2014 Ford Focus 0 60 Time
TESTED
Just as Sonny or Cher, individually, never lived up to Sonny and Cher, you might assume that the greatest hits from Mazda and Ford are behind us. When Ford sold all but a symbolic slice of its stake in Mazda in 2010, it ended one of the longest-running, most successful automotive collaborations in history. Mazda's chassis expertise and Ford's engine know-how produced lively, nimble cars, none more significant than the 2000 Ford Focus. Built on a Mazda platform that wouldn't be used by the Japanese automaker for another three years, that Focus landed on our 10Best list five times and initiated the industry-wide race to build compacts that enthusiasts want.
Mazda and Ford haven't peaked, though. Since parting ways, they've only improved their compact cars, as if knowing what the other was capable of motivated them. Ford's compact car still rides on an evolution of that Mazda-developed C-segment platform and is every bit as good as the original Focus. It's earned a spot on our 10Best list for the past two years. Mazda's newcomer is unproven but hardly lacks confidence. A multibillion-dollar investment in new engines, transmissions, and platforms has already returned comparo wins for the CX-5 crossover and the 6 mid-size sedan.
Without Mazda's handling competence or Ford's financial stability, neither company would be building these cars today—the best compacts on the market. Since there can be only one winner, these one-time BFFs are now rivals vying for the title of compact-car king.
The third-generation Ford Focus has hardly been challenged in the three years it's been on sale. It has comfortably driven away with three comparison-test wins against a total of six competitors, including the previous-generation 3. But the Ford has finally met its match with the new Mazda 3, giving up its title in a 15-point loss.
After jumping out of the Mazda, we found the same interior bits we once praised now less satisfying. The Ford's plastics are harder, and the finishes are starting to look run-of-the-mill. Our sparsely equipped SE model saves us from having to curse MyFord Touch, yet even the standard Sync system is an ergonomic curiosity. The few options amount to aesthetic upgrades that leave the $22,550 Focus feeling like a stripper of sorts. In contrast, the 3 justifies its $2085 premium with a long list of convenience features.
If it's lacking beauty and amenities, at least the Focus has the fundamentals down. The driver benefits from an adjustable-tilt headrest and cushioning that remains comfortable long after your butt's gone numb in the 3. The Ford's rear seats also offer more thigh support, and they fit three across with less shoulder jostling. However, a wheelbase two inches shorter and an overall length that's down four inches on the Mazda mean the Focus has significantly less rear-seat legroom.
A.J. MUELLER
The stout unibody is quiver-free over even the worst concrete-asphalt patchwork, and the car's suspension tune—largely executed by Ford's European arm—reminds us of one of Germany's best: the Volkswagen GTI. There's more vertical motion than in the 3, with the springs trumping the dampers, and tire impacts are transmitted to the cabin with a sharper shock. You wouldn't call it stiff, but the ride is substantially firmer than in the 3.
That athletic character is also apparent through the sharp turn-in and excellent on-center sensitivity of the steering wheel. At the limit of adhesion, the Focus is helped through corners by the nondefeatable stability control that subtly brakes individual wheels to keep the car in line without noticeably impeding progress.
The 160-hp four-cylinder is a commodity piece, built to a price point as much as a set of targeted traits. While power delivery is slightly more energetic than in the Mazda, Ford's 2.0-liter buzzes while cruising and booms under load on the highway. The five-speed manual it's attached to is an anachronism that's almost a decade removed from relevance. Shift quality is decent, but driving the Mazda brings a perspective that makes the Ford's throws feel longish and the effort a bit muddy.
The Focus squeaks past the 3 in most straight-line and roadholding metrics. Its advantage is just two-tenths of a mile per hour through the slalom, one-tenth of a second in the quarter-mile, and one-hundredth of a g around the skidpad. In the real world and in our scoring system, the differences are trivial.
Ford didn't lose this comparison on performance. In both objective and subjective dynamic evaluation, the Focus went shot-for-shot with the 3. The Focus remains an exceptional compact car, with impressive handling and practical packaging. The problem is that the Mazda 3 is just as competent dynamically while demonstrating unmatched polish and style.
To understand just how serious Mazda is about the compact segment, note that the Japanese automaker has wiped the anime smirk off the 3's face. The long hood, bulging fenders, and windswept sheetmetal suggest a car with more class and ambition than the outgoing car—and your typical compact. It's a design that Infiniti or Lexus would be fortunate to claim.
The 3 lives up to its billing inside, with one staffer calling the cabin "Audi-like." No one will confuse this Mazda for a $60,000 car, but the 3's interior is characterized by the same attributes seen in the best luxury sedans: understated styling, high-end materials, and impressive fit quality.
