[Consequences]

I was a bit surprised with all of the acceleration data (from several sources) on this car. Frankly I was expecting to see 0-60 around 4 seconds flat, mid to high 12's in the 1/4 with trap speeds around 110 MPH. Instead we see consistent mid-high 4 second 0-60, mid 13 second 1/4 mile, and trap speeds around 105. That does not suggest 350 bhp, in fact several similar cars (EVO, STI, Golf R) can and have produced very similar performance. In some cases even better.

In fact here is a straight up drag race where a DSG equipped Golf R actually out accelerates the Focus RS, see for yourself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqdCOsJRewc

I agree that one test is not conclusive, but then when you start seeing test after test where this car is more or less neck and neck with similar cars with much lower rated horse power, such as:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2016-ford-focus-rs-vs-2015-subaru-wrx-sti-2016-volkswagen-golf-r-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-5

So then I started looking with keen interest for some chassis dyno test results and find this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GYL2-oZLjI

This dyno test shows 253 bhp to the wheels which is what you typically see with these other cars and equates to around 300 hp at the crank, not 350 hp as indicated by Ford.

It seems pretty clear to me that this car's engine is not making anywhere close to 350 hp and 350 ft lbs of torque. Some have mentioned the disappointing acceleration test data, however I am curious why I haven't seen anyone question the hp rating.

 

[NJboneless]

I was a bit surprised with all of the acceleration data (from several sources) on this car. Frankly I was expecting to see 0-60 around 4 seconds flat, mid to high 12's in the 1/4 with trap speeds around 110 MPH. Instead we see consistent mid-high 4 second 0-60, mid 13 second 1/4 mile, and trap speeds around 105. That does not suggest 350 bhp, in fact several similar cars (EVO, STI, Golf R) can and have produced very similar performance. In some cases even better.

In fact here is a straight up drag race where a DSG equipped Golf R actually out accelerates the Focus RS, see for yourself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqdCOsJRewc

I agree that one test is not conclusive, but then when you start seeing test after test where this car is more or less neck and neck with similar cars with much lower rated horse power, such as:

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2016-ford-focus-rs-vs-2015-subaru-wrx-sti-2016-volkswagen-golf-r-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-5

So then I started looking with keen interest for some chassis dyno test results and find this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GYL2-oZLjI

This dyno test shows 253 bhp to the wheels which is what you typically see with these other cars and equates to around 300 hp at the crank, not 350 hp as indicated by Ford.

It seems pretty clear to me that this car's engine is not making anywhere close to 350 hp and 350 ft lbs of torque. Some have mentioned the disappointing acceleration test data, however I am curious why I haven't seen anyone question the hp rating.

Not an expert here but these are some observations on your post.

1st: Obviously you have no idea about the difference between HP and WHP...
2nd: Drag races against a vehicle like a Golf R is hard to compare, you are talking about a manual 6 speed vs a dual clutch auto trans. I am sure if the RS had a dual clutch it would be getting low 4 second 0-60. If 0-60 times are all that matter than this is definitely not the car for you, as has been mentioned in many reviews already.
3rd. It does stink that the RS isnt a little quicker considering the HP advantage it has over some competing cars but in the end I think its a worth while trade off considering the handling and driving experience.

 

[Rspeed]

Your expectations are definitely very very far off my friend. Flat 4 second 0-60 and mid 12 second quarter mile times doesn't make sense at all for the Focus RS.

A car that fits the 0-60 in the low 4s and hits a mid 12 quarter mile would be like a 2015 Charger SRT 392. That produces 485hp and 475lb-ft of torque.

 

[ExtremeFocus]

It's not all about the 0-60 times my friend. The Focus RS is special because it is a fun car to drive that you can hoon down a track with or take for spirited rides on some nice curvy roads. And it drifts.

 

[Rspeed]

Exactly.. this vehicle isn't really meant to be a drag-strip king. It's a drivers vehicle meant for courses and turns, etc.

 

[Red Leader]

It's not all about the 0-60 times my friend. The Focus RS is special because it is a fun car to drive that you can hoon down a track with or take for spirited rides on some nice curvy roads. And it drifts.

I totally agree, the best car to use on minor roads with lots of bends. This car brought nothing but smiles when I took one out for a test drive. It is still a rapid car, at the right price and it's not going to cost you an eye watering amount to service. You can go down to the shops or cover a few hundred miles and just know you are going to have some fun.

 

[Consequences]

1. Actually I am very aware of the difference between crank and wheel hp. Most EVO's and STI's lose about 50 hp to drivetrain losses, from what we are seeing here the Focus RS would have to be losing 100 hp if Ford's engine output rating is to be believed. Does that sound right to you?
2. The C&D comparison with the Golf R, STI, and Focus RS were all manual cars, and the quarter mile times and trap speeds (a good indicator of actual hp) were all within .1 second and 1 MPH. All three cars have very similar drivetrains and weight, only one supposedly has 20% more power but they all have nearly identical acceleration, how do we explain that? Oh and the one head to head race where the Golf R did have a DSG it actually beat the Focus RS by a significant margin so...
3. I am not suggesting that the Focus RS is a bad car, not at all, but the Golf and STI are also good cars. The Focus RS is advertised as having a significantly more powerful engine, which is definitely a selling point, however the test data shows that it is no more powerful than these other cars. When the test data does not match the advertised specifications, I would say Ford has some explaining to do.

The last time something like this happened was the mazda RX8 see here: http://rotarynews.com/node/view/206 mazda had to revise their specs and offer compensation to those who had purchased cars before the revised specs were made known.

This isn't about this car is better than that, I don't really care to be honest. However if a manufacturer advertises and sells a product with certain specifications, that product should meet or exceed that specification. The plane hard facts clearly show that is not the case with this car. Based on the specifications this car should easily out accelerate an STI, EVO, and the Golf R, and clearly it does not. The handling seems good yes, but the acceleration is no better than the others, worse if they have a DSG. If Ford had advertised this as another 300 HP AWD hot hatch that would have been fine, but they didn't, they said it has 350 HP and clearly it does not. If I had purchased one of these already, I would still like the car, but I would be upset about the discrepancy.

 

[Rspeed]

I definitely agree with you that the product a manufacturer is selling should meet/exceed their specifications. But, for better marketing, it only makes sense. Now understandably, they are close in specifications, however there are way too many different variables to throw in there as well. What's the weight like, what tires are they running, gear ratios, etc.

However, refer to the other thread for the dyno chart and my little blurb.