Late Escorts - Good or Bad?

What? Apart from the 1.8/2.0 engines, and the drum rear brakes, what parts of the Focus are the same as an Escort?

I've owned several Escorts, and currently have a '99 Focus which I've owned from new. The Escorts were OK-ish, never giving me major problems. The Focus is in an entirely different league! It's better it just about every way.

It's more reliable, far more enjoyable to drive, much more comfortable, more durable with better rust protection, much safer in an accident - you get the picture?

If I was looking for a 500 quid car, I'd consider an Escort. If you have around a grand and a half to spend, not too much more would get you an early Focus.

WRT your question on high versus low milage cars, generally speaking if the higher milages have been mostly done on motorways and the car has been serviced properly it's not a reason to reject a car.

Chris

I have a V reg diesel Scrote (still) with 170,000 on the clock. All it's failed its MOT on in the last 3 years is tyres and suspension.

In message , gthh writes

Yes and Concorde was just an upgraded redesign of the Sopwith Camel.

Has it? Not on the 99 Focus we've owned since new. The wishbones are a different design to the Escort with the rear bush oriented longitudinally rather than vertically. Ours are original and in perfect condition.

I think you need to review your research.

Ford improved on the Escort design, which is why the Escort was discontinued completely. Better re-design on their part, is the reason you can't just compare the two and say "a Focus is an Escort." Neighbours of mine have had the wishbones of their Focus go to pot, but this is on T- and X-Regs, so I'd say that's very acceptable given the age of the vehicles.

I don't honestly need to review anything, my 'inside man' has informed me of the various Focus problems, of which they are many, but they don't become apparently until a much later age, which I think most people would find acceptable given that most older cars start to display issues.

Have a look on honest-john.

In message , gthh writes

I'm sorry but the Focus was "clean sheet" design and not a redesign. Your basic assertion is wrong.

I've not heard of it myself.

I don't have to. I currently have two Focus, the oldest I've owned for nearly eight years now. I know what they are like and what "issues" they have.

In news:Xi4Zh.2196$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe6-win.ntli.net, gthh wittered on forthwith;

Hate to be the one to point this out, but your mate is talking utter bollocks.

The Focus is immensely, vastly, astonishingly better than the late Escrot.

Late Escorts were rubbish when they were new, and they're still rubbish now. They're unlikely to improve.

Focii are simply brilliant, and other than a couple of engines and gearboxes and other random parts share nothing of any importance whatsoever with an Escrot.

If you have the choice of a Focus or an Escort and you buy the Escort, you're quite simply mentally impaired.

"Pete M" wrote

So it's fair to say you think the Focus is better than the Escort, Pete?

"Pete M" wrote in message news:f12v7a$mk8$ snipped-for-privacy@registered.motzarella.org...

Hang on, I don't recall it being a clean sheet at all. Ford even stated at the time it was the replacement for the Escort, the perfect new family car that had evolved from the quote "family Escort!" I don't know if this guy's mate knows his stuff obviously, but Paul is naturally not going to think of his own car as 1) a Ford, and 2) an Escort, which probably explains his lower class argumentative defensive nature.

On another moot point I've never been amazingly impressed with them. They run fine, and have the odd problem as with any car. I think many people were shocked at just how well it done, when you get a similar model from a better car manufacturer that is much better overall.

That Paul guy sounds he's got the inevitable car ownership argumentative nature - as if he *really* knows best. Many people purchased Rovers in the past, they're s**te. What does that tell us all? People are thick as shit, same goes for the Focus. It's just 'okay', not an amazing car by any means, perhaps a good idea to calm those beans Paul.

If only SteveH was about this evening for the poor chap :-(

In news: snipped-for-privacy@bt.com, Knight Of The Road wittered on forthwith;

Significantly so.

When the Escort was in its twilight years I was unfortunate enough to drive lots of them on an all to regular basis. A small amount of salvation came when they introduced the one with the oval themed interior Mk7?, that was a lot better than the earlier attempts but miles behind the competition.

When the Focus came out it was a revelation. I still rate the Focus as probably one of the best everyday cars I've ever used. Roomy, excellent ride and handling, nice steering and just generally a very nice car indeed.

The Escort is just a horrible old vibratory, rattly, ill-handling old shed.

RS2000 Escort Mk5s were nice though, I had one for a while and liked it.

In message , RichardD writes

Then your recollection is wrong.

Yes it was a replacement for the Escort but it wasn't evolved from the Escort.

I don't have any problem thinking of my car as a Ford. Obviously I'm not going to think of it as an Escort because it is not...... unless you can prove otherwise?

I think you will find that discussion is often argumentative by its very nature. Perhaps you can explain the "lower class" part?

Read my posts again. I wasn't extolling the virtues of the Focus. I was just pointing out that the Focus was not a redesign of the Escort.

It sounds like he is ;)

I work for a company that is owned by Ford. As a result of this, I can access documentation for just about every Ford vehicle programme in the last 20 years or so.

You're right - there's some amazing similarities between the Escort and the Focus. They both have 4 wheels for a start. The 1.8 engine is the same. They both use the iB5 and MTX75 gearboxes. Oh, and they both have the same blue oval badge on them. Apart from that I'm struggling to see the similarities.

But then, it's not, is it? The 1.8 in the Focus is a black top, and the Escort is a silver top. The gearboxes aren't even the same, either. Hydraulic in the Focus, and cable in the Escort.

I've driven a V reg Escort Estate for over 60,000 miles

I've driven a W reg Focus Estate for over 20,000 miles

They are both Fords, they share a control layout, but there the similarity ends.

That explains why I hated the Focus clutch so much.

Out of interest, what did you hate about it?

Chris

I just got SWMBO an 04 plate TDCi bus. I quite like the clutch on it.

With the Cable Clutch, it was far easier to feel the bite point, as you get feedback from the pedal as well as the engine note and feel.

Vauxhall Astra is the worst I've driven in that respect. Haven;t test-driven a Daevy yet...

Aside from that, you can fix a cable clutch on the road.

I can honestly say I've never really noticed the difference. What I like about the hydraulic actuation is the fact that the bite point remains constant. With self-adjusting cables you can tell when it has taken up another click.

On some cars, yes. I wouldn't like to sort out the self-adjust on an earlier Escort or Fiesta at the roadside however...

Chris

When I realised how many miles I was doing a year, I clutch and throttle cables duplicated to the passenger compartment.

If one fails, I still call the RAC, but he's grateful that the part is pretty much all there already.

Ironically, the two times I've had to call the RAC have both been for flat tyres!