3600 Mile review 2011 ford Focus

[Nick R]

So with all the other reviews popping up, I'll do one for mine. No recent pictures, I really need to hit the car wash after the rain last week. 3600 Miles in 2 months. Lotta driving. About 75% Highway, 25% City/stop and go I've averaged about 28mpg (computer overestimates by 2mpg) which isn't bad considering that I cruise at 75mph, and I have 6 different merges everyday from slow on-ramps.

Comfy front seats. Leather wrapped steering wheel is excellent (though I'd prefer a 4 spoke to the 3 spoke). I have the base stereo with sync. Sync is definitely nice to have, and the hands-free phone part is very nice. Being able to call up a song or artist, or album or pre-made playlist without taking your hands off the steering wheel is a VERY useful feature. For a stock system, it sounds really good. Bass is nice, and it doesn't really start getting distorted till I turn it way up, and by that point it isn't getting any louder anyway.

The stock Kumho solus tires are so far excellent. Ride on the highway is smooth and composed. They have fantastic dry traction. I can take on ramps at 50mph if I want to. They just grip. Wet isn't quite as good, but still not bad. I tend to spin the tires out of a stop if I'm not careful, though the Traction control kicks in right away. The Stabilitrak thus far seems to do a good job. There is no wind noise, but a little bit of road noise gets into the cabin. I have them inflated to 37/37 (35 recommended). No comments on winter traction yet, though not expecting miracles.

The engine is one of the strong points here. It is very refined and smooth. Free revving, and it pulls for a 2.0L. It isn't bad at low RPM, but it doesn't really start to "go" until about 3400-3500RPM (See 0-60 at the bottom). It will never be confused with a V6 or V8, but it purrs nicely enough. Hasn't burned a drop of PP in the 2800 miles or so it's been in the car.

Transmission is overall very good, for a 4 speed. Shifts are smooth and well spaced. It turns 1500@45, 2000@60, and 2500@75. Torque converter will NOT lock up until exactly 45mph. And it will not lock up when cold until the engine is halfway to NOT, which does bug me a little. And if I let completely off the gas, the torque converter unlocks and the rpm drops, which does engine brake pretty good, I just sometimes wish it wouldn't, because it doesn't immediately lock back up upon touching the gas again.


The climate control is good. A/C is a tiny bit weak in 90 degree sunny weather, but not horrible. And the nice thing is I can't tell it's running like I could with the cavalier. You KNEW the A/C was on with that one. Heat is oven-like. If you leave it on max heat, it will cook you. So I don't recommend that, lol.


The one thing I cannot praise enough are the brakes. I love these brakes. They are very, very linear feeling, and quickly grow in power with pedal travel. Initial bite is strong, and pedal feel is the best I have ever, ever experienced. Ford nailed the brakes on this thing. Braking distance is great, with front disc/rear drum. Way to go ford!!

Trunk is huge, with a good opening. Rear seat room is about average for a small car. Unless the front seats are all the way forward, the rear passenger has their knees in the back of the seat. But there is a large air gap inside to allow for this without becoming very uncomfortable. When we go places as a family in it (rare but does happen) I sit in the back, and we are pretty comfortable.

I only have a few minor gripes.

1. No power seats, but I knew that when I got it. Would be nice to have.

2. No telescoping steering wheel, again, knew this when I got it, but seating position is a trade off between leg comfort, and arm comfort. Which brings me to #

3. 4 spoke steering wheel would be great. That is a personal thing, but I'm so used to 2/4 spoke (Cavalier, expedition, Jeep) that it just feels strange.

4. There is a little bit of wind induced wander on the highway which I am not used to. I've seen a few others mention this too with the SES model, something to do with the tires I guess. Not a big deal but if it's windy you can definitely feel it.

Cold start coming soon. For now, here is the 0-60 from the other week. I timed at 9.5 seconds. Not to bad, but not great either.

 

[IndyIan]

Good review, sounds like a solid car, 9.5s 0-60 is just fine for getting around and safe passing. As for the crosswind issue, I think most "small" cars have this happening due to their much larger side area compared to the old compact cars. Also having toe and camber seems to effect it as well. My Neon used to ignore almost any crosswind but after I put a bunch of front camber in, it does wander if its windy now.

 

[andrewg]

I agree with most of the stuff you've said. I do find the a/c however to work very well for me. The trunk is indeed huge for a small car and the engine is refined and ample for a 4 cylinder. I agree with the brakes....very nice. My tires are Hankook and not Kumho's. They have a bit of road noise, but not terrible. The sidewind thing I haven't noticed. I do have a habit of wheel spin when starting on a hill. I have not had it in snow as of yet so I can't comment on that....we just don't get it very much.
Thanks for the review.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

I hope it lasts a long time! I find steering to get overly sensitive with the higher tire pressure, especially now these compacts and subcompacts have 15 and 16" rims. Even my 2300lb Yaris has the 185 65R 15 option. Steering stability may improve with 31-33 psi cold inflation. I would not take a lot of air out at once - it can distort the tire. This will improve your wet traction too. I dont think you would take any air out though, right? You have it jacked to 37 for fuel mileage?

