6th Feb 2008, 16:41
You are completely missing the point.
You can pick up a new ST150 for £12,500 without even trying. Add the £1,800 for the conversion, and you're looking at £14,300. The cars you list are considerably more expensive. If they weren't quicker, they'd be pointless. Sub £15k for 185 bhp, 0-60 in 7 secs and full warranty support is cheap - how can you argue otherwise?
Turbo engines make huge amounts of power, but for many, the sharper throttle response and more consistent power delivery of a naturally aspirated engine is preferable. Particularly if you look beyond headline BHP and consider the package as a whole. The ST was crying out for more than Ford's 150 bhp and it now has it. If Ford made this car out of the factory for the £15k it costs, everyone would be going on about what a bargain it is. The fact is though you can retro-fit this to older cars, which makes it even better.
If you buy a car to tune or want to boast down the pub about how many bhp your car makes, you'd be mad to buy any naturally aspirated car, let alone a "lowly" ST.
17th Mar 2008, 18:44
How is it spending "ridiculous money" when the total outlay is still less than a new example of the Clio you mention? Ford admitted they kept the ST down to 150 bhp for insurance reasons, and every review of the car has mentioned that it cannot only comfortably handle, but is crying out for more power? Fifth Gear recently tested the standard ST against the new Corsa which is quicker in a straight line, but the Fiesta whooped it around the track. This isn't a chassis that's going to struggle in any way with a 30 bhp power hike.
You can't knock the ability of the RenaultSport Clios, but how many people who buy Renaults would ever buy another? They simply do not stand up to hard use, and many have build quality and electrical reliability that 1970's British Leyland would have been ashamed of. This is why you can buy them secondhand for 49p. Modern Fords are built like tanks in comparison.
At the end of the day, we are talking about a Ford approved conversion by a major Ford specialist tuning house, which retains the full warranty, not a set of crappy bolt ons from the Ripspeed catalogue. It's no different to an Alpina or Hartge tweaked BMW in principle (if not level), and turns the car into what the press, and some Ford insiders say it should have been in the first place,
Evo liked it a lot.
23rd Mar 2008, 06:25
£1800 is ridiculous money to alter a car which you have just bought. Save up and buy a civic type R, or even buy a used one I don't think anyone would claim a used CTR is any less reliable than a brand new fiesta ST150. The ST is priced accordingly to what it is worth, you add 1800 pounds or more to make it how you want don't expect to see that 1800 quid again, just buy a car which does what you want in the first place.
25th Mar 2008, 15:34
A 180 bhp hot hatch with the Fiesta's handling talent for under £15k with the full manufacturers warranty. It's peanuts mate. I don't see why you have such a problem with it.
I presume you have a similar issue with Alpina BMW or AMG Mercedes, or even the original Mini Cooper.
I'm not in any way comparing a Fiesta to any of these cars except to illustrate a point. All the above are independently modded with full manufacturer backing. Exactly the same in principle.
26th Mar 2008, 15:27
I've never owned a RenaultSport Clio, but I had an '05 Megane (1.9 dCi) as a company car, and we have a 54 plate Grand Scenic in the family and they were/are enough to convince me never to go near a Renault.
Both are good looking and brilliantly designed, and the engines are mechanically reliable, but both are complete crap; constant wiring and engine management gremlins, and build quality which is a total disgrace. Worn gearknobs and seatbelts chafing holes in B-pillar trim at 30,000 miles, fading paint on the plastic parts of the body such as the bumpers and fuel filler cap, uneven panel gaps, rattles, squeaks and knocks. Neither have been used hard, and both had full Renault histories. I can't even begin to imagine how something of this standard would stand up to being thrashed. The Scenic was a £22k car brand new.
Renault's problems relating to poor build quality, reliability and crap dealer backup are well documented. I acknowledged the car itself is good to drive - it re
2nd Apr 2008, 11:05
Just a quick question, has anybody had there actual 0-60 mph times checked in the Fiesta ST150. The figures which the Ford Guide Lines state of 0-60mph in 7.9secs don't really do it justice! Do they?? I have took my standard ST 06 plate on a track day and my times don't really match up to those figures! Does anyone have the same opinion.
2nd Apr 2008, 14:55
I think the book figure is very accurate. Just compare it to other cars of similar weight/power. The mg zr 160 does 0-60 in 7.4 seconds and is slightly lighter with more bhp.
9th May 2009, 19:22
You know what, I agree, I own an ST and I've owned plenty of other fast hatchbacks. The ST is fastish, but no more fun than an old 205 GTi. But I don't care, it's fun, it's reliable and good value for money. Stop trying to justify why you own one and just enjoy it instead.
11th May 2009, 07:42
I'm planning to have the Full Monty Mountune kit bolted to my near-new standard Fiesta ST. Obviously I want to keep the warranty intact. However, one small problem: Parking what sounds like a flack-holed Battle of Britain Spitfire in my cul-de-sac at 2am in the morning isn't exactly going to earn me a meal ticket at the next street party.
What's the best solution? Mountune say the offending pipe was engineered as an integral part of the kit and can't be dropped from the package. Is there a retrofit muffler for what would be a fantastic but otherwise obscenely rude caster-wheeled fart box?
17th Jan 2010, 04:32
Wow, you lot really don't like each other when it comes to cars. I can't believe how many of you have actually been able to afford both a 12+ grand car and a 15+ grand car in the past like 4 years. They may have been available LOL, didn't realise the county was in recession.
Anyway I'm a Ford lover, but... I have doubts with the ST150 as a 2L car kicking out 150hp? And only 32mpg? I would've expected more form such a restricted car, look at the Racing Puma? kicking out 155hp from a 1.7?? Civic Type R with 200hp?
The bhp/litre ratio is terrible; they definitely needed to squeeze more power out.
And people going on about the looks; which looks better etc!!! Well guess what, some guys like fat girls!! Shocking isn't it!! But if we all liked the same thing, what would be the point?
I have never driven a Clio in my life, but from reputation and cost and insurance... I'd settle with the Ford.
Oh and for all those people saying it's more fun to drive etc etc... You can get a s1/s2 Lotus Elise for under 15K that handles better than both put together, and would probably, wait what am I saying, it will do you over on a track and on public roads.
So why the hell argue? Seriously? It's pointless at the end of the day, and if the perfect car was made, why would they still be producing new cars and looking at ways of beating them!!! Every car make has flaws, GET OVER IT!!!
17th Jan 2010, 13:39
I thought websites like this were specifically for people to argue/discuss cars' flaws and strengths. The idea is that potential buyers can see strengths and weaknesses of cars before making a decision, as well as being interesting for other people to read.
If people want to discuss performance (which isn't that unreasonable considering the fiesta ST was the performance model in the range) then I say let them. Nobody forces you to read this, and I found it all quite entertaining.