I got a chance to test out the new Focus ST before I bought my Octavia as one of my neighbours works for Gates Ford.

The seats were nice and it was a good drive but have you seen that centre console? Absolutely hideous! It's like one of those 90s AIWA Hi-Fis (except it is made by Sony) and the Sat Nav screen is absolutely tiny. So many pointless buttons and not user friendly at all.

My Octavia and the Mrs' BMW 1 series are in a different league.

Looking at fuel costs I maybe better of with a diesel a3 black edition which they are knocking out at about £200 per month.

Wow, £200 a month for an A3 diesel? Where do I sign

I guess that this is a special company funded lease deal?

Wow, £200 a month for an A3 diesel? Where do I sign

I guess that this is a special company funded lease deal?

It's not as if its a boggo standard 1.6 Diesel.

That's for a 2.0 Tdi Black Edition which I think is a great looking car.

Contract hire and leasing website.

It's a business lease but they do personal ones too.

They usually work out at around £30 to £50 more expensive per month and don't forget the VAT!

Edited 29 September, 201213 yr by taff170

I was being serious.

£200 for an A3 Blackline sounds pretty good to me!

I was being serious.

£200 for an A3 Blackline sounds pretty good to me!

Sorry, I misread the smiley for sarcasm!

I would go for the Audi every time. My 12 year old A8 is still rattle and squeak free, and that is with 181K miles on the clock. Even compared to the previous Superb the build quality is better and that car was only 4 years old when I sold it.

Yes not a lot is standard, and the price soon increases, but the cars are in different leagues and aimed at very different markets.

Compared to a Ford, the Audi is such a nice place to be and I drive it everywhere. Its a shame that the S3 uses the Haldex 4x4 system, my A8 with the full time 4x4 Quattro feels very sure footed and was great in last winters snow, as it and the ESP kept the car on the straight and narrow.

At the end of the day, perhaps it depends on the image your company is trying to portray. A company Audi gives off a much better image than a a low rent Ford.

Ford is a fleet car maker as are Vauxhall. They are not Audi / BMW / Merc rivals and never will be. The quality of my Skoda is streets ahead of all the fords i have driven by a long way.

If you get the ford you will enjoy it as it is a good car just be realistic about the differences between the ford and the Audi.

Can't agree with you there. The MK I focus is a much better built car compared to the MK I octavia / MK IV golf and far far more reliable.

The MK II focus is similar to the MK II Octavia, with the octavia winning out on interior build quality by a small margin (IMHO). However, the Focus is again far far more reliable than a number of MK II Octavia.

While ford used to make junk, don't forget that the MK II Octavia suspension reflects that on the MK I focus.

Can't agree with you there. The MK I focus is a much better built car compared to the MK I octavia / MK IV golf and far far more reliable.

The MK II focus is similar to the MK II Octavia, with the octavia winning out on interior build quality by a small margin (IMHO). However, the Focus is again far far more reliable than a number of MK II Octavia.

While ford used to make junk, don't forget that the MK II Octavia suspension reflects that on the MK I focus.

Mk1 focus was better than every one that followed but interior was still comical, all slanty lines, looked like a kids car. Two surveyors in my work at mk1 focus's and they were terrible inside, flimsy as hell. Octy 2 has the mk 5 or 6 golf suspension set up which is a very sophisticted set up. I have yet to sit in a ford from any era that hasnt been appaling inside in terms of build quality. The new fords look like mobile phones inside, far too complicated with buttons splattered everywhere. Actually the mk 4 golf was widly regarded by the motoring press for setting a new benchmark for interior quality for cars of this class, the focus never received such acclaim. I dont hate ford cars its just that they are cheap and flimsy inside and in no way are a rival for an Audi and never will be. I have sat in so many fords there is no way i was merely sitting in a bad example, they must all be like this, actually their main rival vauxhall even has a far higher level of quality interior than the ford. As for reliability i wasnt really comparing this but i dare say, without checking JD power survey or the likes, that the cars are similar but if the OP is getting a brand new car anyway then it really isnt an issue. Pound for pound the Audi absolutely destroys the Ford in terms of build quality. Pound for pound most cars beat the ford when it comes to build quality.

Mk1 focus was better than every one that followed but interior was still comical, all slanty lines, looked like a kids car. Two surveyors in my work at mk1 focus's and they were terrible inside, flimsy as hell.

Nothing's broken on ours, which is more than can be said for a MK IV golf.

Octy 2 has the mk 5 or 6 golf suspension set up which is a very sophisticted set up.

And that set up was pinched from where.... why do you think VW hired a large chunk of the team that did the MK I focus rear suspension?

