2000 Ford Focus Reviews - Page 13 of 45

2000 Ford Focus ZTS 2.0 I-4 from North America

Model year2000
Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.0 I-4 Automatic
Performance marks 4 / 10
Reliability marks 2 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 0 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.0 / 10
Distance when acquired35000 miles
Most recent distance50000 miles
Previous carOldsmobile Achieva

Summary:

Horrible

Faults:

The battery and its wires had corroded and needed to be replaced.

The paint is cracking and showing small chips.

The body shows tiny rust marks.

I was driving and heard weird sounds coming from the back driver side tire and I took it to the shop. It turns out that if I would've driven it for a couple days longer, The wheel would have fallen off!

The stereo screen is a large black smudge.

Headlights have just started to cloud in the center.

The car is an overall LEMON!

General Comments:

The only only positive part is gas mileage.

The interior plastics don't seem to fit well together.

The seats are way to small and the stereo stinks.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 31st August, 2005

2000 Ford Focus LX 1.6 16v petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 1.6 16v petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.6 / 10
Distance when acquired1600 miles
Most recent distance122000 miles
Previous carVolkswagen Golf

Summary:

An outstanding piece of engineering

Faults:

Auxiliary belt found to be worn at 100,000 mile service and changed as a precaution.

Front shocks past their best at 110k so replaced (with OEM items).

Original CD player died a few weeks ago.

General Comments:

Proof that you don't need to spend big money to get superb engineering.

122,000 miles and only four components have needed replacement outside normal servicing, three of which could be considered consumables anyway over this kind of mileage.

Great to drive still, with a willing little engine which thrives on revs. Handling is still superb too and makes the Golf I had before (and the mk4 I have driven since) feel stodgy and vague. The engine still uses no oil, and has never missed a beat. The car has only had the recommended maintenance at the local Ford dealer.

Servicing is cheap, apart from the 100k "major" which consisted of the dreaded cam-belt replacement and a check of the valve clearances. Despite the mileage, all clearances were still to factory specs which again is an indicator of the quality of the engineering in this car. As the car had been so reliable, I thought this was money well spent.

Fuel consumption averages 32 mpg with 38 on a motorway run, and 28 around town with the air-con on.

The car doesn't feel at all tired, and is still squeak free inside. The exhaust, battery and clutch are all still original, and none are showing signs of requiring replacement.

Seriously impressed, and wouldn't hesitate to recommend a Focus to friends or relatives. Great to drive, reliable, durable and affordable - what more do you need in a car, if you're not a badge snob at any rate?

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 15th July, 2005

24th Jul 2005, 16:50

Strange isn't it?

I've had two as company cars, and as a nationwide engineer, my cars work hard for a living. I do 60k per year and carry all manner of heavy parts and tools around. Although the cars are serviced every time it's due, time and work pressures mean it is not unheard of for my cars to run a few thousand miles late. This happened to both of mine on many occasions.

The first Focus I had was a 2000 model 1.8 LX (petrol) estate, in which I covered 122,000 miles in the two years I had it. It only needed an alternator belt and tensioner outside routine servicing and conumables, and didn't once fail to start or break down.

The second one, a 2002 TDCi 115 Zetec estate went back last year with 127,000 miles on the clock. This suffered some engine management issues early on, which seemed to me to be generic rather than an issue with my particular car. However, once resolved, the car didn't miss a beat for 100,000 miles until it went back.

Both cars wore their miles well, both still drove, handled and rode nicely, and their interiors (with the exception of the battered load areas) looked clean and tidy. The only issue on the LX was that the silver trim on the gearknob started looking tatty after about 60k. Hardly grounds to dislike a car though.

A good workhorse and far superior to the Renault Meganes that our company is now leasing. Had more problems with my recently acquired dCi in 40,000 miles than I had in a quarter of a million miles with the Focuses.

Average review marks: 6.1 / 10, based on 152 reviews