The Grand Touring trim contributes to the upscale aura with dual-zone climate control, blind-spot monitoring, and leatherette seats that could pass for the real thing. The included infotainment system mimics BMW's iDrive and Audi's MMI with the screen perched atop the dash and a single oversized knob to handle audio, navigation, and Bluetooth. It's arguably more intuitive and attractive than its inspirations, except that the volume knob is the only dedicated audio control on the center console. Without a tuning knob or seek buttons (other than those on the steering wheel), switching radio stations sometimes requires navigating to the correct screen first.
A.J. MUELLER
Midway through our drive, as the 3's lead becomes clear, C/D technical director Don Sherman points to a lonely cloud he claims has spelled out the Mazda tagline, "Zoom-Zoom." [The '60s. Man, those were the days—Ed.] Mazda's Skyactiv technology, branded on the 3's rear hatch, is not a weather-control machine, though. Rather, it's an amalgam of engineering approaches and hardware optimizing the engine, transmission, and body structure to conjure up the 3's 29/40-mpg fuel-economy ratings
The tangible bits are under the hood, where the four-cylinder employs direct injection, variable valve timing, and a 13:1 compression ratio. Over 750 miles, the 3's 2.0-liter outscored the Focus's by one mpg with 32. The efficiency-minded tech isn't as beneficial to straight-line performance. Even when the gas pedal is pressed to the floor, there's not much active about this Skyactiv powertrain. While the specs suggest that the 3 has the torque advantage, the engine lacks low-end urgency. The Mazda clears the quarter-mile in 16.3 seconds, just one tick behind the Ford, yet it's 0.4 second off the Focus's pace to 60 mph. It doesn't help that the Mazda's lower three gears are taller than the Focus's, despite the gearbox having one more cog.
The 155-hp four-cylinder offers redeeming qualities when revved. It is smoother and quieter than the Ford's engine and the need to shift frequently is no penalty, thanks to the six-speed's light and delightful action. A 184-hp 2.5-liter four-cylinder is also available (but only with an auto, for now).
As with the Focus, the 3's finest attributes are its suspension and chassis. It weighs in at 2892 pounds, or 107 pounds less than the Ford, an advantage evident in curves. Turn off the stability control and you'll find that Mazda doesn't have anything to hide. The 3 delivers handling that's more neutral and better attuned to driver input. Its lighter steering is just as precise and alert on-center as the Focus's, and its firm, pressure-sensitive brake pedal inspires confidence. Supple damping massages the transition between compression and rebound, setting the 3's ride apart from that of the Focus. The suspension tune is compliant without compromising handling, a masterful balance that is rare for a car of this size and price.
Back in May 2011, the old Mazda 3 handed first place to the Ford Focus because it was thirstier, short on features, and lacked the interior quality and style of the Ford. With the new 3, each of those criticisms could now be leveled at the Focus. Of course, it shouldn't come as a surprise that Mazda knew exactly where to plunge its knife. Keep your competition close, learn its faults, and strike when it's least expected—that's what frenemies do.
| | ||||
| Vehicle | 2014 Ford Focus SE | 2015 Volkswagen GTI | ||
| Base Price | $19,910 | $24.040 | ||
| Price as Tested | $22,550 | $24,635 | ||
| Dimensions | ||||
| Length | 171.6 inches | 175.6 inches | ||
| Width | 71.8 inches | 70.7 inches | ||
| Height | 57.7 inches | 57.3 inches | ||
| Wheelbase | 104.3 inches | 106.3 inches | ||
| Front Track | 61.2 inches | 61.2 inches | ||
| Rear Track | 60.4 inches | 61.4 inches | ||
| Interior Volume | F: 52 cubic feet R: 39 cubic feet | F: 52 cubic feet R: 42 cubic feet | ||
| Cargo Volume | F: 45 cubic feet R: 24 cubic feet | F: 47 cubic feet R: 20 cubic feet | ||
