[Sheel]

Originally Posted by swiftnfurious

Curious, what difference does the re-surfacing make and how does it impact the lap times? Would like to know what exactly is "re-surfacing" of the track.

On an old track, with softer rubber being used by race machines, it would provide more rolling and less resistance than a freshly laid tarmac.

So much so, that if you observe a track's racing line closely, you will spot different shades for racing line and off it.

Freshly laid tarmac loses that line and hence you lose millimeters and fraction of seconds.

This is what I as a layman can think of. I would love to know more on this

[SmartCat]

Originally Posted by Sheel

I would love to know more on this

Autocar's take on this is freshly laid track has "patchy and inconsistent" grip levels. 2016 tested cars would have been "slightly quicker" in the old track.

At the same time, they mention that Audi TT had pretty much the same track timing on both old and freshly laid track.

[kiku007]

Originally Posted by mxh

These times make a lot more sense than the ones in the Overdrive test. It didn't make any sense for the Figo to be close to the Abarth, let alone beat it. I wonder what the huge difference in result could be attributed to?

Attribute it to bias?

Last time the Figo was SO close to the Abarth Punto and this time it's rated EQUAL to the Audi R8 V10

[d3mon]

The website now has the article as well. I'm still super stoked about the R8 rivaling, XE & S5 beating 8* rating for the Figo

http://www.autocarindia.com/auto-fea...-402973.aspx/0

[RSR]

Frankly, I'm not at all surprised by Narain's high praise for the new Figo. Ford India did the right thing by supposedly going "mass-market". I'm delighted they ditched that pump, belt & pulley driven HPS for a nice EPS with pull drift compensation, and made the suspension more compliant & absorbent, and put in RHD control stalks (finally!) A recent ride on the rear seat of an Uber (Fiesta) Classic 1.4 TDCI over bad roads made me realise how stiffly sprung that car is.

Getting a non-absorbent stiffly sprung suspension to handle well is no big deal at all! Even humble go-karts do the same.

On the other hand, getting a car that offers a comfortable ride quality over most road surfaces at everyday speeds to handle well at higher speeds is an achievement indeed! Ford have clearly showed their prowess here (compared to, say Fiat).

Where they've slipped is only in terms of build quality. It's a pity that the new Figo does not feel as solid as the earlier one. Still, it's no featherweight and most variants cross the one metric tonne mark in terms of kerb weight. The new Figo/Aspire also offer better safety equipment across variants, so safety shouldn't be a cause for concern.

Originally Posted by CrAzY dRiVeR

Hope Figo Ecoboost (Priced against Baleno RS, GT TSI and Punto Abarth) is introduced. Imagine taking one to the track and having more fun than a Lamborghini.

I'm eagerly waiting for a Figo/Aspire EcoBoost 1.0 in Titanium+ trim level! I would be quite happy to have it even in its 100 PS state of tune (if not the 125 PS). The EcoBoost 1.0 is a compact, lightweight motor and even the 100 PS version will give the Figo a power-to-weight ratio of almost 100 PS/ton.

They need to localise the EcoBoost 1.0, and do it fast!

[d3mon]

Originally Posted by RSR

I'm eagerly waiting for a Figo/Aspire EcoBoost 1.0 in Titanium+ trim level! I would be quite happy to have it even in its 100 PS state of tune (if not the 125 PS). The EcoBoost 1.0 is a compact, lightweight motor and even the 100 PS version will give the Figo a power-to-weight ratio of almost 100 PS/ton.

They need to localise the EcoBoost 1.0, and do it fast!

At the risk of going slightly OT, would you agree with the following?

Stock TDCi beats the Ecoboost in City driving & mildly spirited highway driving. Loses out only in flat out acceleration & mad pulls to the redline.

Remapped/'Boxed TDCi is a different ballgame though - Given that you get about the same power and way more torque, it's going to be faster both on a track and in the real world. Don't think the weight difference would amount to much - the TDCi is a featherweight at <50kg more than the 1.2 petrol.

Given that, why wouldn't you just take a remapped TDCi? It will be faster at a similar price, zero turbo lag, with better fuel economy & better resale! Now that's like having your cake and eating it too.

Disclaimer: I haven't actually driven the Ecoboost yet.

[RSR]

Originally Posted by d3mon

Given that, why wouldn't you just take a remapped TDCi? It will be faster at a similar price, zero turbo lag, with better fuel economy & better resale! Now that's like having your cake and eating it too.

