Focus Fanatics Forum banner

What is the SVTF capable of part II

4K views 33 replies 22 participants last post by  FocusInAlaska 
#1 ·
What's the SVTF capable of part II
This is in responce to an earlier post of "What is the SVTF capable of". The first post seemed to take off in the direction of HP limits. This is a flip side view of trying to reach 300 HP. While the SVTF may be able to reach HP of almost scary numbers from it's small powerplant. The car was meant to be driven. Driven as a spirited everyday driver, with some added pleasure due to the SVT design teams adding a little additional HP, TQ, body and interior trim, and a great feel.
So what is the SVTF capable of:
It's capable of taking back road twisties at remarkable speed. She will hold the road like gum on the bottom of your shoe.
It's capable of driving owners of Neon SRT4 crazy when they rev up their little funky sounding motor, and all you do is smile back at them with an ear to ear grin. Because bottom line it is a Neon.
It is capable of blending in with the looks of traffic, yet give you the quiet satisfaction of knowing what it is capable of doing.
For me it is capable of allowing me the pleasure to enjoy a drive in the country, sun roof popped open, some good 60's and 70's music playing, rolling through usually only the lower 4 gears out of the 6 she provides, looking down the road as far as I can see, then getting there with the most fun, zeal and zest as the little Yellow Screamer can get there. Best part is once I get there, I get to drive back to the starting point.
At more relaxed speeds she delivers 31 MPG. And delivers it all at a pretty good price point.
Guess the point is, the SVTF is capable of putting a Big Grin and Smile on my face.
But keep in mind, I'm one of the older members on the forum. I have already done the numerious Vettes, SL500s, CLK cabriolets, 65 Mustang 2+2, Charger 440, Lightnings, Excaliber, Rolls Royce and many others.
Stepping down from my soap box now,
Have a great day, and stay Focused out there.
 
See less See more
#3 ·
jonrjen, you are truely insightful. This is one fun little car. I love going to work because I get to drive her. I hate sitting in my office looking at the parking lot and NOT getting to drive. I can't wait for the weekend when I get to drive all afternoon. The Focus commercial where the car talks to the driver and wants to go like a dog begging his master to go for a walk is a true reflection of this fine automobile. It DEMANDS to be driven. And I am honored to oblige.
Mike
 
#4 ·
Well put sir!

I enjoy doing the same thing.
31mpg huh

What do you shift at?

I think i am doing extremely well if i get 280 out of a tank full on my 04
 
#5 ·
I don't think the words "harmony" and "balance" would be misused talking about the SVT. It may be relatively quick, but I believe it is more than the sum of it's stats.

It's not just how fast you go, but how well you go fast.
 
#6 ·
Well put sir's, I gett 270-300 around town city that is. I get a lot more on the turn pike say 340-360 If I don't drive it like it was meant to be driven. Which by the way is hard to do. One of my friends asked if she can chirp 2nd gear, I said that i would be happy to show off her prowness. I've had the mustang gt, trans am firebird ws6 and many more quick cars like the grand prix gtp. All in all the svtf is fun to drive and gets alright milage with todays rising petrol prices. Svt is a great bang for the buck. V_tec this
 
#10 ·
Jon coming out waxing poetic!!!
I would have to agree completely. I think that in my driveway, I have the best of the 3 worlds. The SVTF, for twisty fun, and just general driving nirvana.
The SportTrac Adrenalin for light loads, relaxed comfort, and hella power when pushed to it.
The Flareside F150- pure balls power, will haul and tow heavy loads with ease, but yet still run the 1/4 in mid 12s if I ask it to.

PS: Jon, you need to send me pics of the EAP Yellow SVT please [;)]
 
#11 ·
I agree on those fronts, which may sound interesting as I was the guy who started the first post... my SVTF is amazingly fun to drive, absolutely a blast, but I'd just like a little more power. And I always like to hear about what my little car could do, with the proper "encouragement" aka boost. Simple curiousity.

As a side note, I just can't help myself: jonrjen, tho the STVF does fit into traffic nicely, don't you have a little trouble given that your car is bright yellow?
 
#13 ·
I mentioned the word balance, and no doubt balance is a fine goal. I would be willing to give up some balance for more power....still a nice car at a nice price. If they offered a a SC Model at 3-5k more, I would have checked that box.
 
#15 ·
also the svt is all motor..can you say that about the srt-4..and the tires on those stupid things go out in no time and they HAVE to put 93 in them and they wheel hop all the way down the track..screw that..all motor 2.0 makin 15.4 at the quarter and lookin as sweet as it does...my heart starts throbbin whenever i see one..its like a nun whos really a dirty whore (i know i always refer to the nuns)
 
#17 ·
low 200s in HP....lol

The SVTF seems to be not as good of a 2.0 as the EVO. EVOs put out 276hp and 286tq. I looked at focus sport turbo kit 5800!!! Seems to be a bit over priced to say the least. All the EVO has on the svt is a intercooled turbo and hollow camshaft. I've looked around and seen I can get turbo and a new cam for less than 5800, and have a lot of money left in my pocket. Anyone wanna tell me why we aren't getting as much horsepower. These low 200s are starting to annoy me. I would think for that much money you should get more bang for your buck.
 
