2008 Focus SECOND in Consumer Reports Comparo

[MKII]

It's not my fault, that's the only engine they offer around here. This is why I fucking hate Ford of Europe, they give us the trash that doesn't sell around there.

 

Did you say space? I have never been into a lot of small cars, but the C1 Focus is FREAKING TIGHT.. I came out of a Caprice... A LWB version of the Vauxhall VX8 if you will.

 

If you find the C1 tight, the C170 is much tighter.

 

C1 4 door

Front seats:

Headroom: 999 mm

Front leg room: 1108 mm

Front shoulder room: 1408 mm

 

Rearseats:

Rear Headroom: 966 mm

Rear leg room: 853 mm

Rear Shoulder room: 1385 mm

 

Overall length 4488

Overall width without mirrors 1840

Overall height (max) 1497

Wheelbase 2640

*********************************

 

C170 4 door 2008

Front headroom 995mm

Front legroom 1,059mm

Front shoulder room 1,359mm

 

Rear headroom 972mm

Rear legroom 916mm

Rear shoulder room 1,363mm

 

Vehicle length 4,445mm

Vehicle width 1,722mm

Vehicle height 1,488mm

Wheelbase 2,613mm

 

C1 specs http://www.ford.co.uk/ie/foc_c307/foc_c307...ns/-/-/-/982531

 

2008 C170 specs http://media.ford.com/products/presskit_di...&make_id=92

 

I have included the C170 4 door My2007 as well

Front headroom 993mm

Front legroom 1,034mm

Front shoulder room 1,359mm

 

Rear headroom 975mm

Rear legroom 955mm

Rear shoulder room 1,361mm

 

Exterior length 4,450mm

Exterior body width 1,694mm

Exterior height 1,443mm

Wheelbase 2,616mm

 

http://www.ford.ca/main/default.asp?langua...amp;model=Focus

 

As far as what spec'd Focus is offered in your country I do not believe that is Ford of Europes decision but the distrubutors decision in ones countries market Yes?

Edited October 5, 2007 by MKII

[LincolnFan]

Actually, no. FoE is to be blamed. I don't know whether there's a Ford of Middle East or not, but even if it does exist it will be a pawn of FoE, it's a known fact among companies that Europe, Middle East and Africa are controlled by the European division.

 

Again, I know the C170 is smaller than the C1. Everyone talks about the C1 being bigger but imo it's really so small that it isn't funny..

 

EDIT: Funny, the C170 has bigger rear dimensions than the C1 dispite being smaller.

Edited October 5, 2007 by LincolnFan

[igor]

If you find the C1 tight, the C170 is much tighter.

 

C1 4 door

Front seats:

Headroom: 999 mm

Front leg room: 1108 mm

Front shoulder room: 1408 mm

 

Rearseats:

Rear Headroom: 966 mm

Rear leg room: 853 mm

Rear Shoulder room: 1385 mm

 

Overall length 4488

Overall width without mirrors 1840

Overall height (max) 1497

Wheelbase 2640

*********************************

 

C170 4 door 2008

Front headroom 995mm

Front legroom 1,059mm

Front shoulder room 1,359mm

 

Rear headroom 972mm

Rear legroom 916mm

Rear shoulder room 1,363mm

 

Vehicle length 4,445mm

Vehicle width 1,722mm

Vehicle height 1,488mm

Wheelbase 2,613mm

 

C1 specs http://www.ford.co.uk/ie/foc_c307/foc_c307...ns/-/-/-/982531

 

2008 C170 specs http://media.ford.com/products/presskit_di...&make_id=92

 

I have included the C170 4 door My2007 as well

Front headroom 993mm

Front legroom 1,034mm

Front shoulder room 1,359mm

 

Rear headroom 975mm

Rear legroom 955mm

Rear shoulder room 1,361mm

 

Exterior length 4,450mm

Exterior body width 1,694mm

Exterior height 1,443mm

Wheelbase 2,616mm

 

http://www.ford.ca/main/default.asp?langua...amp;model=Focus

 

As far as what spec'd Focus is offered in your country I do not believe that is Ford of Europes decision but the distrubutors decision in ones countries market Yes?

your post disproves your point - the interior dimensions for the front row are within millimeters of each other .. and that is for a car that is quite a bit smaller on the outside. IE: the EU C1 Focus wastes space.

 

Igor

[ShockFX]

your post disproves your point - the interior dimensions for the front row are within millimeters of each other .. and that is for a car that is quite a bit smaller on the outside. IE: the EU C1 Focus wastes space.

 

Igor

 

Americans can't have the C1 Focus because we are fatter on average than Europeans. I seriously only think some cars are popular (Impala, Monte Carlo, CV, Big SUVS) in the US because of all the overweight people that need big cars. I can't imagine some of the people I've seen squeezing into a Mondeo, let alone a C1 Focus.