Just to clarify, I was in no way trying to say the 1.0 EcoBoost is superior to or much quicker or even more fun than the 1.5 TDCi. The TDCi would run rings around the EcoBoost in terms of everyday drivability, tractability, most in-gear acceleration times and fuel efficiency, no doubts at all! EcoBoost would only score better on refinement and performance at higher revvs.

It was just about my personal preference for petrol engines over diesel ones, that's all! And it's got to do more with what comes out of the tail pipe than what goes into the fuel tank.

Ford already have the EcoBoost 1.0 with them. All they need to do is localise this little wonder of a petrol motor and plonk it under the twins' hoods. As it is, the 125 PS EcoBoost itself is a bit cheaper than the 100 PS TDCi on the EcoSport. By localising the 1.0 EcoBoost in India, they can make it the default petrol engine for the Figo, Aspire & EcoSport. If they so wish, they can maintain the EcoSport's higher positioning by giving the Figo/Aspire this motor in its 100 PS state of tune (which should do quite nicely).

Just imagine the power-to-weight & fun-to-price ratios of the Figo twins if Ford gives them a localised 125 PS EcoBoost!

[IshaanIan]

Originally Posted by RSR

It was just about my personal preference for petrol engines over diesel ones, that's all! And it's got to do more with what comes out of the tail pipe than what goes into the fuel tank.

As a staunch petrolhead, in most cases I would agree with you but having had a little experience with the 1l ecoboost in the Ecosport (didn't appeal enough to me to want to drive it more), I can say that I'd take the 1.5tdci anyday. I enjoy working an engine and its gearbox to enjoy a car's full potential but that little 3cy turbocharged ecoboost was no fun for me; 1.2tsi anyday, they say the 1l boosterjet isn't so bad to drive although I'm a little skeptical, but the ecoboost, no fricking way I see myself having too much fun with it out on a track or empty road. The turbo lag is real and I didn't care too much for the throttle response or its behavior at higher revs.

Perhaps it would be better to drive in a different state of tune in the lighter Figo? Not sure, just prompting a discussion in the middle of the night

[ashwin489]

Originally Posted by IshaanIan

having had a little experience with the 1l ecoboost in the Ecosport (didn't appeal enough to me to want to drive it more), they say the 1l boosterjet isn't so bad to drive although I'm a little skeptical

I think it is high time all cars at least in the 8-10+ lac price range gets the option of at least a 1.5L engine (turbocharged or otherwise).

Add to that proper ergonomics (lumbar support, reach-tilt steering) and an optional automatic transmission being available across the range. How much is all this basic stuff going to cost? Not much, in relation to the total price of the car, especially when you consider EMIs.

What is the point of having rain-sensing wipers, cooled glove-box and automatic climate control, if you are stuck incessantly shifting gears in traffic with a horrible back ache?

P.S. Sorry about going OT, but I believe that this is something worth ranting about.

[d_himan]

Originally Posted by d3mon

At the risk of going slightly OT, would you agree with the following?

Stock TDCi beats the Ecoboost in City driving & mildly spirited highway driving. Loses out only in flat out acceleration & mad pulls to the redline.

Given that, why wouldn't you just take a remapped TDCi? It will be faster at a similar price, zero turbo lag, with better fuel economy & better resale! Now that's like having your cake and eating it too.

Disclaimer: I haven't actually driven the Ecoboost yet.

An alternate view- comparing oranges to oranges. The 1.0 ecoboost has mad tunablity with 160 bhp+ remaps available! Check any of the reputed UK tuner sites/youtube. My remapped 1.2 TSI is so vicious and lag-free, I can't imagine how much more sweeter this little motor would be!

I think it'll sound better, hold revs longer, be nimbler into corners. But yes, fuel economy like a TDCi while driving hard? No chance.

Bring it on Ford! And I'll put my money where my mouth is and buy a second Ford after the Ikon 1.6 Sxi!

[Karthik Chandra]

The Autocar Track day 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c64WQaCOjwo

[NiXTriX2004]

Originally Posted by mxh

These times make a lot more sense than the ones in the Overdrive test. It didn't make any sense for the Figo to be close to the Abarth, let alone beat it. I wonder what the huge difference in result could be attributed to?