I have yet to sit in a ford from any era that hasnt been appaling inside in terms of build quality. The new fords look like mobile phones inside, far too complicated with buttons splattered everywhere. Actually the mk 4 golf was widly regarded by the motoring press for setting a new benchmark for interior quality for cars of this class, the focus never received such acclaim. I dont hate ford cars its just that they are cheap and flimsy inside and in no way are a rival for an Audi and never will be. I have sat in so many fords there is no way i was merely sitting in a bad example, they must all be like this, actually their main rival vauxhall even has a far higher level of quality interior than the ford. As for reliability i wasnt really comparing this but i dare say, without checking JD power survey or the likes, that the cars are similar but if the OP is getting a brand new car anyway then it really isnt an issue. Pound for pound the Audi absolutely destroys the Ford in terms of build quality. Pound for pound most cars beat the ford when it comes to build quality.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a focus is an S3, but IMHO VAG don't deserve that build quality reputation.

Nothing has had to be replaced outside of warranty on either ford, which is not the case for the Skodas or VWs.

It's just been normal servicing and more miles have been put on the fords than the VAG cars.

Nothing's broken on ours, which is more than can be said for a MK IV golf.

And that set up was pinched from where.... why do you think VW hired a large chunk of the team that did the MK I focus rear suspension?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a focus is an S3, but IMHO VAG don't deserve that build quality reputation.

Nothing has had to be replaced outside of warranty on either ford, which is not the case for the Skodas or VWs.

It's just been normal servicing and more miles have been put on the fords than the VAG cars.

Im not on about reliability im talking about build quality. Good build quality is solid feel creek free dashboard and centre console. VAG feel like this fords dont, they are flimsy and cheap feeling. The ford dash may well stand up and prove reliable over time but it feels cheap and flimsy to start with. I couldnt comment of ford v's VAG reliability record but interior build quality is appharant for all to see and feel. VAG cars feel far more solid and look far classier internally. No VAG cars ive had have deteriorated over the years so im assuming this is typical of the brand but if the fords cabin is flimsy and cheap to start with then it doesnt matter if it is reliable as that just means its still pants years later. Reliability and build quality are not necessarily related hence why im not commenting on reliability. A cheap car can be solidly and simply built and be totally reliable due to lack of moving parts but you would never rave about its build quality. Interior build quality = soft feel, expensive looking materilals and tactile surfaces, granted it can be perceived quality sometimes but that still counts. Ford dashboards do not exude quality, they feel / look cheap and id rather drive something that feels more expensive than it actually is rather than the other way round. Reliability wouldnt have a bearing on the OP as if leased the cars would probably be changed after warranty expired anyway therefore why pick the ford over Audi if the monthly cost is the same??

Im not on about reliability im talking about build quality. Good build quality is solid feel creek free dashboard and centre console. VAG feel like this fords dont, they are flimsy and cheap feeling. The ford dash may well stand up and prove reliable over time but it feels cheap and flimsy to start with.

I was reminded of this quote recently when I was watching Clarkson's "is this thorough enough for you Mr Needham?" Fiesta road test (that seemed to be on every time I switch on Dave over the weekend!) where he compared the new Fiesta's well made interior to that of a Golf. I never really thought the build quality on VAG cars was anything special, and in fact the only two cars I've owned that squeaked and rattled were an aging Vauxhall Corsa and a Skoda Fabia. The Scooby may well have rattled, but the exhaust probably did a good job of masking it.

In terms of the OPs question, the Focus will be the better to drive (imhe) so I'd pick that

Chris

I was reminded of this quote recently when I was watching Clarkson's "is this thorough enough for you Mr Needham?" Fiesta road test (that seemed to be on every time I switch on Dave over the weekend!) where he compared the new Fiesta's well made interior to that of a Golf. I never really thought the build quality on VAG cars was anything special, and in fact the only two cars I've owned that squeaked and rattled were an aging Vauxhall Corsa and a Skoda Fabia. The Scooby may well have rattled, but the exhaust probably did a good job of masking it.

In terms of the OPs question, the Focus will be the better to drive (imhe) so I'd pick that

Chris

I wouldnt rely on that top gear pi55 take car review for a valid opinion on a particular car TBH plus they were reviewing it in isolation. Was funny though, was surprised the car didnt conk out after the beach landing. My scooby actually never rattled at all despite the dash looking like it was made out of recycled washing up bottle plastic. I quite liked the simplistic back to basic style of my scooby inside, apart from the radio, it was totally pants.

The S3 never gets rated highly as a good drivers car but mine was head and shoulders above every other car ive ever owned, scooby included. What do people mean when they say a car is "a good drivers car"?? It generally refers to track driving. BMW are regarded as superb drivers cars but my S3 was better IMO. Im not interested in tail out antics so track day abilities count for nothing on the road. Why then would a Ford be a better car to drive? I dont think it would be especially as its FWD which is the worse than AWD even one with a haldex system. My S3 handled well, had massive traction and plenty of grip. How would the Ford improve on this? The ford would definately have less traction, probably equal grip and handling is down to personal opinion but i doubt they would differ much seeing a some reviews rate the golf GTI higher than ford ST's and the S3 is basically a golf.