[igor]

Americans can't have the C1 Focus because we are fatter on average than Europeans. I seriously only think some cars are popular (Impala, Monte Carlo, CV, Big SUVS) in the US because of all the overweight people that need big cars. I can't imagine some of the people I've seen squeezing into a Mondeo, let alone a C1 Focus.

Americans cannot have C1 because Ford was smoking meth in 2003.

Americans cannot have the same Focus as EU (not just platform and basics, but the full shebang) because they refuse to think and probably because they are too fat... they never value the merit of a small car ..

 

but let me say this - IF in 6-8 years Ford (any Ford brand) has a wagon out with 4x5star rating in the C or CD category - I WILL BUY (not lease - buy)- fully decked out too.

 

Igor

Edited October 5, 2007 by igor

[johnnyb82]

Maybe it is much less about the waistlines of Americans and more to do with the following:

 

1. Lower taxes on gas make larger cars more affordable.

2. We drive more, have longer commutes and thus are more likely to want a bigger car that is more comfortable.

3. We are probably taller than Europeans

4. We have larger families.

5. We are less concentrated in the cities.

6. Compact cars are less safe than their mid-sized cousins.

[ShockFX]

Maybe it is much less about the waistlines of Americans and more to do with the following:

 

1. Lower taxes on gas make larger cars more affordable.

Lower taxes on gas make ALL cars more affordable.

2. We drive more, have longer commutes and thus are more likely to want a bigger car that is more comfortable.

Bigger does not equal more comfortable. I can't tell you how many people I've seen commuting solo in a Denali or the like.

3. We are probably taller than Europeans

Less than an inch difference on average.

4. We have larger families.

Again, less than a 1 child per family difference. A better argument would be that Americans carpool to soccer and football and boyscouts etc.

5. We are less concentrated in the cities.

But our concentrated cities still have a vast difference in car choices from their cities.

6. Compact cars are less safe than their mid-sized cousins.

This is not always true. The problem is that almost all small cars in the US are cheap. A Volvo S40 is much safer than most midsize cars, and comparable to the S60. In addition, if we didn't have soccer moms swerving down the street in Suburbans, larger cars wouldn't be necessary.

[TomServo92]

In addition, if we didn't have soccer moms swerving down the street in Suburbans, larger cars wouldn't be necessary.

 

True dat!

[RichardJensen]

This isn't Europe. Assigning relative values (e.g. "Americans are fat and lazy") is ridiculous. This is a different place. End of story.

[ShockFX]

This isn't Europe. Assigning relative values (e.g. "Americans are fat and lazy") is ridiculous. This is a different place. End of story.

 

Americans use 2-3 times more energy per day than Europeans. Is our standard of living 2-3 times higher? No, it is not. Therefore, a problem exists.

 

I could find a ton of research that shows we have a lower life expectancy, higher risk of obesity, etc. Saying Americans are lazy is relative, saying they are fat is a fact.

[suv_guy_19]

Americans use 2-3 times more energy per day than Europeans. Is our standard of living 2-3 times higher? No, it is not. Therefore, a problem exists.

 

I could find a ton of research that shows we have a lower life expectancy, higher risk of obesity, etc. Saying Americans are lazy is relative, saying they are fat is a fact.

 

 

What are you talking about. We use more energy per capita than any country on earth. We live longer than you. Americans work longer hours, on average than both Europeans and Canadians. Yeah, your a little fatter, but so. Fat people buy small cars too. Europe and the US/Canada are two very different things, and its not really very easy to compare them. We have longer distances and colder temperatures in winter. Our lifestyle is different than that of Europe.

[ShockFX]

What are you talking about. We use more energy per capita than any country on earth. We live longer than you. Americans work longer hours, on average than both Europeans and Canadians. Yeah, your a little fatter, but so. Fat people buy small cars too. Europe and the US/Canada are two very different things, and its not really very easy to compare them. We have longer distances and colder temperatures in winter. Our lifestyle is different than that of Europe.

 

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th...r/2102rank.html

 

Canada over the US correct, but not the US over Europe.

 

Although American, I find it problematic such a small % of the world's population uses such a large % of its resources. Not that I'm troubled on a daily basis, but it seems long run insustainable.

[Catalepsy]

You are over simplifying statistics. USA, unlike other cultures, is multiethnic. Some ethnic groups have higher risk of obesity and have much lower life expectancies. This is a country of immigrants, of course the statistics are going to reflect differently than a monoethnic societies in Europe of Asia.

 

Americans are far from lazy. Americans are the most productive people on Earth according to a report by the United Nation's International Labor Organization in Sept of this year. We work far longer hours and take few vacation/sick days than Europeans. Our health reflects that.

