Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

2013 Ford Focus ST Lap Times - A Closer Look




A few weeks ago, Car and Driver posted their annual new and updated performance cars test - Lightning Lap 2013 (Car and Driver's Lightning Lap 2013 - A Closer Look). While the Focus ST has yet to disappoint a reviewer in terms of driving balance and handling, especially for a front-wheel drive, performance numbers and lap times were a little lower than expected.

The Lightning Lap is held at Virginia International Raceway (VIR), where the Focus ST posted a lap time of 3:21.4. In case you are not familiar with the track and the lap times, this time puts it behind competitors like the Golf GTI MkVI, the Subaru BRZ, the Mini Cooper John Cooper Works, the Subaru Impreza WRX and the Mazda Mazdaspeed 3. One thing to note, though, is that it wasn't all smooth sailing for the Focus ST during Lightning Lap 2013.

The Lightning Lap test is simple in that cars are ranked based only on their lap times over 3 days of tests. They usually record the fastest lap times on the second day, which makes sense because they wouldn't be as familiar with the car on day 1 and exhaustion probably hinders progress on day 3.  In an unfortunate incident (for the Focus) the keys were smashed and the car was forced to miss the second day of lapping, which means it possibly missed its chance to record the fastest lap time. A recent Motor Trend comparison test may have just redeemed the Focus ST's numbers though.

Motor Trend posted a comparison test between the 2013 Mazda Mazdaspeed3, Ford Focus ST and Subaru Impreza WRX Special Edition a couple of weeks ago. The comparison included hot lapping the 3 cars at the 1.55 mile Streets of Willow Raceway where they ranked third, second and first:

1 - Impreza WRX: 1:27.40
2 - Focus ST: 1:28.40
3 - Mazdaspeed3: 1:29.51

While at VIR with Car and Driver the rankings were different:

1 - Mazdaspeed3: 3:16.2
2 - Impreza WRX: 3:16.5
3 - Focus ST: 3:21.4

You can't always carry the same lap-time-based order/ranking from track to track. This is clear here where the Mazdaspeed3 is a couple of seconds slower than the WRX at Streets of Willow but 0.3 s quicker at VIR. However, during the Motor Trend test, the 3 cars were closely matched and the same stands at VIR, except for the Focus ST which is far behind. It's not unusual for a car's performance to vary a lot from track to track, though, because different track configurations highlight different strengths and weaknesses.

So what are the Focus ST's weaknesses compared to the WRX and Mazdaspeed3? We know from reviews that it's the best handler, objectively and subjectively. It is the most neutral with the best turn in and posts class leading grip and braking numbers. The only category where the Focus ST trails is acceleration. Add that to the fact that it lacks a mechanical limited slip diff, which is something it's always critiqued for, and it's apparent that what the Focus ST needs to post better numbers is one thing; Speed.

The question is, does it have enough speed to post a faster lap time than the 3:21.4? The answer, in my opinion, is a definite yes. The VW Golf GTI Mk VI, a direct competitor for the Focus ST, posted a lap time of 3:19.3 at VIR when it was tested for Lightning Lap 2009. The Golf GTI has less hp and torque - 52 hp and 63 lb-ft torque to be exact. The Focus has stronger brakes, more grip and a more composed chassis (in terms of performance). The Golf GTI even has to do with an electronic brake-based limited slip diff, much like the Focus ST. In terms of performance, the GTI should have no advantage over the Focus ST.

So what do I make out of this? The Focus ST should be able to at least post a better lap time than 3:19.3 and probably closer to the 3:16.x range. There's no way to tell for sure, though, so I hope Car and Driver brings the Focus ST back next year for another round of testing.. Now enough with all that bench racing - if you have a Focus ST, you know it's a pretty quick car and should be able to hang with the best in class so take it out to a track or an autocross event and see how fast you can take it!

Source: Car and Driver and Motor Trend

Comments

  1. Well informative with great advantage of car choices. I used to say that I am very much pleasant to buy new or used car with great affordable prices. Please kindly give the knowledge over this I couldn't find from your post. We have some tips over new car comparison with latest technology then have a look at: www.quotebound.com

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

Michelin Pilot Super Sports vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 - Street Review

I've been a huge fan of Michelin PSS tires and exclusively bought them for the Mustang over the last four years. So how did I end up here? This year, I was hugely interested in trying an "R-comp" tire. I had my eyes set on Bridgestone Potenza RE-71R's for two simple reasons: price and reputation. Although not a true "R-comp" tire on paper, it performs like one by the account of every single test and review I've read (down to wear rates...). They seem like they're easily the most affordable (from a big brand) R-comp tire and combine that with a reputation for having tons of grip, it was an easy top contender. I had my concerns, though. For one, I'm told and have read that they are an autox tire, not really designed for high speed, pressure, and temps associated with open track. For another, the Mustang is a heavy car (as far as track cars are concerned) being roughly 3,800 lb. (including driver), which will amplify the unwanted open track load...

Michelin PSS vs Firestone Indy 500 - Track Review

A couple of weeks ago, I posted my first impressions of Michelin's PSS vs Firestone Firehawk Indy 500 tires. I've run PSS's for several years on the Boss, but I'm trying the Indy 500's for the first time. In short, I was worried about the narrower tires (I was running 285/35/18 PSS but could only find the Indy 500 in 275/35/18) and tread squirm, but I was happy with them up to that point just driving on the street. I had the chance to drive on them for three track days now. So what were they like? After my first session, they made an impression that basically persisted for the rest of track sessions on them. Phenomenal, unmatched value. Now, if value is something that stands out above all else, it typically means the compromise between qualities you want and those you don't is less than ideal, but the value is attractive. This is no different. I'll start with the bad, which really boil down to two: ultimate grip and grip longevity. Grip is noticeably l...

Kawasaki Ninja H2R - 300 hp and Supercharged

Okay, this isn't a car but there's a reason why I'm writing about it. It has a supercharged 1.0 litre engine makes 296 hp. 296 hp may not be too impressive in a car but one has to remember that this isn't a car. It's a bike and it weighs just 476 lb in full trim and a 90% full tank. That's a weight to power ratio of 1.6 lb/hp. I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around that number. To put that number into perspective, a 2013 Mustang GT500 has 5.9 lb/hp. A C6 Corvette ZR1 has 5.3 lb/hp. A 2015 Porsche 918 has 4.2 lb/hp and that's with the electric motors running at full song. The insane Hennessey Venom GT with its twin-turbo LS7 7.0 litre engine has 2.2 lb/hp. I can't even begin to imagine what 1.6 lb/hp would feel like. I would also be curious about how fast you'd have to be going to be able to use that power. I used to have an 09 Cobalt SS. It had GM Stage 1 and a few bolt ons which would put it at very close to that 296 ...

2016 Mustang EcoBoost Track Review

Photography by: Graham MacNeil Ford really wants to sell you a Mustang with a turbo four cylinder. They started by derating the V6 engine in the 2015 S550 compared to the 2011-2014 S197 V6 to make the EcoBoost 2.3 litre more differentiated. Then, they offered a performance pack on the EcoBoost but not on the V6. Now, they killed the V6 all together for 2018 and will only sell you a V8 or this EcoBoost. I love a good V8, everyone who knows me knows that. This is a Mustang, which means it needs a V8. If those aren't enough reasons, I always prefer natural aspiration over forced induction. That's three strikes against the EcoBoost-powered Mustang. But I'd be lying if I said the idea never intrigued me. It's the lightest (if you account for features). It has the best weight distribution. It has the same great chassis as the GT. It's very affordable and it has a lot of potential to make more power. Aftermarket? Endless support. There's plenty of good about it....