2014 Fiesta ST

[Eye of the Tiger]

Unthusiast

ST has too much power to be a balanced FWD car. It is a monster that should not be allowed on the street.

[Madman]

ST has too much power to be a balanced FWD car.

It is a monster that should not be allowed on the street.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Unthusiast.

[MrH]

I gotta say, I agree with BGK.  You guys will bitch about anything

But I can't say that I understand this market.  The car isn't practical at all.  The back seat is nearly useless.  If you're going to get something so impractical at that price, why not an FR-S or Miata?

A tarted up, non-practical economy car doesn't make sense when real RWD performance cars are within reach for nearly the same price.

[2o6]

I gotta say, I agree with BGK.  You guys will bitch about anything

But I can't say that I understand this market.  The car isn't practical at all.  The back seat is nearly useless.  If you're going to get something so impractical at that price, why not an FR-S or Miata?

A tarted up, non-practical economy car doesn't make sense when real RWD performance cars are within reach for nearly the same price.

Fiesta rear seat is bigger than BRZ...

[MX793]

Fiesta rear seat is bigger than BRZ...

And I'll wager it's quicker than a BRZ at pretty much any venue (auto-x, drag strip, road course).

[MrH]

Fiesta rear seat is bigger than BRZ...

A bit.  It's not anywhere I'd want to sit for more than a few minutes.  Seems like a pretty marginal gain in practicality.

And I'll wager it's quicker than a BRZ at pretty much any venue (auto-x, drag strip, road course).

A quick google search:

Fiesta:  0-60 - 6.7 seconds
1/4 mile: 15.0 seconds

BRZ: 0-60 - 6.1 seconds
1/4 mile: 14.6 seconds

auto-x and road course, that's debatable.  A simple tire upgrade on the BRZ, and it wouldn't be close.

I don't know, if I'm thinking, I want a fun to drive, impractical car, I would much rather have something RWD.  Not a FWD sub-compact economy car.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

Do the rear seats fold down in the fiesta?

If they do than that+hatchback gives it 3-4 times the cargo space. Not to mention the capability to carry larger objects within that space. Nothing is better than a hatchback for practicality.

I bought a shop vac(5 gallon) on day at home depot, took me about 5 minutes to get it into my BMW 540. I couldn't get it into the trunk and had to go through the passenger door, it kept hitting the front passenger seat so I had to move it up about 3 times until I finally got it in there. It's pathetic really.

So back to the point, the fiesta has a huge advantage over the BRZ in this regard, and as a sole mode of transportation that is a huge consideration.

[FlatBlackCaddy]

I wonder what the track widths and lengths are between a BRZ and fiesta ST.

If the fiesta is lighter with a shorter track, plus the greater and wider torque range of the ST, that would be a huge advantage on the AutoX course.

[Catman]

Sedans aren't near as practical. I agree.

[2o6]

A bit.  It's not anywhere I'd want to sit for more than a few minutes.  Seems like a pretty marginal gain in practicality.

A quick google search:

Fiesta:  0-60 - 6.7 seconds
1/4 mile: 15.0 seconds

BRZ: 0-60 - 6.1 seconds
1/4 mile: 14.6 seconds

auto-x and road course, that's debatable.  A simple tire upgrade on the BRZ, and it wouldn't be close.

I don't know, if I'm thinking, I want a fun to drive, impractical car, I would much rather have something RWD.  Not a FWD sub-compact economy car.

Granted, the Fiesta isnt the best packaged car in class, but the rear seats are wayy more practical than the BRZ. The BRZ's are merely decorative. And the Fiesta is a 5 door. And a hatchback.

[MrH]

Have you been in the backseat of a Fiesta?  They're pretty much just decorative too.

[2o6]

Have you been in the backseat of a Fiesta?  They're pretty much just decorative too.

Yes, I drove one last week.

It's tight, but not unusable.

[280Z Turbo]

A bit.  It's not anywhere I'd want to sit for more than a few minutes.  Seems like a pretty marginal gain in practicality.

A quick google search:

Fiesta:  0-60 - 6.7 seconds
1/4 mile: 15.0 seconds

BRZ: 0-60 - 6.1 seconds
1/4 mile: 14.6 seconds

auto-x and road course, that's debatable.  A simple tire upgrade on the BRZ, and it wouldn't be close.

I don't know, if I'm thinking, I want a fun to drive, impractical car, I would much rather have something RWD.  Not a FWD sub-compact economy car.

I think the fiesta rear seat is fine, but I'm only 5'10".

[SVT32V]

Fiesta:  0-60 - 6.7 seconds
1/4 mile: 15.0 seconds

BRZ: 0-60 - 6.1 seconds
1/4 mile: 14.6 seconds

Hard to imagine such an acceleration difference, the cars weigh the same have the same hp and the fiesta has over 60 more ft lbs of torque, and mostly likely a great deal more area under the power curve with forced induction.

[Raza]

Hard to imagine such an acceleration difference, the cars weigh the same have the same hp and the fiesta has over 60 more ft lbs of torque, and mostly likely a great deal more area under the power curve with forced induction.

Grip.

[SVT32V]

Grip.

With this little hp, I doubt it.

[Raza]

With this little hp, I doubt it.

Absolutely yes.  I've owned a 200hp FWD car before, straight line grip is not what they're great at. 

[MX793]

A bit.  It's not anywhere I'd want to sit for more than a few minutes.  Seems like a pretty marginal gain in practicality.

