I agree its not astonishing... But I mean how much power can you actually put through a FWD before its goes beserk? 350 HP is pretty close or even over what you could normally get through a FWD car.... Or am I horribly mistaken here?
This is in addition to them not having a suitable 4WD system to fit in any case - you can't just fit something like the Kuga's system to a performance model.
Depends on what you want to do with that power. I had a 330whp fwd sedan and taking it to and from school wasn't bad, nor was drag racing at the track. Other things I didn't bother with. The rs500 is supposed to be a great handling car like the normal RS and I just don't find that believable.
Odd as this may sound (and technically unrelated, 'cos it's nothing to do with the 4WD system), but the Kuga was used as a testbed for the entire Focus RS system.
It's not power that's the issue - as commonly believed. It's torque. Hence the issue with powerful FWD cars torque-steering in low gears.
When you get north of 200lbft crank is when you get problems. Low torque, 200hp, FWD Honda Type-Rs? No problems. Alfa 147 GTA with 220lbft? Catastrosteer. ST220, with 210lbft? Feh, it's fine (though a heavier car). Vectra VXR, with 262lbft? Hedgefinder general.
The Focus RS has 325lbft and, make no mistake, is not very happy about it. The RevoKnuckle does an astonishing job. With less weight and way more torque than the Vectra VXR, you can drive it on the road and not understeer into every tree. Despite being heavier and less nimble, it's as good in really tight stuff as a RenaultSport Clio 197 - which is bloody hard to do - and will waste one on the straights. But even that can't stop the RS being a little bit unfriendly with that much torque on the front wheels.
Giving the RS+ even more won't help matters.
what exactly does this RevoKnuckle thing do?
I am pretty sure the RS was uncovered at the 2007 british motor show.
If they'd given it AWD, or if they'd removed 200kg from the podgy Focus body, I might have been more interested.
Only 2 things to say...
WANT
SEXY
Nix the former... yay on the latter. A crash-diet removing 200 kilos with no power added (okay... maybe add 50 more ponies on top and it's okay) would be the best thing for this car.
Sorry, I'm just used to using HP in conversations because the crowds I used to deal with, couldn't care less about TQ let alone what it actually was or what it did.
330hp and 350ft/lbs was the figure, btw.
Correct-a-mundo, though it was in 2008. Oddly I don't remember seeing it, and yet I have a vivid memory of the Vauxhall Insignia. Hmm.
Well, technically it does nothing except make power
(and that should generate a fun argument for the rest of the thread, despite being technically accurate)
Power = Torque x Angular Velocity
or to put it another way
![]()
courtesy of wiki although I do remeber my GCSE Physics![]()
Power = Torque x Angular Velocity
or to put it another way
![]()
courtesy of wiki although I do remeber my GCSE Physics![]()
Numbers!this should get interesting now 👍
So THAT'S the correct formula. Thanks, I've been looking for that...
I remember mine too - which would have been the same day as yoursBut even then they'd dumbed it down so far not to include it
![]()
Easiest way is torque x current rpm/5252rpm (for lbft to hp).
Torque does nothing ("My eyes!") on its own. Torque x speed = POWAH!
So THAT'S the correct formula. Thanks, I've been looking for that...