The layout of the track. The Kari racetrack in Coimbatore is a lot more technical and handling of the car is probably more important there to get good lap times. Therefore, the Abarth loses out to the Figo because of its soft suspension.

The Chennai track has a lot more high speed sections which give an advantage to the powerful engine of the Punto Abarth.

[reignofchaos]

Originally Posted by NiXTriX2004

The layout of the track. The Kari racetrack in Coimbatore is a lot more technical and handling of the car is probably more important there to get good lap times. Therefore, the Abarth loses out to the Figo because of its soft suspension.

The Chennai track has a lot more high speed sections which give an advantage to the powerful engine of the Punto Abarth.

Quite the opposite. Kari has a really long straight on one side and a few medium speed curves on the other. This is where power would probably benefit more. One major difference is that all cars in the Kari test were shod with terrible JK rubber while in the Autocar test, rubber is the one available in stock configuration. So Polo and Punto would probably be running Apollo Alnac which is far better than the JK crap.

[itsashishsharma]

Originally Posted by d3mon

Stock TDCi beats the Ecoboost in City driving & mildly spirited highway driving. Loses out only in flat out acceleration & mad pulls to the redline.

I have got a remapped TDCi Fiesta and its true, a good remap changes a car a lot. The TDCi is the most silent diesel out there in stock form and remap has further improved its NVH charactersticks, so much so that people can't tell its a diesel while sitting inside. The remap has worked wonders on this engine's slow rev climbing nature. Now it revs like a petrol in 1800-3500 rpm range. Mid range is just too good and hence 3rd gear acts like an automatic for me, good for speeds from 30 to 100 kmph. And with its excellent handling package, this car beats cars in much higher range in driving pleasure. Only if Skoda/VW could put a better steering!
Given all this, I still wonder what if it had a TC petrol engine. Fiesta is available, though not in India, with that 1.0L Ecoboost that is available here on Ecosport.
+ves of Ecoboost:
1. Light weight, could completely change how a car changes directions. My car being a diesel is nose heavy, not something that an enthusiast would like, believe me.
2. And that fast rev climbing nature with pleasures of redlining it every now and then. I had a Swift 1.2 non vvt petrol earlier and trust me it could make rings around today's Citys and Ventos with its firm suspension and lovely weighed steering coupled with that sweet hard revving engine, nirvana.

+ves of TDCi:
1. Its a diesel for almost the same price, running costs would be lower and resale will be better.
2. Almost no turbo lag in stock form and after remap, its just too good.
3. City drivability is definitelt better.

So, I think if the Fiesta was available in hatchback form with the Ecoboost engine, I could have gone for it. Reason you ask. Sedan is lighter than the Ecosport already, hatchback would be even lighter, hence turbo lag would be lesser pronounced. Also, lighter means more agile, and hence sportier. On top, hatchback IF lesser than 4m in length, would be much cheaper than my current car.
But what if the Ecoboost was available with Fiesta sedan at same price point as the TDCi was? I think I would still have got the diesel for its better city drivability.
The Figo twins are not typical Fords. Previous Figo was the Fiesta mk5 essentially and hence had driving etiquettes to die for including a hydraulic steering unit. New Figo is far from that car. Its steering is light, in VW class if better than Hyundai and suspension doesn't inspire confidence at all. Yes, its lighter, so same engine would make it faster than the Fiesta but corners are not ballgame for the baby Ford.

Originally Posted by RSR

It was just about my personal preference for petrol engines over diesel ones, that's all!

I know what you mean buddy. Petrols are inherently faster revving and hence have that fun to drive factor. If we had USA like traffic and road conditions, the Ecoboost would have a much better choice to buy than the diesel. And with diesel cars sales dwindling, NGT taking steps (though not logical really), I think manufacturers are now returning towards investing more in petrol. This only means one thing, more TC petrol options to be there. Good for us.
Here is a Ecoboost Fiesta acceleration video for you:

[Vik0728]

Originally Posted by Karthik Chandra

The Autocar Track day 2016

Thank you Karthik for sharing the video here

I noticed something while viewing the video and have funny feeling something is amiss here:
- Observe closely when Narain takes the Figo TDCI on a spin, the time displayed is 2m 12s on the screen
- Towards the end of the video, the Figo TDCI's time is changed to 2m 19s !!
- What is even more alarming is the fact that all other cars times displayed during the spin matches with the final chart data!!

Am I missing something here guys??