A quick google search:

Fiesta:  0-60 - 6.7 seconds
1/4 mile: 15.0 seconds

BRZ: 0-60 - 6.1 seconds
1/4 mile: 14.6 seconds

auto-x and road course, that's debatable.  A simple tire upgrade on the BRZ, and it wouldn't be close.

I don't know, if I'm thinking, I want a fun to drive, impractical car, I would much rather have something RWD.  Not a FWD sub-compact economy car.

Times are meaningless without sources.  For all anyone knows, you pulled a Cougs and cherry-picked times.

From Motortrend
Fiesta ST
0-60:  6.4
1/4 mile:  14.9 @ 94.6
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1310_2014_ford_fiesta_st_first_test/

BRZ
0-60:  6.4
1/4 mile:  14.9 @ 95.5
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1203_2013_subaru_brz_limited_first_test/

Unfortunately, C&D hasn't done an instrumented test of the ST yet.  I'd be curious to see how its 5-60 time compares to the BRZ.  The BRZ's is pretty poor (8 seconds, as I recall) and it's an important number for real world performance.

And on equal tire compounds, with equal drivers, an auto-x would be probably be much closer than either of us think.  The lack of midrange torque kills the FRSBRZ on an auto-x.  Then again, not sure how bad the turbo lag is on the ST in an auto-x.  Might end up a wash, though I suspect the ST would have an edge.  I've run against more than half a dozen drivers in FRS/BRZs.  They aren't the auto-x monsters that you'd think they'd be (at least in stock class form).  There was even semi-serious talk earlier this year of demoting them from C stock (where NB and NC Miatas run) to E stock (where the NA Miatas are classed) for next season.

[SVT32V]

Absolutely yes.  I've owned a 200hp FWD car before, straight line grip is not what they're great at. 

With only 150 ft-lbs torque, the brz is going to bog off the line, it is not a hole shot car either.

[SVT32V]

Times are meaningless without sources.  For all anyone knows, you pulled a Cougs and cherry-picked times.

From Motortrend
Fiesta ST
0-60:  6.4
1/4 mile:  14.9 @ 94.6
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/hatchbacks/1310_2014_ford_fiesta_st_first_test/

BRZ
0-60:  6.4
1/4 mile:  14.9 @ 95.5
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1203_2013_subaru_brz_limited_first_test/

Unfortunately, C&D hasn't done an instrumented test of the ST yet.  I'd be curious to see how its 5-60 time compares to the BRZ.  The BRZ's is pretty poor (8 seconds, as I recall) and it's an important number for real world performance.

I was also looking at the MT times and was going to post them but decided it wasn't worth it. What really caught my eye was MT had the FRS/BRZ weight distribution at 55%/45% rear. C&D had it at 54/46.

[Eye of the Tiger]

With only 150 ft-lbs torque, the brz is going to bog off the line, it is not a hole shot car either.

Rev it and pop the clutch. It's not rocket science. I have 46K miles on an Accent with hard launches and power shifts up the ass.

[SVT32V]

Rev it and pop the clutch. It's not rocket science. I have 46K miles on an Accent with hard launches and power shifts up the ass.

Right, and is still isn't taking off fast.

[Eye of the Tiger]

Right, and is still isn't taking off fast.

Revs and clutch slip at launch are the main difference between the 0-60 and 5-60 test. The two cars are identical with a launch, but the BreeZ us slower from idle. You can do things in the real world other than what a magazine does.

[SVT32V]

Revs and clutch slip at launch are the main difference between the 0-60 and 5-60 test. The two cars are identical with a launch, but the BreeZ us slower from idle. You can do things in the real world other than what a magazine does.

Obviously on slipping the clutch off the line. I have been driving V8 mustangs with a manual transmission for 26 consecutive years, including drag strip passes so I guess I know a bit about slipping the clutch off the line.
Especially with the 32V 4.6 that needs revs to move out.

My point, and you are really arguing it, was that they should be similar off the line and they are, any wheelspin on the fiesta will be made up with a better power curve with the turbo and the rwd of the frs is helpful at launch even if it takes time to get into the powerband, 6000 rpm clutch dumps or not.

[cawimmer430]

Nissan Quest - the answer to all problems. 

[FlatBlackCaddy]

Nissan Quest - the answer to all problems. 

You used to be cooler than that.

[cawimmer430]

You used to be cooler than that.

That was my impression of Char. 

[Eye of the Tiger]

Obviously on slipping the clutch off the line. I have been driving V8 mustangs with a manual transmission for 26 consecutive years, including drag strip passes so I guess I know a bit about slipping the clutch off the line.
Especially with the 32V 4.6 that needs revs to move out.

My point, and you are really arguing it, was that they should be similar off the line and they are, any wheelspin on the fiesta will be made up with a better power curve with the turbo and the rwd of the frs is helpful at launch even if it takes time to get into the powerband, 6000 rpm clutch dumps or not.

But the Fiesta can't put all that power down off the line

[Madman]

The back seat is nearly useless.  If you're going to get something so impractical at that price, why not an FR-S or Miata?

A tarted up, non-practical economy car doesn't make sense when real RWD performance cars are within reach for nearly the same price.

Useless?  Not unless you have the physical proportions of a Sasquatch.  Roomy back seat and "boot" are demonstrated below.


2013 Ford Fiesta review - What Car?




Pity we don't get the three-door over here.  It really is gorgeous!   


2013 Ford Fiesta ST review - What Car?