Thats what the figures say but cant get my head round it just wanted someone to confirm? Ive read vrs has 310nm and focus has 340nm :thumbdwn:

Surly VRS should be faster and more torquey?

1.9 8v vs 2.0 16v....

Larger displacement = more torque

Why should a vRS be faster than anything? It's a small cheap diesel run-around at the end of the day.

my focus 2.0 tdci has 385nm after a remap from rs tuning according to parkers the standard torque is 320 tho

Why are people talking in those odd Nm figures anyway? Let's talk lb/ft!

My old Fab has 504Nm though... which was nice.

I would have thought the Focus is more comparable the the Mk2 Octavia, than the Mk1 Fabia, due to the Focus being a bigger car

63kilos heavier than a vrs and at the risk of getting killed 0.2 seconds quicker to 60....... dont shoot the messenger!!!!!

63kilos heavier than a vrs and at the risk of getting killed 0.2 seconds quicker to 60....... dont shoot the messenger!!!!!

race ya to find out

Focus's also go round corners... from the factory

race ya to find out

maybe not although i would like to try a fabia with a map just a map tho not 240bhp

how much are they compared to a fab?

Just looked out of interest and they are a lot more expensive as well.

Hmmm, the OP ....... this is his first post. The Troll detector is twitching

I know its more powerful and all that, but choosing a focus (any type)

is IMO indicative of a distinct lack of imagination.

My mate in Uni had a Focus 2.0 TDCI GHIA.

It was a LOT slower than my Fabia with a Dragon Box.

They are alright, but a bit "big" my liking.

They are wide and the seats are crap and not sporty.

Basically, they are alright but a bit of a "fat persons" car.

Hmmm, the OP ....... this is his first post. The Troll detector is twitching

Twitching.....?

Mine just jumped off the desk screaming NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

*Fabia vRS isn't the fastest car in the world shocker*

:P

Basically, they are alright but a bit of a "fat persons" car.

Explain 'Fat persons car' to me?

*Fabia vRS isn't the fastest car in the world shocker*

:P

It is true that the focus has more torque according to the stats bible aka New & Used Cars, UK Car Dealers - Parker's

apparently theres that fiat grande punto diesel that could be a rival to the fab but fook me would you dare drive a fix it again tony!

The focus does cost loads for a decent one.

Thats what the figures say but cant get my head round it just wanted someone to confirm? Ive read vrs has 310nm and focus has 340nm

Surly VRS should be faster and more torquey?

What a bloody cheek. I suggest you write a stern letter to Ford informing them that they must de-tune the 2.0 tdci Focus with immediate effect. I thought there was a European directive banning manufacturers from tuning their cars with more than 309.999999Nm of torque so that the Fabia was the torquiest torque monster in the big boys’ “Festival of Torque” taking place at Torquecester’s “Inverted Asphalt Playground of Torque”. Whilst you’re writing the letter, maybe you could use a template and also send copies to BMW, M-B, Ferrari, Lambo, Bugatti etc reminding them of their obligations under the 2005 Fabia Directive*.

To celebrate the end of production in 2007 of this ultimate modern classic, I contacted the nice chaps at AMG. I told them I thought the Fabia was far more deserving of Black treatment than anything those leather fetishist Bavarians at M-B could come up with. I even suggested a tuning package of an Ebay postal remap, LCR splitter and WRC spoiler to exceed the performance gains seen on the SL Black (Suggesting a hybrid turbo would have blown their tiny minds). Alas, they said their budget was too small to buy a development Fabia, such was the stern residuals on the model. Did you know that even the early 53 models still retain a healthy 2,000,000% of the initial purchase price? So my dream of a black Fabia vrs Black remains unfulfilled.

On a positive note, they said that Skoda had approached them regarding the development of the mark 2 vrs but after examing the development car, they told Skoda that there was no way they could improve it as it was such a beast already. Apparently the delay in releasing the new vrs is because it is so torquey it presents a threat to humanity (it has enough torque to stop the earth’s rotation), so Skoda are still in talks with the UN to tune it down a little. Brighteyes Sugarlumps (hotly tipped to succeed Banksy Moon as General secretary of the UN when he steps down to concentrate on his grafitti art) is trying to get himself put at the top of the waiting list for the new model as it has always been his ambition to slide down the road with the car on its roof and the taste of airbag in his mouth.

* At the time, MG Rover were so digusted with having to de-tune their entire range of cars to meet the EU directive, they took the only option available and closed their plant in Birmingham, relocating to China where they could produce the 500Nm CityRover with no threat of legal action as well as opening a side line in knock off DVDs and software, lead paint decorated children’s toy and formaldehyde laced baby milk, with mixed success I should add. The cars are still rubbish but the other sectors of the new business are flourishing.

Legendary!

Slow morning was it

only figure I worry about is the MPG, sad I know :P

only figure I worry about is the MPG, sad I know :P

During Skoda's R&D for the Fabia vrs they found the car was capable of doing one squillion smokeless miles to the gallon when run on olive oil and double that from standard pump diesel.

However the oil companies found out and were so worried that they ganged up to pay skoda a billion dollar royalty fee for every fabia vrs they sold if they could frig it so it only did 50mpg and make it smoke like a pregnant teenage single mum on the social. This royalty is why every Fabia vrs feels like it is hewn from granite and 24ct gold because they are.

If Chuck Norris was a car he would be a Fabia vrs (a black one)