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
And if I let completely off the gas, the torque converter unlocks and the rpm drops, which does engine brake pretty good, I just sometimes wish it wouldn't, because it doesn't immediately lock back up upon touching the gas again.


The way Ford programmed your transmission produces a smoother transition than the way Toyota programmed my Camry, for example. My Camry leaves the TCC engaged all the time, unless I hit the brake, AND cuts fuel. So you get full engine braking like a manual transmission. Most "normal" automatics allow you to really coast when off the gas, and it sounds like your Focus is the same way. The drive is very smooth that way, but not quite as efficient (more slippage). The way Toyota does it is most efficient, but not as smooth. I can drive mine smooth, but some people on ToyotaNation don't like it, and it can get "jerky" if you're not careful.

I said all that to say that the way Ford did it is probably the better option for most people, especially those used to driving automatics. You can jump on and off the gas at will, and there's no immediate engine braking like you get in a manual.

Good review. It sounds like it's a nice fit for you.

 

[Nick R]

 

[ItsuMitsubishi]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

The way Ford programmed your transmission produces a smoother transition than the way Toyota programmed my Camry, for example. My Camry leaves the TCC engaged all the time, unless I hit the brake, AND cuts fuel. So you get full engine braking like a manual transmission. Most "normal" automatics allow you to really coast when off the gas, and it sounds like your Focus is the same way. The drive is very smooth that way, but not quite as efficient (more slippage). The way Toyota does it is most efficient, but not as smooth. I can drive mine smooth, but some people on ToyotaNation don't like it, and it can get "jerky" if you're not careful.

I said all that to say that the way Ford did it is probably the better option for most people, especially those used to driving automatics. You can jump on and off the gas at will, and there's no immediate engine braking like you get in a manual.

Good review. It sounds like it's a nice fit for you.


That's very interesting regarding your Camry transmission. What year is it? Most autos are programmed the way the Nicks Focus is..

 

[Hokiefyd]

It's a 2011 model.

 

[odie]

We test drove a 2010 and enjoyed it . Should be interesting when the hy-brid and electric FOCUS are available .

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted By: ItsuMitsubishi
Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

The way Ford programmed your transmission produces a smoother transition than the way Toyota programmed my Camry, for example. My Camry leaves the TCC engaged all the time, unless I hit the brake, AND cuts fuel. So you get full engine braking like a manual transmission. Most "normal" automatics allow you to really coast when off the gas, and it sounds like your Focus is the same way. The drive is very smooth that way, but not quite as efficient (more slippage). The way Toyota does it is most efficient, but not as smooth. I can drive mine smooth, but some people on ToyotaNation don't like it, and it can get "jerky" if you're not careful.

I said all that to say that the way Ford did it is probably the better option for most people, especially those used to driving automatics. You can jump on and off the gas at will, and there's no immediate engine braking like you get in a manual.

Good review. It sounds like it's a nice fit for you.


That's very interesting regarding your Camry transmission. What year is it? Most autos are programmed the way the Nicks Focus is..
The "flawed" lockup converter programming is the MAIN reason why I dont buy automatics - if I could get one programmed so that the clutch stays engaged off-throttle above 30 MPH, Id take it. To drive with the least throttle opening, I'm always backing off the go pedal to a closed throttle then re-cracking the throttle to just open. This has typ caused the converter to unlock then relock. Given that I do this prob 2x per minute I felt I was causing undue wear in ther tranny. Any autotrans that STAYS locked above 30 MPH in any of the top 3 gears is well programmed in my book! Good to hear there are some out there set up this way.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
The "flawed" lockup converter programming is the MAIN reason why I dont buy automatics - if I could get one programmed so that the clutch stays engaged off-throttle above 30 MPH, Id take it. To drive with the least throttle opening, I'm always backing off the go pedal to a closed throttle then re-cracking the throttle to just open. This has typ caused the converter to unlock then relock. Given that I do this prob 2x per minute I felt I was causing undue wear in ther tranny. Any autotrans that STAYS locked above 30 MPH in any of the top 3 gears is well programmed in my book! Good to hear there are some out there set up this way.


