitely preferred the latter, but I haven't driven a 1.8, which I don't regret.
|
My Escort (1.8 Zetec E engine) gives 42mpg on a run and 32mpg on commuting (when it was dry weather, sometimes in a bit of a hurry) if that helps? :-)
|
Now this is a dilemma isn't it ? think, if I remember rightly that you are rather fond of your Volvo ? But....the Golf is more economical. So there is some logic in your thought of changing. I guess you will have done the maths on cost to change versus fuel costs of keeping the Volvo as your main commuter car ? What price do you put on your pleasure / comfort etc ? Is the Volvo behaving itself mechanically ?
I think I might consider keeping the Volvo until it has more or less had its time and suffering the fuel costs.
Not that there is anything wrong with Focuses or Golfs of course, it just seems a shame to sell a car which you like so much for such practical reasons.
|
|
|
|
and I can just about get 37 on a motorway run
I used to be able to touch 40, but then I changed the tyres - from Michelins (IIRC) to Nexens. Seemed to make a significant difference.
|
|
|
|
I have owned a (04) 1.6 zetec for the last 18 months have done nearly 38k miles and have had no problems and that has the zetec-e fitted which has 94k on clock. Changed cam belt at 60k gone through 2 M O T's no probs. I do 380 miles a week mostly A and B roads with a 5 mile run each way every day at motorway speeds and i get, week in week out 37mpg in the colder months like now and 39 to 40 mpg in the warmer months and will get 44 mpg on a good motorway run when we travel to glasgow couple times a year from the southwest.And the 1.6 is only £155 a year for road tax opposed to £200 + for the 1.8 and £270 for the 2ltr.
I down sized from a mk3 mondeo 2ltr petrol to the focus, apart from missing the extra grunt and comfort at first the 1.6 does everything the 2ltr did in the same time but cheaper.Hope this helps
|
|
|
|
For the mainly short journeys which it's going to do, I wouldn't think there's much in it. Maybe go for whatever you judge to be in the best condition for the price you're prepared to pay.
Perhaps also keep a look out for any petrol Golfs in your price range, though they may be older.
|
From experience with an '04 Focus I 1.8 (Zetec-E) and an '03 Mondeo 2.0 (Mazda related engine) Estate I'd go for the 2.0, my giant Mondy was more economical than the Focus and a lot more punchy.
However if SWMBO likes Golfs then the Focus (however good) will never be 'a Golf', we've just changed a Civic because the experiment with a 'non Golf' failed.....
|
|
|
Many thanks for all the replies.
Humph - I will be sad to see the Volvo go, but the financial argument for getting rid is pretty convincing. Based on fag packet calculations, and factoring in the diesel/petrol cost difference, the Golf will cost me just shy of £1200 a year less to fuel, £100 a year less to tax, and in insurance group 13 vs 15, slightly less to insure. I reckon it will cost me about £500 to change the car, so that's a pretty quick return on investment, and profit thereafter, assuming the Focus is reliable of course, and returns similar round the houses economy to the S60 in its current usage pattern. I don't foresee either being a problem.
Mechanically the S60 is still good, and whoever buys it will get themselves a nice car for really not a lot of money. It's a bit tatty round the edges, but still reliable, and just got another year's ticket on it last week with the only item of concern being an advisory on very slight play on the steering arms. Not a big or expensive job. I would happily keep it, but for the fact that SWMBO just can't get on with it. Apart from the size of it, she also finds it frustrating for carrying the kids around, with no space in the back (the Golf has more leg room), poor access through the rear doors, and the saloon boot which is much less practical. From my side, the Volvo is more comfy, smoother and quieter than the Golf, but for the motorway plod I do, the Golf is perfectly OK, and I've become addicted to that midrange clout too :-)
We thought about a petrol Golf, and that might still be an option, but we both like the Focus, and it might be nice to have both rather than two cars the same. That said, we will give it some more thought. I'm thinking the 2.0 might be the one to go for now though, but take Avant's point that condition is probably going to be the deciding factor.
Thanks again everyone.
DP
|
Fair enough DP. I see your point and good luck with your search. It can be quite a fun thing to do if you are a bit of a car buff anyway.