 

Vehicle choices reflects the way of life in the US. We drive more, we want bigger cars because we are in it longer. You can argue that some small cars are comfortable, but it is a fact of human psychology that we want bigger homes with a yard, and a small minority that prefer smaller apartments.

 

I know Europe envy is trendy, but as someone that goes there on business every 2 months, I see different cultures as different. I appreciate them both. I hope difference in culture can exist without everyone becoming the same.

 

 

 

Americans use 2-3 times more energy per day than Europeans. Is our standard of living 2-3 times higher? No, it is not. Therefore, a problem exists.

 

I could find a ton of research that shows we have a lower life expectancy, higher risk of obesity, etc. Saying Americans are lazy is relative, saying they are fat is a fact.

[RichardJensen]

saying they are fat is a fact.

I see. Given any thought to why this is the case?

 

Making value distinctions about classes of people (e.g. using a pejorative like 'fat') is very very dangerous. Assigning a negative attribute to a whole class of people, prejudices one to finding alleged character flaws to underpin that assumed negative character trait, which then leads to assumed inferiority of that class of people in general.

 

Follow the bouncing ball.

 

Assumptions:

 

Being overweight is bad.

 

People have control over their weight.

 

Conclusions:

 

Becoming overweight is a result of decisions a person makes.

 

The overweight person chooses to make bad decisions.

 

Because they make bad decisions, they must be poorly educated, poorly motivated, or they must lack sufficient self-control or the discipline required to make good decisions.

 

Overweight people are, therefore, in some fundamental sense, inferior to people that are not overweight.

 

 

Very dangerous business that....

[ShockFX]

You are over simplifying statistics. USA, unlike other cultures, is multiethnic. Some ethnic groups have higher risk of obesity and have much lower life expectancies. This is a country of immigrants, of course the statistics are going to reflect differently than a monoethnic societies in Europe of Asia.

 

Americans are far from lazy. Americans are the most productive people on Earth according to a report by the United Nation's International Labor Organization in Sept of this year. We work far longer hours and take few vacation/sick days than Europeans. Our health reflects that.

 

Vehicle choices reflects the way of life in the US. We drive more, we want bigger cars because we are in it longer. You can argue that some small cars are comfortable, but it is a fact of human psychology that we want bigger homes with a yard, and a small minority that prefer smaller apartments.

 

I know Europe envy is trendy, but as someone that goes there on business every 2 months, I see different cultures as different. I appreciate them both. I hope difference in culture can exist without everyone becoming the same.

 

I don't envy Europe, I just think we could improve here.

 

Also, the US used to dominate life expectancy charts. The fact that we no longer do is what I am calling into question.

[johnnyb82]

I am 6ft 3 and when I had a Ford Contour, my head went past the B-pillar when I drove, I had to lean the seat back so far. Imagine what it was like for people sitting behind me?

 

I can live squashed in a Toyota Corolla for a 15 minute drive in the back, but if I am driving cross-country I'll want to kill myself. People can afford larger cars and the larger gas bills. In fact, I am not sure there is a huge gain in fuel economy going from mid-sized four-banger to compact four-banger.

 

I have lived in Europe and people simply do not drive as much. They are taxed extremely high both in regards to gas and otherwise, they have a denser population which makes it easier to 1) have more cost-effective public transportation, 2) walk more places, etc.

 

Take away the straw-man of the soccer mom swerving in the Suburban and you still have buses, tractor-trailers, etc. that threaten small cars.

 

If you are talking about people driving to work without anyone else in their car, that maybe so, but people want to have the ability to have comfortable long rides with their whole family even if they are unlikely to be bringing everyone out in their car more than half the time. 1 extra person on average in a family is a lot. Three kids in the back seat or two kids in the back seat and a friend or whatever is far worse than 1 kid sitting behind the short person in the passenger seat.

 

If it is all about Americans being fatter, which I think is dubious since cars are usually limited in leg room more than anything else, then how do you explain our long history of larger cars that pre-dates any uptick in obesity?

 

If it makes it feel better to blame people on being lazy, stupid and greedy for not buying the kind of cars THAT YOU LIKE, that's fine, however.

Edited October 5, 2007 by johnnyb82

[ShockFX]

I see. Given any thought to why this is the case?

 

Making value distinctions about classes of people (e.g. using a pejorative like 'fat') is very very dangerous. Assigning a negative attribute to a whole class of people, prejudices one to finding alleged character flaws to underpin that assumed negative character trait, which then leads to assumed inferiority of that class of people in general.

 

Follow the bouncing ball.

 

Assumptions:

 

Being overweight is bad.

 

People have control over their weight.

 

Conclusions:

 

Becoming overweight is a result of decisions a person makes.

 

The overweight person chooses to make bad decisions.