I would say S3 and ST handle similarly, grip similarly, S3 has better traction, S3 has far nicer interior and general perceived build quality and S3 is a far more desirable car. Where exactly would the Ford win?

I wouldnt rely on that top gear pi55 take car review for a valid opinion on a particular car TBH plus they were reviewing it in isolation. Was funny though, was surprised the car didnt conk out after the beach landing.

I don't rely on it, but Clarkson has a far wider experience of cars than I do. Ultimately build quality is subjective.

The S3 never gets rated highly as a good drivers car but mine was head and shoulders above every other car ive ever owned, scooby included. What do people mean when they say a car is "a good drivers car"?? It generally refers to track driving.

Funnily enough when I was in the market for my classic Scooby turbo, a colleague at work told me I should check out the S3 as an alternative. The S3 was well specced, but that's about where the positives ended and it was not particularly exciting to look at or to drive. I have to confess I don't remember what the interior plastics were like. I don't think the Scooby is a particularly great driver's car - I enjoyed driving mine, but it mostly relied on limpet-like grip to get round corners quickly and tended to mask most of my driving deficiencies. I think a "good driver's car" very rarely relates to track driving (although the best driver's cars are good on track) and a "driver's car" is a car that allows the driver to become an extension of it through accurate feedback and response to driver inputs. It's definitely not about all out speed or grip or flattering the driver, otherwise cars like the MX-5 would not be so sought after.

I'm not saying the ST is a great driver's car, but imvho it is a better driver's car than the Audi and 99% of the time I'm in the car I'm driving it so I'd pick the one that was better to drive.

Chris

S3 easily, even a boggo spec One will give you a nice warm feeling everytime you get in it. It is a quality car at that price, the focus has a great engine and prob great chassis but a dash from a wheelie bin.

S3 handle and grip like a focus. What a ridiculous statement. These two cars shouldn't be compared. As has been said many times above, different leagues of car.

The main reason I sold the VRS for the S4 was the awful FWD.

FWD even with a LSD is just not good enough for our rainy island.

Edited 9 October, 201213 yr by Nicky boy

I don't rely on it, but Clarkson has a far wider experience of cars than I do. Ultimately build quality is subjective.

Funnily enough when I was in the market for my classic Scooby turbo, a colleague at work told me I should check out the S3 as an alternative. The S3 was well specced, but that's about where the positives ended and it was not particularly exciting to look at or to drive. I have to confess I don't remember what the interior plastics were like. I don't think the Scooby is a particularly great driver's car - I enjoyed driving mine, but it mostly relied on limpet-like grip to get round corners quickly and tended to mask most of my driving deficiencies. I think a "good driver's car" very rarely relates to track driving (although the best driver's cars are good on track) and a "driver's car" is a car that allows the driver to become an extension of it through accurate feedback and response to driver inputs. It's definitely not about all out speed or grip or flattering the driver, otherwise cars like the MX-5 would not be so sought after.

I'm not saying the ST is a great driver's car, but imvho it is a better driver's car than the Audi and 99% of the time I'm in the car I'm driving it so I'd pick the one that was better to drive.

Chris

So why is ther ford a better drivers car? Have you driven a new S3 and a new ST? What does the ford do better? I havent driven the new ST or the new S3 but i have owned an old S3 and have driven other fords. Cant remember the previous generation ST offering "precise feedback" or felt like"an extension" of myself when i drove that. It wasnt a bad car but it felt no better than my older S3 but was definately no where near as nice a place to sit as the S3. Day to day driving isnt about precise control and balance and if these aspects where key i doubt either car would be on the OP's shopping list but these are the cars in question hence why im only comparing them and not MX5's. As a "package" i think the S3 offer the driver more than the ST i.e more power, 4wd, better quality, more exclusive brand plus better residuals i would imagine. Precision and balance and driver feedback are subjective as you say so lets agree they are equal in both cars - where then does the ford beat the Audi?

It doesn't. You get what you pay for and Audis are stupidly expensive for a reason and should only be compared to Merc and BMW for overall package. Ford, do me a favour.

Got to love the comments on fords. Can see you've not lived with one for any length of time.

As I've said before vag build quality is by reputation not anything else.

Got to love the comments on fords. Can see you've not lived with one for any length of time.

As I've said before vag build quality is by reputation not anything else.