At the severe and actual risk of posting the standard backroom lowest common denominator reply......Have you considered leaving the Golf in the grateful and capable hands of your nearest and dearest and replacing the Volvo with a.....wait for it.......Mondeo diesel? I think you will know I'm a bit of a fan and can honestly say that despite having had many vehicles which were allegedly "better" that I've simply never had any which were so suited to privately financed high mileage.
|
|
|
but for the fact that SWMBO just can't get on with it.
SWMBO always has the last word in the end! :-)
|
|
|
|
|
I have a 1999 1.8 which has been very reliable. Since I was replacing a 205GTi 1.9 I was looking for a 2.0 but there were very few around at the time and I ended up with the 1.8. As most of my driving is urban the 1.8 engine has proved perfectly adequate. In fact I miss the handling more than the power.
I think the 2.0 cars may have more kit on them than the 1.8s. Mine is a Zetec but has the quickclear screen which I think was an option.( However it has started to fail in the last six months so check yours carefully if you can. )
Now if had been able to find and afford an ST170 estate I'd have been a very happy boy... or maybe not.
|
|
I'm selling my (now replaced) 2001 Mondeo 2.0 petrol this week. Had what may be a last proper drive today. I won't miss the fuel bills but for a bog standard Ford I thought the engine a gem. It hasn't missed a beat in over 25,000mls and has provided great entertainment between 4000 & 6000rpm! It propels the Mondeo to illegal speeds on any road in seconds so in the Focus it must be fun...But surely not the engine choice for short runs???
|
|
|
I've just managed to find a 2004 Focus brochure. At that time the 2.0 Zetec had the following equipment over the 1.8 Zetec.
Electrically-operated and heated door mirrors.
Quickclear screen and heated washer jets.
Air-con.
6-disc autochanger CD.
205/50 R16 rather than 195/60 R15 tyres.
Rear disc brakes.
Traction control system.
However my 1.8 has the first three as the Climate Pack option.
Hope that helps in your search.
|
|
|
|
|
I've got a genuine average 37.1 mpg overall (5626.44 litres in 45938 miles) over 61 months in my 2 litre petrol 2003 Mk 1 Focus, driven spiritedly. The 2.0 is a higher specification than the 1.8.
Edited by L'escargot on 14/01/2010 at 07:37
|
I had a 1999 1.8 LX. Commuting it did 30 tops, mid 20s was more usual outside of school holidays. I could get over 40 on a decent run.
The 1.8 engine was more than adequate for everyday use.
|
I'd go for the 1.8
I had a 2000 1.8 Zetec (albeit 3 door) and it was fine for town and motorway driving. I averaged around 37mpg which I thought was pretty good. Took it up to 90,000 miles before it went for a new car.
Only things that went wrong were battery (failed due to age) and the speed sensor on the gearbox (makes the instruments go crazy) but otherwise a great all rounder.
Wish I'd kept it now!
|
Hi,
My much better half has recently had a 1.6 zetec auto.Very nice car,quite nippy and quiet.
DP....The only thing I would be carefull of is down sizing from your Volvo,comfort wise.I have an Avensis and,as much as I like the Focus,the seats to me are uncomfortable after approx 45mins diving.I understand the S60 has very cumfy seats also!
Having said that,everybody's different,and I haven't seen many complaints on here about Focus seats.
Cheers....Phil.
|
|
I did fail to mention that after 50,000 miles the seat squab on mine collapsed giving me chronic back ache. Later models and those with better spec than LX may not have this problem.
|
|
There seems to be very little padding in the seat base on this Zetec,like sitting on a board eventually!...However,no complaints from the wife.
|
There seems to be very little padding in the seat base on this Zetec like sitting on a board eventually!...However no complaints from the wife.
Are you saying your wife has better padding? ;-)
|
|
|
|
I did fail to mention that after 50 000 miles the seat squab on mine collapsed giving me chronic back ache. Later models and those with better spec than LX may not have this problem.
I found Zetec seats to be excruciating. Ghia seats suit me admirably.
|
>...SWMBO thinks the S60 is the spawn of the devil...
Mrs dB won't drive mine either, or only if there's no alternative. Beats me why - it's nicer in just about every particular than the Verso, but she says she finds it hard to park. I suppose parking is a disproportionate part of her driving compared with mine but I prefer the S60 even for a short trip.
