GTP Cool Wall: 2003-2004 Ford Focus SVT

2003-2004 Ford Focus SVT

  • Total voters
    118
  • Poll closed .
Badasp5.0
A very low cool. Its a good driving car, it might be tacky compared to the Euro version but still not a bad car.

Shhhhhhhhhh remember its European so its better no matter what.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, I forgot apparently American cars are automatically 🤬 because someone doesn't like them.
 
The original EU ST170:

image.jpg


A lot of cars that weren't designed for the US market originally look a bit weird with the required body modifications for them to be sold there.
 
Put me down as also not seeing the big deal with the body kit that the car got in SVT trim. It's a very moderate rake and a slightly more aggressive front end, which was perfect for eliminating the minor visual similarity the car otherwise had with the dorky looking cars Ford had been making for the previous five years. In person they have just about perfect presence.








I also think some of the comparisons on performance being made are quite a bit unfair. The SVT wasn't an amazing upgrade over the regular 2.0, but it wasn't punching way above its weight class. The SVT went after the breadvan Civic Si, the GTi 1.8t, the Neon RT, the Sentra SpecV and (sorta) the Mazdaspeed Protégé. None of those were sterling examples of performance FF vehicles, but that was the American landscape when the SVT was introduced, and it competed with those cars very well. The SRT-4 was introduced after the Focus went on sale and caught pretty much everyone with their pants down (which is why Dodge sold a hell of a lot more than they expected to) , and the WRX was a lot more expensive than any of those. Emphasis on a lot.
 
Leggy1
The original EU ST170:

View attachment 294341
Click to expand...

Note that there are minor differences between that one, which has a body kit that was only available to the Australian market (mostly skirting and additional ST170 badges), and the European model.

If anything, I think it conforms better to the sportier underpinnings than EU equivalent.
 
Last edited:
Tornado
I also think some of the comparisons on performance being made are quite a bit unfair. The SVT wasn't an amazing upgrade over the regular 2.0, but it wasn't punching way above its weight class. The SVT went after the breadvan Civic Si, the GTi 1.8t, the Neon RT, the Sentra SpecV and (sorta) the Mazdaspeed Protégé. None of those were sterling examples of performance FF vehicles, but that was the American landscape when the SVT was introduced, and it competed with those cars very well. The SRT-4 was introduced after the Focus went on sale and caught pretty much everyone with their pants down (which is why Dodge sold a hell of a lot more than they expected to) , and the WRX was a lot more expensive than any of those. Emphasis on a lot.
Click to expand...
Totally correct about the WRX, but it was still within grasp of most looking for a sporty compact back in '03.

The SRT 4 may have come out a few months after the SVT, but the Dodge was still introduced and sold in '03 against the SVT. Dodge really pulled the pants off everyone with that feisty neon.

I forgot about the Sentra SER from that year, although I consider it a far miss for Nissan.

The Civic Si of that time had also missed the mark considering the success of the 99 - 00 civic si. The same can be said about the RSX Type S, but it had the best Naturally Aspirated 4 cylinder in America at the time.

The biggest shame was the Mazdaspeed Protege. Out of all the FWD compacts at the time it handled the best out of the factory. If Mazda actually took into account engine modifications they might not have put a highly strung out turbo engine that needed a lot done to put down more power at a "reliable" level. It did pave the path for Mazda to release some great cars afterwards though.

I acknowledge your opinion that some of the cars I brought up might not be fair and I could agree with you to an extent. At the time these cars all came out I was 24 years old and was in the market for a sporty compact at the time. The SVT was one of the cars I was looking at, along with the others I mentioned. I am going by the recollection of my memory from test ddriving all of them along with the budget I had at the time.

The WRX was at the tip top of my budget, also wished I pulled the trigger at that point. At the time dating the woman I thought I was going to marry; she fell in love with a Black on Black RSX Type S which was not my choice but what we ended up with. I was centered on the SRT 4 and Mazdaspeed as my second choice from the WRX.
 
Cool. These were largely overshadowed by their competitors, which added even more to their potential as quick, little sleepers.
 