 

Because they make bad decisions, they must be poorly educated, poorly motivated, or they must lack sufficient self-control or the discipline required to make good decisions.

 

Overweight people are, therefore, in some fundamental sense, inferior to people that are not overweight.

Very dangerous business that....

Assumptions

 

Being overweight is UNHEALTHY.

Not all people have control over their metabolism, but most adjust accordingly.

 

Conclusions

 

Becoming overweight is a result of decisions made.

Because they make bad decisions, they are making a personal choice, but when my money goes to pay for bad choices (ie my health insurance helping to pay for smokers) I get upset.

Overweight people are, therefore, in some proven fundamental sense, more risky and less healthy than people that are not overweight.

 

See what I did there. When the lifestyles of people I have nothing to do with are driving my health care costs through the roof I get a bit pissed off.

[RichardJensen]

Also, the US used to dominate life expectancy charts. The fact that we no longer do is what I am calling into question.

So what is your preference:

 

The U.S. continues to have higher life expectancy than the rest of the world?

 

The rest of the world catches up?

 

Fact is, standards of care have gone up dramatically in Europe over the last few decades. Remember, WWII was fought in -their backyard- not ours. As standards of care have gone up, life expectancy has gone up.

[RichardJensen]

When the lifestyles of people I have nothing to do with are driving my health care costs through the roof I get a bit pissed off.

Oh. So it's about you.

 

It's not about overweight people getting sick, it's about you paying for it.

 

What rankles you, is that it costs you money.

 

Am I right?

[ShockFX]

Oh. So it's about you.

 

It's not about overweight people getting sick, it's about you paying for it.

 

What rankles you, is that it costs you money.

 

Am I right?

 

Lol, it's one and the same thing. All sickness is unecessary cost. Loss of productivity, loss of a loved one, loss of ability (parkinsons etc). You can't control getting parkinson's or Alzheimers, you can control having increased risks of stroke, high blood pressure, heart attacks, diabetes, etc.

 

If you are in shape you pay as much as the fat guy working next to you. How is that fair?

[johnnyb82]

Lol, it's one and the same thing. All sickness is unecessary cost. Loss of productivity, loss of a loved one, loss of ability (parkinsons etc). You can't control getting parkinson's or Alzheimers, you can control having increased risks of stroke, high blood pressure, heart attacks, diabetes, etc.

 

If you are in shape you pay as much as the fat guy working next to you. How is that fair?

 

You should feel compensated by the piece of mind that you will live longer and have a higher quality of life. I suppose it's better to try to connect it to your pocket-book so that you can justify a holier-than-thou attitude.

 

If I think about the person who is fat or whatever, I am like man, it might suck being fat, if I bother judging them at all.

[ShockFX]

You should feel compensated by the piece of mind that you will live longer and have a higher quality of life. I suppose it's better to try to connect it to your pocket-book so that you can justify a holier-than-thou attitude.

 

If I think about the person who is fat or whatever, I am like man, it might suck being fat, if I bother judging them at all.

 

I was actually thinking not just about myself, but about people that can't afford health care because it is too expensive. If more people were healthy, guess what, the UAW would have been able to keep the sweet health benefits they had cause they wouldn't have cost so damn much.

[RichardJensen]

If you are in shape you pay as much as the fat guy working next to you. How is that fair?

How is it not fair? Is it because the 'fat' guy 'wants' to be 'fat'?

 

Sounds fine to me. While we're at it, let's round up all those people with depression and make them pay for their own psych bills. They 'want' to be depressed. Let's just start developing a list of health issues that people 'want' to have, and give them their own insurance pools, and maybe even their own segregated work areas, and so forth.

 

I mean really, Shock. Once you start down that road, there is absolutely no valid basis for drawing the line anywhere.

 

You either make it equal across all participants, or you start drawing distinctions. Remembering of course, that the only basis for any distinction is 'because', and that's no valid distinction at all.

[johnnyb82]

Also, why stop at the fat person or the smoker?

 

Should I have to pay for the person who speeds excessively? Should I pay for person who forgot to look where they were going and tripped on stuff on the floor? Should I pay for the person having unprotected sex? Should I pay for the person who works with hazardous materials? Should I pay for the person who decides to hand glide? Should I pay for the person who decides to ever leave his house because it is so much safer being a shut-in? Should I pay for the person who travels to Southeast Asia and gets bird flu?

 

And how much can we even control?

 

I'd think in regards to what we can control given what card we are dealt, death, serious injury and a terrible quality of life should be enough deterrence. Paternalism and shame from other people who don't want to pay their health care bill is unnecessary.

[johnnyb82]

I don't have the stats available, but I remember reading that while Americans pay a lot more per capita for their health insurance, the growth rate in health care costs is now about equal across countries. So it can't all be about obesity.