Would you consider an S60 D5 of comparable vintage to your 2.0T? Not mine - it ain't for sale - but there must be a fair few 2002-2004 cars about that have the 163 engine and have been well cared for. Mine (52) consistently does 47mpg on a long, fast commute, and still looks good after seven years. A coating of snow this week has freshened it up nicely. Even so, if I did sell it I doubt it would fetch more than £2,500.
Go on - you don't really want a Focus, do you?
};---)
|
Of course the simple solution would be just to inform the Memsahib that she is being ungrateful, insubordinate and disrespectful of her rightful lord and master and that she should jolly well buck up her ideas and be glad of the provision of a luxury saloon .....That Emily Pankhurst started the rot y'know. Country's been going to the dogs since then. You know the sort of thing.........
Well you could try anyway.........
:-))))
|
|
...and then it might not be only Zetec seats that are uncomfortable to sit in. :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
The comments about Focus seats strengthen Humph's argument re the Mondeo. You do lots of miles - you need a diesel but a comfortable one - and you're rightly not afraid of buying a high-mileage car that's been looked after. You were fond of the petrol Mondeo you used to have, so presumably it was comfortable enough.
That way the Golf stays with Mrs DP - I suppose a lot depends on whether she's happy with that or whether she's now focused (sorry) on a Ford.
Apologies - sounds as if we're organising your life for you - but you did ask for suggestions!
Edited by Avant on 14/01/2010 at 20:00
|
|
i have a 02 Focus Estate Zetec. No issue with the seats at all. 1.6 petrol also completely fine. I would just find the best one you can nearby and go for it.
|
I currently run a 1.8 Focus Ghia (better seats than a Zetec IMO), but have to say the MPG is terrible round town/on short hops. I am pretty certain the 2.0 would do better than my average of 25.99mpg, measured brim to brim over the last five years.
Due to various reasons (chiefly boredom, if I'm honest), I aim to change it for a Skoda Octavia 1.8TSI in the summer - have you considered the Skoda, DP?
|
1.4 and 1.6 very sweet, crisp engines, 1.8 and 2.0 not quite matching them in refinement terms.
I reckon the 2.0 has a little more go than the 1.8 though with similar economy plus the benefit of rear disc brakes which were fitted to some 1.8s as part of a pack.
An early Focus II 1.8 or 2.0 would have the benefit of being chain cam.
|
If it's a MK I Focus then rear discs came on ABS equipped 1.8s (so most/all post 2002 I think) whereas 2.0s always had ABS and ESP and discs all round IIRC. Same is true for the Focus II I think - 1.6s have rear drum brakes even today.
I have to say, if it's a MK I Focus then the Mondeo III is a far nicer place to be, only Ghia Focus Is had variable intermittent wipers or lumbar adjustment on the fairly flat seats whereas I think these sort of features were standard on all Mondeo IIIs from the base up. Also features such as curtain airbags, EBA, cruise control, heated screen, trip computer, heated electric mirrors (and so on) were standard on Mondeos and missing from most Focus Is.
If it's a Focus II you're considering then a lot of the Mondeo III features became standard........
|
....... whereas 2.0s always had ABS and ESP and discs all round .........
There's traction control on my 2003 2 litre Ghia, but not ESP.
Very early 1999 2 litre Ghias had drum rear brakes and no ABS because of a supply problem. I waited (willingly) 8 weeks for my 1999 2 litre to get rear disc brakes and ABS.
|
Very early 1999 2 litre Ghias had drum rear brakes and no ABS because of a supply problem. >>
I doint beleive that any Focuses have been built, of any variant, without ABS.
|
>> Very early 1999 2 litre Ghias had drum rear brakes and no ABS because of >> a supply problem. >> I doint beleive that any Focuses have been built of any variant without ABS.
I've just checked my October 1998 and March 1999 Focus brochures, and ABS was an optional extra on all Mk 1 Focuses at that time except the 2 litre Ghia. The option was called "Reflex Pack". Rear brakes were drums on all models except the 2 litre Ghia which had rear discs.
|
|
|
My 1999 Focus 1.8 Zetec does not have ABS. Haynes also includes non-ABS systems.