I've forgotten how good the original Focus looked in cooking spec. Thanks, @Roger the Horse.

The SVT was a pretty decent entry in that end of the market during those years. We were still a few years away from the "bring-at-least-200hp" club, and while the bodykit might not match up to European tastes (especially with the ST170 now posted), it walked a fine line between restraint and aggression during those years too. It certainly was preferable to the forgettable Civic Si or the shouty Protege.

Cool.
 
miata13B
The biggest shame was the Mazdaspeed Protege. Out of all the FWD compacts at the time it handled the best out of the factory. If Mazda actually took into account engine modifications they might not have put a highly strung out turbo engine that needed a lot done to put down more power at a "reliable" level. It did pave the path for Mazda to release some great cars afterwards though.
Click to expand...

The problem was the 2.0 FS-DE was basically a POS that was already wrung out in its "142 hp" trim (up from the woeful 100+ it made in the 626) and bolting a turbo onto it to make around 170 hp was the best they could do. Add any more boost to the gutless iron-block wonder and it guzzled oil like crazy and tended to blow up.

I had mine tuned about as far as it would go without raising the rev limit or slapping on a turbo (race engines did about 7.5k rpm, but only lasted three races. It's only in recent years that racing teams have learned how to keep them from grenading), and it only made 152 whp... or about 180 bhp.

The Focus's 2.0 was a gem, in comparison.

Of course, neither car was all that cool.
 
Not as cool as the RS Focus and isn't as handsome as the ST170 what with that rear bumper. I do prefer the SVT wheels to the ST ones however. But it's still a fairly quick hatchback that doesn't shout about it as much as the later ST models.

Cool.
 
Wiegert
Note that there are minor differences between that one, which has a body kit that was only available to the Australian market (mostly skirting and additional ST170 badges), and the European model.

If anything, I think it conforms better to the sportier underpinnings than EU equivalent.
Click to expand...
I didn't see the difference at first, but close to the EU version.
 
niky
The problem was the 2.0 FS-DE was basically a POS that was already wrung out in its "142 hp" trim (up from the woeful 100+ it made in the 626) and bolting a turbo onto it to make around 170 hp was the best they could do. Add any more boost to the gutless iron-block wonder and it guzzled oil like crazy and tended to blow up.

I had mine tuned about as far as it would go without raising the rev limit or slapping on a turbo (race engines did about 7.5k rpm, but only lasted three races. It's only in recent years that racing teams have learned how to keep them from grenading), and it only made 152 whp... or about 180 bhp.

The Focus's 2.0 was a gem, in comparison.

Of course, neither car was all that cool.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression that the weak spot on the Mazdaspeed Protege was the trans, it couldn't handle much more power beyond the 142hp so engine was detuned.
 
I personally think it's cooler than most of cars this Focus went against, but I also think that most people will just think it's just another hatchback. So, I would put it at meh if I didn't suggest it.

I heard that the suggestor of a car has to vote uncool. Is that true?
 
RandomCarGuy17
I personally think it's cooler than most of cars this Focus went against, but I also think that most people will just think it's just another hatchback. So, I would put it at meh if I didn't suggest it.

I heard that the suggestor of a car has to vote uncool. Is that true?
Click to expand...
I don't and whoever doesn't like to can suck an egg.
 
Badasp5.0
I was under the impression that the weak spot on the Mazdaspeed Protege was the trans, it couldn't handle much more power beyond the 142hp so engine was detuned.
Click to expand...

Third gear synchro was a dog, but that's true of most FWD third gear synchros. The transmission could be built for the power. There is a diesel application for the box, and the older 626 had (strangely) better synchros and a longer final drive to go with the puny 105 hp variant... But the engine itself was ultimately unsuited for performance.

Could be worse. The 2.5 in the Sentra had a propensity for eating itself, bone stock. But at least that motor made up to 200 hp in later year models.

 
I probably should add on to one more thing, I'm on the same page as Tornado about the Focus' bumpers. I don't think they look at all tacky and rather just looks a bit more aggressive. Which is what should be expected for it to differ from the normal Focus in appearance.
 

Latest Posts

Back