I just checked the Ford website. The Ford Focus automatic hatch is $21K MSRP. Does that satisfy you? I just made a reference that the ride is bad on the Focus, almost Z like bad. Is that not true? The Z rides bad, but it is what it is, a sports car that handles. The Focus is not a sports car, but it rides almost as bad as one. The knock is on the Focus, not the Z fanboy.
Outside of the Sync, I still don't see what you get out of the stupid Focus hatch? Are you guys seeing something that I am not? $21K for a car that is smaller than a Civic, rides worse and is way noisier. Some people are in love with the car because it has an available turbo? Are you going to tell me the Lancer is the same as the EVO? My post was more about how overrated the car is, it is like the BRZ of compact cars. I am trolling about a Focus? I am not 18 and it isn't like I have never driven other cars before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cmike2780
 
Enough with the trolling. Not only is that going to stir things up, it has nothing to do with what your thread is suppose to be about. There are plenty of things to complain about the Z but the ride quality isn't really on that list. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that stiffer springs and low profile tires will make the car more prone to a stiffer ride. You could say a 458 Italia has shytty quality too if we apply your "logic."
You're getting a lot for $16k. You can't find a Civic at that price unless it's the stripped down DX. If you're lookin for sports car handling and luxury comfort, you're not going to find it for $16k. The base Focus is commuter appliance, kind of like your POS Prius. At least with the Focus, there are some speedy variants that can be had. I want to know what car in the past has the same technology, fit, finish and performance you're comparing this to. Considering just about every car segment has grown considerably over the years, I also don't understand why the size of an economy car would even be an issue. They're all kind of small, but this segment had much smaller cars in the past. I actually decided to lease a Civic a few months back because I got a really good deal on it. It's boring to drive, the interior is okay, but it does what it's suppose to for my purpose so I think it's a great car. It's great on gas, pretty roomy unless you're fat, plenty reliable and gets me from point A to B. Complaining about it's flaws is pointless and moot. |
Bang for the buck yes. Ride quality? I can think of 3 cars off the top of my head that rides better without giving up much in ride quality. Corvette, RX-8, M3, 997 GT3. Guess what, I have had many cars too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tazicon
I have driven many MANY cars over my 33 years of driving, you sir are wrong. I test drove cars for 2 years before buy my G then another 6 months before buying the Z I will say it once again, you sir are wrong. I drove everything from Z4 to Skys, Elises to an SL550. The best bang for your buck that I could find, which included handling, ride as well as creature features in a 2 seater was the 370z.
|
When did you buy your Z? I am a troll yet I have had it long than you? I am sorry I don't beat off every time someone praises it or cry when someone knocks it. I was purely using the Z as a reference, not as a knock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockhound
|