Yes, So its good because its got a good reputation. Whats wrong with that? Im not hating on fords, its just not a competitior to an S3. Maybe have a ST over a 1.6tdi A3 but never an S3. Focus gets a good reveiw and i actually really like the 1.0 ecoboost engine in principle but if i was offered an Audi for the same price that had more power and 4wd then there wouldnt be a decision to make other than the wrong one. The only way a ford could compete would be for it to be cheaper, faster, more economical and better equipped. The current run out S3 and the new ST are the same price on the PCP deal and the ford offers less in terms of power / image etc so why should he pick one? Thats all im asking.

Got to love the comments on fords. Can see you've not lived with one for any length of time.

As I've said before vag build quality is by reputation not anything else.

Long enough that's for sure! I've now lived with an Audi for 6 months and can say I will never go for any ford, even the most well specced one. I think you're the one that needs to spend time in a nice Audi. Borrow mine for a small fee if you want?

Given the choice of the two, I'd have to choose the S3 ultimately, if for only the haldex 4wd advantages in the wet and the perceived/actual better quality build and materials. BUT you can't assume the S3 would out handle the new ST simply because it has haldex. The comment above suggests that's the case especially when Nickyboy states he got rid of the VRS for that reason, being fwd. The Focus chassis will out handle and out grip the VRS by quite some way and that's from experience or driving and owning both.

Given the choice of the two, I'd have to choose the S3 ultimately, if for only the haldex 4wd advantages in the wet and the perceived/actual better quality build and materials. BUT you can't assume the S3 would out handle the new ST simply because it has haldex. The comment above suggests that's the case especially when Nickyboy states he got rid of the VRS for that reason, being fwd. The Focus chassis will out handle and out grip the VRS by quite some way and that's from experience or driving and owning both.

We are not comparing a VRS and the ST though. Plus i doubt it would "out grip" the VRS by "some way". The current GTI favours comparitvely well with the ST in all the road tests ive seen so i cant see why a VRS would differ much. I never actually said the S3 would out handle toe ST either, i actually said that they are probably very similar. By your forum name i imagine you are biased slightly though towards the ford.

We are not comparing a VRS and the ST though. Plus i doubt it would "out grip" the VRS by "some way". The current GTI favours comparitvely well with the ST in all the road tests ive seen so i cant see why a VRS would differ much. I never actually said the S3 would out handle toe ST either, i actually said that they are probably very similar. By your forum name i imagine you are biased slightly though towards the ford.

That your view, as i say mine is from fairly extensive use of the products. I was actually referring to Nickyboy when he stated that the vrs was awful being fwd. The VRS is well below average IMO in terms of getting the power down in the damp... Far worse than something with better a better front suspension setup and different geometry. That's why I mentioned the VRS. And no, I'm not biased to Ford or my main car would surely be a Ford?! I'm on my third Skoda now and very happy with the brand and product. I did however specifically choose a Yeti so I could have the Haldex as after my initial ownership of a mk 1 octavia 4x4 turbo, my mk 2 vrs actually felt like a downgrade in these areas. :-(

That your view, as i say mine is from fairly extensive use of the products. I was actually referring to Nickyboy when he stated that the vrs was awful being fwd. The VRS is well below average IMO in terms of getting the power down in the damp... Far worse than something with better a better front suspension setup and different geometry. That's why I mentioned the VRS. And no, I'm not biased to Ford or my main car would surely be a Ford?! I'm on my third Skoda now and very happy with the brand and product. I did however specifically choose a Yeti so I could have the Haldex as after my initial ownership of a mk 1 octavia 4x4 turbo, my mk 2 vrs actually felt like a downgrade in these areas. :-(

I was only kidding about you being biased. I would have haldex again in a heartbeat. Lots of people slag it off for not offering drive thrills but to be honest im not looking to get thrilled when driving to work or when taking dog for a walk or when driving missus and baby about. I definately feel though that haldex 4wd is a far better setup than any FWD setup, ford ST included. Haldex basically drives like a FWD car but has the back up of 4wd when things get slippy, whats not to like about that? A FWD car with a trick diff would be better than the VRS i agree but it hardly makes the VRS bad in terms of front end grip just no better than all FWD cars which tend to be a bit pants in the wet. Has the ST not got an electronic diff this time as opposed to a proper limited slip thingy? I thought the new GTI already had something similar so i would imagine the next VRS will get one too. Hope so.

Even the focus RS has issues in the wet and that is better equipped to handle the power than the ST. For low down grunt, pull and traction there currently isn't a FWD that can do what a Quattro or haldex can and that's probably a fact.

I am aware that FWD cars are improving but for grip, confidence and safety give me haldex or Quattro any day. I've got a 3.0TDI A6 for the day and even this feels like its on rails for the size of it.

I think a good comparison would be Golf GTi and Focus ST.