Quote:

---

To be honest with you sarge, the gear ratio's on the VTS and ST are almost identical. Something to consider when comparing cars is that difference in
power isn't always a good indication that one car may be quicker than another.
You have GOT TO look at the power to weight ratio for a true comparison.
Many people who aren't that clued up about cars just believe if they have more
power then their car must be quicker. D'oh!
Take the ST 150bhp 1165kg, so power to weight ratio = 128.75 bhp/ton
Then some chump might come along and say my car has got 295bhp so it would
eat your car in a race, unfortunately this guy is in a range rover sport
4.4 V8 HSE and the thing weighs 2480kg so his power to weight ratio is
only 118.95 bhp/ton. In reality the ST would probably be quicker in a straight line and also leave it for dead in the bends too!!!

---

Quote:

---

Exactly my man. I was just working it out myself! so unfortunately it must be a miss-print!

---

Quote:

---

I wasnt going on power, but if the fiesta gets from 0-60 in 7.9secs and the saxo does it in 8.4secs then blatently the fiesta is quicker. You dont have to know a great deal about cars to make that assumption really do you. Agreed the saxo is light but i honestly dont feel its as powerful as the fiesta, especially on corners.

---

Not sure there Sarge. On pure performance they must be very close but about the "especially on corners" bit... I don't see why a Saxo would not corner as well as an ST. Now don't get me wrong, I do agree that Ford engineers have done a brilliant job with the handling on our cars but they do have to cope with about 150 kg (or more) extra weight. And having said that, as much as you can criticise french cars for their poor build quality, they have at least got the handling right for a long time. Looking at Ford, the Fiesta ST is the first in the Fiesta line which has a handling to match the one on the French cars. Look back at the previous fast fords in comparative press... Take the Fiesta RS Turbo for instance. It was a sports car because it was a real sport trying to keep it on the road with fancy footwork! And all this at a time when french manufacturers were proposing cars like the 205 GTI which was the "reference" in terms of hot-hatch handling at the time. Now arguably the ST may also be a much more forgiving car than any car of older conception might require a good dose of expertise to be taken up to the same speeds, but that aside why should it corner slower?

Quote:

---

8.4secs? i think a VTS is a bit quicker than that!!

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I wasnt going on power, but if the fiesta gets from 0-60 in 7.9secs and the saxo does it in 8.4secs then blatently the fiesta is quicker. You dont have to know a great deal about cars to make that assumption really do you. Agreed the saxo is light but i honestly dont feel its as powerful as the fiesta, especially on corners.

---

Not sure there Sarge. On pure performance they must be very close but about the "especially on corners" bit... I don't see why a Saxo would not corner as well as an ST. Now don't get me wrong, I do agree that Ford engineers have done a brilliant job with the handling on our cars but they do have to cope with about 150 kg (or more) extra weight. And having said that, as much as you can criticise french cars for their poor build quality, they have at least got the handling right for a long time. Looking at Ford, the Fiesta ST is the first in the Fiesta line which has a handling to match the one on the French cars. Look back at the previous fast fords in comparative press... Take the Fiesta RS Turbo for instance. It was a sports car because it was a real sport trying to keep it on the road with fancy footwork! And all this at a time when french manufacturers were proposing cars like the 205 GTI which was the "reference" in terms of hot-hatch handling at the time. Now arguably the ST may also be a much more forgiving car than any car of older conception might require a good dose of expertise to be taken up to the same speeds, but that aside why should it corner slower?

---

Well i guess theres only one way to find out Ive been itching to try one of these track days where i can drive round a race track in my car. once ive worn it in ill take mine and my girlfriends car round the track and see which i can get round quicker in, just a matter of doing it properly and impartial. any ideas?

Quote:

---

Couple of things, VTS spec was as follows (I think this is accurate)

1.6 (1587 cc) VTS - DOHC (Double overhead camshaft) 16 valve - 120 bhp - 0-60 in 7.2 seconds - top speed = 127 mph
Insurance group 14

I never owned a VTS, I had the cheaper VTR (hey I was only 20 or so hehe). I'm not a total Ford Fanboy and i'm not going to bash the Saxo for the sake of it.., but the VTR was one of the worst car purchases I ever made. Sure it was nippy, but the handling was crap (remember doing 70.. yes 70) along the motorway, wasn't particulary windy but felt the backend start to slide out a little. The seats were absolutely crap and unsupportive (dont know if the VTS had better seats?) and the brakes were awful.. absolutely terrible - actually ended up getting rid of it after just 18 months into my 3 year deal as I couldnt stand it.

Too light, poor handling, awful brakes and uncomfortable cars. I'm sure if you spent some money on a VTS and put some decent suspension, upgraded brakes, decent seats in it, you'd have a nice little car. Found this on one of the review sites as well, and seems this guy had the same issues with the VTS I had with the VTR.

"My girlfriend says I'm being a snob, but I swear to you the build quality on this vehicle is absolutely appalling.

Ignore the Max Power crowd - despite the on-paper figures this is no sports car. The components just can't keep up with the car's 130BHP.

The gearbox feels horrifically cheap and I get the feeling it could break at any minute. Rapid gear changes after tight bends make a nasty crunching sound as though the clutch hasn't disengaged.

The brakes are extremely vague even when the pads are replaced - not what you want from a car of this performance.

A quick thrash round some country lanes leaves the cabin smelling faintly of cooking; I have the suspicion this is the feeble clutch being deep-fried.

The suspension is virtually non-existent. Every tiny stone and dried blade of grass is translated into a spine grinding jolt. This appears to be Citroen's ham-fisted attempt at making a school-and-shopping car 'handle'. Which it doesn't, especially in the wet; this car enjoys skittering and sliding about with its wheels spinning in mid-air.

The footwell is so tiny I have to drive around sitting at a slight angle; the pedals are so close together I tread on my own feet.

The engine note is vile. Compared to the lovely smooth tone of my previous car this sounds like Brian Blessed yelling at you from the bottom of a well.

Despite claims of 7.4 second 0-60 times, and dubious accounts from young boys who claim to have done 199MPH in one of these, I can assure you that the numbers are purely academic. Over 90MPH this car feels positively terrifying; not only is the wind-noise deafening, the steering gets all floaty and the brakes would never save if you had to stop within less than about ten miles.

All your worst suspicions about this car are true; it really is as bad as you think it is, and even worse than the people on this site say it is."

But it does come down to personal preference, and what one person might think was awful another might find fine... /shrug.

---

Quote:

---

U sure ur gf's is a VTS and not a VTR? lol

---

Yeah it has the vts badge next to the side repeaters.

I kinda agree what has been said regarding build quality, but none of that apart from the tires will affect how quick it goes in a straight line.

My gripes of my girlfriends car is, pedals feel to light under my feet and are very close together, breaks arnt great and wheels are a bit thin for the power of the car (would help if she changed her tires once in a while though!)