My TCC will stay locked (unless the brake is applied) until about 20 MPH, at which point fuel returns to the engine, the TCC unlocks, and the car will coast normally. It actually does encourage me to NOT jump completely off the gas (because you'll get a little jerk like in a manual transmission), but to keep the throttle cracked just slightly.

I used to drive my other cars (with "normal" automatic transmissions) like you Arco. I'd jump off the gas then get right back into it, at the slightest opening. The Camry encouraged me to do it differently, which is probably more efficient anyway.

My wife, however...she would prefer it like Nick's Focus. She has a hard time driving the Camry smooth at a slow speed because she's on and off the gas all the time.

 

[Nick R]

The auto in the mustang will stay locked above ~40mph, which is nice. I'm not worried about wear, but it's just hard to get good fuel economy around town when it does that.

 

[brianl703]

My '97 Crown Vic doesn't, as far as I can determine, unlock the TCC unless you brake. If you coast, you can actually feel it downshift from 3rd to 2nd.

 

[wander2039]

Nick how does the DOHC do on the hills? I drove my sisters 02 Focus with the 2.0L SPI from KC to St. Louis and back. I was amazed how well it handled the hills with no down shifting and absolutely no loss of speed! Had the AC on for a time also. Excellent low end grunt! Can't say the same for our 04 Escape with 3.0L DOHC. It's almost a nuisance how much it downshifts.

 

[Nick R]

It does good on most hills without downshifting. Steep hills it will though. It has good acceleration, and if I'm careful with the pedal, I can accelerate with the TCC locked, and it does very well. wish there was a manual TCC override. Oh well.

 

[kkreit01]

Sounds about identical to my review after 4500 mi on mine (bought in June). I'm a little less pleased with the power/acceleration coming from a 4.6 3V to this. It's fine (actually a little fun) when driving alone. BUT, turn on the A/C -- add another adult + 2 kids -- the fun is all over! I had the rear resonator removed -- which opened up the exhaust some. I'm planning some more mods soon.

I'm also less pleased with the KH16s. If you have grooved highway -- they are the worst tramlining tires I've ever driven on. They are slowly re-paving our interstate loop with smooth blacktop -- on which it drives perfectly on.

My "mixed" MPG was 30-31. I think we now have "winter gas", because my last 2 tanks ran ~28-29. I'm very pleased with MPG -- as it's better than my 05 Neon 5 spd. made (27-29) during the same commute.

This car has more interior rattles than previous new ones. I fixed them myself: driver's side A & B pillar. The rattles of course could be amplified by the low series rubber + rough pavement. But, my other (new) vehicles didn't have any.

Insurance is way too high. It's $19/mo. higher than my 08 Sport Trac V8 2wd was. It's also quite higher than the other vehicles I considered (Avenger & Caliber). I don't know if this is due to the SES (sporty-looking) model?

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: kkreit01
Insurance is way too high. It's $19/mo. higher than my 08 Sport Trac V8 2wd was. It's also quite higher than the other vehicles I considered (Avenger & Caliber). I don't know if this is due to the SES (sporty-looking) model?


It's likely due to the size. My 2-year old Corolla was more expensive to insure than my brand new Camry is.

 

[brianl703]

It's due to claims history, not the size. Smaller cars are usually cheaper, and therefore driven by younger, inexperienced drivers who get into more accidents.

Those smaller cars that are more expensive (Mini Cooper, for example) tend to be cheaper to insure--younger, inexperienced drivers don't often drive these.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: brianl703
It's due to claims history, not the size. Smaller cars are usually cheaper, and therefore driven by younger, inexperienced drivers who get into more accidents.


I'd go with that except that insurance rates are largely determined by the CUSTOMER'S claims history. Someone with no tickets and no wrecks will typically get a better rate than someone with those items on their record. This may be the reason why, ON AVERAGE, smaller cars have higher premiums. But it shouldn't be the reason why a larger car is cheaper to insure than a smaller one, for one customer with one driving record.

Smaller cars typically suffer more damage ($$) in accidents, and likely suffer higher occupant injury rates as well. I'd wager that this is the reason for the higher rates.

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

I'd go with that except that insurance rates are largely determined by the CUSTOMER'S claims history.


The claims history of the vehicle model itself figures into it quite a bit, at least with State Farm.


Quote:
Smaller cars typically suffer more damage ($$) in accidents, and likely suffer higher occupant injury rates as well. I'd wager that this is the reason for the higher rates.


Yes, that's all true. It's part of the claims history of the particular model of vehicle, which figures into the insurance rates.

There are multiple types of insurance, liability, collision, and bodily injury, as well as comprehensive amd uninsured motorist.

The largest chunk of any insurance bill is usually the liability--which covers damage that you do (to others' property) during an accident which is your fault. This is affected by the type of vehicle, that is without a doubt.