#18 ·
yal have higher compression ratios..bad for forced induction..it was ment to be an all motor..motor, and thats why toms svt ran more than a second slower than the zx3(that plus the zx3 has many more aftermarket mods) the zetec is perfect for forced induction..we have more of an sti style engine if you will(lower compression)...thats why the svt is so awsome, cuz its just cool like that having the all motor goodies [hihi]
 
#19 ·
Re: low 200s in HP....lol

focussvt324 said:
The SVTF seems to be not as good of a 2.0 as the EVO. EVOs put out 276hp and 286tq. I looked at focus sport turbo kit 5800!!! Seems to be a bit over priced to say the least. All the EVO has on the svt is a intercooled turbo and hollow camshaft. I've looked around and seen I can get turbo and a new cam for less than 5800, and have a lot of money left in my pocket. Anyone wanna tell me why we aren't getting as much horsepower. These low 200s are starting to annoy me. I would think for that much money you should get more bang for your buck.
Perhaps these are things you should have considered BEFORE you bought the car, instead of AFTER. Like my friend above me pointed out, the car was not designed by Ford to be a forced induction car... what do you expect??
 
#21 ·
Yup.
 
#22 ·
Re: low 200s in HP....lol

focussvt324 said:
The SVTF seems to be not as good of a 2.0 as the EVO. EVOs put out 276hp and 286tq. I looked at focus sport turbo kit 5800!!! Seems to be a bit over priced to say the least. All the EVO has on the svt is a intercooled turbo and hollow camshaft. I've looked around and seen I can get turbo and a new cam for less than 5800, and have a lot of money left in my pocket. Anyone wanna tell me why we aren't getting as much horsepower. These low 200s are starting to annoy me. I would think for that much money you should get more bang for your buck.
While it's true that the EVO and SVTF both have 2.0L engines, the similarities really stop there. The engine in the EVO (4g63, same block used in the Turbo DSM's and about 15 years worth of Mitsubishi rally cars) is just a different beast entirely.

Saying that the only difference between the two is just a turbo and an intercooler is just plain wrong. I mean, the VW I4 is 2.0L and it only makes 114 hp, and my old Jeep had a 2.8L engine but only made 150 hp. I guess what I'm saying is, you're not exactly comparing apples to apples.
 
#23 ·
Re: Re: low 200s in HP....lol

ren said:
Saying that the only difference between the two is just a turbo and an intercooler is just plain wrong. I mean, the VW I4 is 2.0L and it only makes 114 hp, and my old Jeep had a 2.8L engine but only made 150 hp. I guess what I'm saying is, you're not exactly comparing apples to apples. [/B]
INDEED! Just because an engine has the same displacement and the same number of cylinders means NOTHING for the most part. For example, check out the old S2000 engine- again, 2.0L, putting out 240 hp naturally aspirated...

And though the turbo kit is $5800, let's try on some numbers:
My SVTF (well-equipped): $17,000
Evo: around $28,000
SVTF+turbo=$22,800

Now, if this really was a straight-line match between an Evo and an SVTF, don't you think if you could use a turbo and get enough additional power with the extra $5200 to compete (and isn't the SVTF lighter too?) with an Evo? Or even beat it? Not that I care, I'm just sayin.
 
#24 ·
Used blown motor ZX3: $3,000
Evo: around $28,000
FOCUS ZX3+5.0 from mustang=$15000
Look on that Evo drivers face: priceless
 
#25 ·
Re: low 200s in HP....lol

focussvt324 said:
The SVTF seems to be not as good of a 2.0 as the EVO. EVOs put out 276hp and 286tq. I looked at focus sport turbo kit 5800!!! Seems to be a bit over priced to say the least. All the EVO has on the svt is a intercooled turbo and hollow camshaft. I've looked around and seen I can get turbo and a new cam for less than 5800, and have a lot of money left in my pocket. Anyone wanna tell me why we aren't getting as much horsepower. These low 200s are starting to annoy me. I would think for that much money you should get more bang for your buck.
Well, a (very) mildly modified Vortech kit on one car has made 290whp (~330bhp) on 91 octane, and most stock Vortech kits make 250-260whp (~285-295bhp). Those cars don't make the same amount of torque, but thats because the boost does not come on early enough to make big torque numbers. That doesn't really matter because when your racing because the power you use is in the top of the RPM scale which is where the Vortech makes its power. Remember torque and horsepower are directly related at all RPM's, and that its not the torque reading you see on a dyno that is moving the car its that torque * overall gear ratio. Our engines are plenty capable of making power if setup properly. We haven't seen many "FI builds" yet either, most are using the stock longblock to make these numbers.

You also have to keep in mind that AWD is cool for launches, but starts to be less cool the faster you go past ~30mph because it then just starts to become a mechanical horsepower loss with very little use (unless you have insane amounts of power). I don't know what EVO's make at the wheels, but STI's only make around 240-250whp after going through the AWD. When you couple that with their car's weighing ~300lbs more then ours, once we get to around 220whp we are keeping up with the stock ones. The guy with the 290whp car said he has no problems on the road course with stock EVO's an STI's, and only had a problem with the ones that are really modified.
 
#26 ·
AWD does indeed provide for monster launches. the other thing that AWD provides is grip. The key "problems" with AWD is the added weight and of course the driveline loss.

I came from a modified wrx, then rx8, and now the focus. I'm loving the car, that's for sure, but I've only owned 2 other FWD cars, I've only raced (auto-x, rally-x, ice race) awd and rwd before this past winter where I've experienced some fwd. This will be the first year to auto-x fwd.

I'm not too worried about straight line racing, it's all about the twisties for me.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top