If you would like to swop cars for a few weeks to allow you to check I'd be more than happy. :-))
|
My 1999 Focus 1.8 Zetec does not have ABS. Haynes also includes non-ABS systems.
IIRC ABS became standard in about 2001/2, after the minor facelift (twin headlamps) perhaps ? I suspect because all Golf IVs had it as standard from the start. Side airbags became standard on Focus Is sometime shortly (perhaps 2003) after, again due to competitive pressure from the VW which had them I think.
When we 'shopped' for our 2004 Zetec it had to have discs / ABS, side airbags and the climate pack. The previous reflex pack (ABS, side airbags ) had always been a cheap option (maybe £300 or so) but the rental fleets who sourced most cars rarely tick option boxes in my experience, that (in modern times) is my objection to cars like the Octavia missing curtain airbags, I'd contend that this results in most second hand ones being deficient in this area.
So, a post 2003 Focus I ir II will have the stuff I'd require, I appreciate that other people have different priorities. However even a brand new sub 1.8l Focus will have drum brakes on the back (yuk).
Edited by idle_chatterer on 16/01/2010 at 15:20
|
|
I stand corrected re ABS though there is no correlation between rear discs and ABS, my MIL's '02 Focus has ABS and rear drums.
|
I stand corrected re ABS though there is no correlation between rear discs and ABS my MIL's '02 Focus has ABS and rear drums.
I believe that there is on a 1.8 (or 2.0) petrol of any age but may of course be wrong.....
|
My 02 Focus Zetec was one of the last without standard ABS.
|
>>However even a brand new sub 1.8l Focus will have drum brakes on the back (yuk).>>
My wife's 52reg 1.6 Chic has got drums on the rear and I can't say the thought "yuk" has ever crossed my mind in relation to them.
|
My wife's 52reg 1.6 Chic has got drums on the rear and I can't say the thought "yuk" has ever crossed my mind in relation to them.
Nope, it's a personal preference I'd admit, maybe the aesthetics (especially with 16" alloys on the current Focus model). I've been told that drums have better low speed characteristics and the rear wheels do little of the braking anyhow, however I suspect it's just cost saving....
|
the rear wheels do little of the braking anyhow ...........
If I remember correctly, the rear brakes do approximately 30% of the braking.
|
Most cars are rarely driven laden with weight, so the rear brakes do very little work, this is why rear discs often corrode or the pads glaze and squeal, in this instance rear drums may prov to be be more cost effective.
I try to keep up with all things modern - I must say I'm astonished that a lot of Focuses didn't have ABS - I would have assumed they had it standard! Penny pinching by ford there, it's hardly a cheap supermini! ABS is a must in my eyes.
|
I must say I'm astonished that a lot of Focuses didn't have ABS - I would have assumed they had it standard! Penny pinching by ford there ..........
According to my September 2002 Focus brochure, all variants except the lowest specification Focus ~ the CL ~ had ABS as standard.
|
My March 2002 Facelift 1.8LX Saloon did not come with ABS as standard.
If I am lucky I may get up to 30mpg, it's only got ~25k on it so still running in!
Edited by Stevieboy on 19/01/2010 at 15:09
|
Thanks all for the continued responses. I am still reading them and digesting them. :-)
The Focus was unbelievably poorly specced in its early days. ABS was a cost option on most models, as was a CD player and air conditioning. All but the most basic mkIV Golfs had almost everything as standard.
A total VW/Ford role reversal really.
As for rear drums, my old company TDDi Focus had them, and the brakes on that car were superb. It's just aesthetics really - drums just don't look as good as discs behind alloys, but they work well enough in this application. Mind you, it was only 90 bhp.
It's between a Focus and a Golf. I think we're going to drive a few of each and see where we are. The good news is we have experience of both cars (just not the engines). I've seen a couple of 1.8T Golf GTIs in budget though.....
Edited by DP on 19/01/2010 at 16:11
|
I have a Y reg 1.8 petrol Focus. I've had it since it was 10 months old.
The most miles I can get from a full tank of fuel is 425. Although the car averages about 36 mpg. The car has travelled 143,000 miles
|
|
|
|
|