| | ||||
| Powertrain | ||||
| Engine | DOHC 16-valve inline-4 122 cu in (1999 cc) | DOHC 16-valve Atkinson-cycle inline-4 122 cu in (1998 cc) | ||
| Power HP @ RPM | 160 @ 6500 | 155 @ 6000 | ||
| Torque LB-FT @ RPM | 146 @ 4450 | 150 @ 4000 | ||
| Redline / Fuel Cutoff | 7000/7000 rpm | 6800/6800 rpm | ||
| LB Per HP | 18.7 | 18.7 | ||
| Driveline | ||||
| Transmission | 5-speed manual | 6-speed manual | ||
| Driven Wheels | front | front | ||
| Gear Ratio:1/ MPH Per 1000 RPM/ Max MPH | ❶ 3.67/5.3/37 ❷ 2.14/9.0/63 ❸ 1.45/13.1/92 ❹ 1.03/18.4/121 ❺ 0.81/23.4/121 | ❶ 3.36/5.4/37 ❷ 1.95/9.4/64 ❸ 1.30/14.3/97 ❹ 1.03/18.7/127 ❺ 0.84/22.9/131 ❻ 0.68/28.3/120 | ||
| Axle Ratio:1 | 3.82 | 3.85 | ||
| | ||||
| Chassis | ||||
| Suspension | F: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar | F: struts, coil springs, anti-roll bar R: multilink, coil springs, anti-roll bar | ||
| Brakes | F: 10.9-inch vented disc R: 10.7-inch disc | F: 11.0-inch vented disc R: 10.4-inch vented disc | ||
| Stability Control | traction off | fully defeatable | ||
| Tires | Cooper Zeon RS3-R 215/50R-17 95W M+S | Yokohama Avid S34 P205/60R-16 91H M+S | ||
| | ||||
| C/D Test Results | ||||
| Acceleration | ||||
| 0–30 MPH | 2.7 sec | 2.8 sec | ||
| 0–60 MPH | 7.5 sec | 7.9 sec | ||
| 0–100 MPH | 21.9 sec | 22.4 sec | ||
| 0–120 MPH | 40.3 sec | 39.8 sec | ||
| ¼-Mile @ MPH | 16.1 sec @ 89 | 16.3 sec @ 87 | ||
| Rolling Start, 5–60 MPH | 8.3 sec | 8.3 sec | ||
| Top Gear, 30–50 MPH | 12.7 sec | 14.3 sec | ||
| Top Gear, 50–70 MPH | 12.6 sec | 13.8 sec | ||
| Top Speed | 121 mph (drag ltd) | 131 mph (drag ltd) | ||
| Chassis | ||||
| Braking 70–0 MPH | 182 feet | 178 feet | ||
| Roadholding, 300-ft-dia Skidpad | 0.83 g | 0.82 g | ||
| 610-ft Slalom | 39.3 mph | 39.1 mph | ||
| Weight | ||||
| Curb | 2999 pounds | 2892 pounds | ||
| %Front/%Rear | 59.0/41.0 | 59.0/41.0 | ||
| CG Height | 22.5 inches | 22.0 inches | ||
| Fuel | ||||
| Tank | 12.4 gallons | 13.2 gallons | ||
| Rating | 87 octane | 87 octane | ||
| EPA City/Hwy | 26/36 mpg | 29/40 mpg | ||
| C/D 750-Mile Trip | 31 mpg | 32 mpg | ||
| Practical stowage | ||||
| beer cases, seats up/folded | 10/30 | 10/26 | ||
| Length of pipe | 116.8 inches | 118.3 inches | ||
| largest flat panel, length x width | 64.3 x 40.0 inches | 63.4 x 40.3 inches | ||
| Sound Level | ||||
| Idle | 43 dBA | 37 dBA | ||
| Full Throttle | 79 dBA | 77 dBA | ||
| 70-MPH Cruise | 73 dBA | 70 dBA | ||
| tested in Chelsea, Michigan, by eric tingwall | ||||
| | ||||
| Final Results | ||||
| Vehicle | Max Pts. Available | 2014 Mazda 3 i Grand Touring | 2014 Ford Focus SE | |
| Driver Comfort | 10 | 8 | 9 | |
| Ergonomics | 10 | 9 | 8 | |
| Rear-seat Comfort | 5 | 4 | 4 | |
| Rear-seat Space* | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
| Cargo Space* | 5 | 5 | 4 | |
| Features/Amenities* | 10 | 10 | 6 | |
| Fit and Finish | 10 | 9 | 9 | |
| Interior Styling | 10 | 10 | 8 | |
| Exterior Styling | 10 | 10 | 9 | |
| Rebates/Extras* | 5 | 0 | 1 | |
| As-tested Price* | 20 | 18 | 20 | |
| Subtotal | 100 | 88 | 82 | |
| | ||||
| Powertrain | ||||
| 1/4-mile Acceleration* | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
| Flexibility* | 5 | 4 | 3 | |
| Fuel Economy* | 10 | 10 | 9 | |
| Engine NVH | 10 | 9 | 8 | |
| Transmission | 10 | 9 | 7 | |
| Subtotal | 55 | 52 | 47 | |
| | ||||
| Chassis | ||||
| Performance* | 20 | 20 | 20 | |
| Steering Feel | 10 | 9 | 9 | |
| Brake Feel | 10 | 9 | 9 | |
| Handling | 10 | 9 | 8 | |
| Ride | 10 | 9 | 8 | |
| Subtotal | 60 | 56 | 54 | |
| | ||||
| Experience | ||||
| Fun to Drive | 25 | 24 | 22 | |
| | ||||
| Grand Total | 240 | 220 | 205 | |
| | ||||
| * These objective scores are calculated from the vehicle's dimensions, capacities, rebates and extras, and/or test results. | ||||
A.J. MUELLER
This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io
Source: https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparison-test/a15113223/2014-mazda-3-vs-2014-ford-focus-comparison-test-review/
Tidak ada komentar: