Mazda2 Vs. Ford Fiesta. Which One To Buy?

[culicine]

mro, can you also post 80-120 times/ these are more important for overtaking. Also do you have times for the new jazz/city mt?

[Ethan79]

I just had test drive in Fiesta 1.6 sport and must say it was most impresive, the powershift auto gives seamless changes, no jerking you just see the rev counter bobbing up and down that coupled with the bigger more powerfull engine than the Mazda 2's. Is worth the 50k premium in my opinion, very tempted to order one in orange

dude...where did you manage to test drive!! I've made an appointment via their online system only for them to call me back and said sorry, our car send for paint job, we call u back on when can test drive....and that was 2 days ago.... seriously...i think i am boycotting the Ford Nara branch from now on.

They have a orange 1.6 with powershift for test drive in Pattaya on sukomvit road just past Lotus on left hand side driving towards sattahip

Thxs man...did you have to book in advance? or you just walk in and test drive it? I think i'll try tmr.

the response so far seems to be slighty in favour of the fiesta...

[MoonRiverOasis]

mro, can you also post 80-120 times/ these are more important for overtaking. Also do you have times for the new jazz/city mt?

MT Jazz, City, VIOS and Yaris untested.

Here are the numbers for 80-120km/hr though (same test conditions as 0-100 times):

• Ford Fiesta Hatch 1.6L 6AT: 8.4s
• Mazda 2 Sedan 1.5L 5MT: 8.4s
• Mazda 2 Hatch 1.5L 5MT: 8.6s
• Honda City 1.5L 5AT: 9.4s
• Toyota VIOS 1.5L 4AT: 9.6s
• Honda Jazz 1.5L 5AT: 10.2s
• Suzuki Swift 1.5L 4AT: 10.5s
• Toyota Yaris 1.5L 4AT: 10.6s
• Mazda 2 Hatch 1.5L 4AT: 11.0s
• Mazda 2 Sedan 1.5L 4AT: 11.8s
• Chevrolet Aveo 1.4L 4AT: 12.2s

Edit: Note that all times posted (0-100 and 80-120) are with A/C turned off. A/C on adds ~0.5 - 1.5s to all these times (depending on specific load, hence why tests are normalized with A/C off).

Edited January 14, 2011 by MoonRiverOasis

[br12stol]

]

Thats the problem, when i tried the fiesta(twice) it was very noisy, and had a big kickback on every gear change. Back then i was used to a CVT (which is not powerful but does feel nice when stuck in traffic, no feeling of gears changing at all)

The kickback on the city is a lot smoother and i feel the acceleration is a lot faster, especially if you use the "1,2,3" speed on the gear stick

I understand that the fiesta should be faster but there's definately something wrong with those numbers, how is the mazda 2 even in front of honda? it has 103hp vs 125hp for jazz/city

I am amazed, I found the fiesta the total opposite compared to Jazz/Vios Very quiet and gearbox ultra smooth with zero kickback on changes, thought that was the benefit of DSG Powershift gearboxs

There would be no change on a CVT as its basically one gear (belt travelling up and down a cone) ?

[katabeachbum]

]

Thats the problem, when i tried the fiesta(twice) it was very noisy, and had a big kickback on every gear change. Back then i was used to a CVT (which is not powerful but does feel nice when stuck in traffic, no feeling of gears changing at all)

The kickback on the city is a lot smoother and i feel the acceleration is a lot faster, especially if you use the "1,2,3" speed on the gear stick

I understand that the fiesta should be faster but there's definately something wrong with those numbers, how is the mazda 2 even in front of honda? it has 103hp vs 125hp for jazz/city

I am amazed, I found the fiesta the total opposite compared to Jazz/Vios Very quiet and gearbox ultra smooth with zero kickback on changes, thought that was the benefit of DSG Powershift gearboxs

There would be no change on a CVT as its basically one gear (belt travelling up and down a cone) ?

CVT can feel seemless and thus rather powerfull, but in reality its slower than any other auto with much lost power. As new. When belt and vaiators get worn, 10-80k km depending on use, its realy slow, and has problem in steep hills loaded. The advantage is engine always work within powerband (4800-6500rpm 4 valve), but to much power is simply lost in transmission. CVT was first used by Daf/Volvo in the 70s, then dropped for a decade or two, and introduced again late 90s.

Thats why Honda has dropped it, and going 5 speed hydraulic auto presently

DSG shifts faster than any other auto, and usually faster than an extremely experienced manual driver. Its directdrive, so no power lost. In fact most DSG cars use less fuel and performs better than their manual gear sibling

[MoonRiverOasis]

Thats the problem, when i tried the fiesta(twice) it was very noisy, and had a big kickback on every gear change.

You must have been test-driving on of the "Style" models with the smaller 1.4L engine and conventional 4-speed AT. The 1.6L powershift versions (Sport and Trend models) are way different.

DSG shifts faster than any other auto, and usually faster than an extremely experienced manual driver. Its directdrive, so no power lost. In fact most DSG cars use less fuel and performs better than their manual gear sibling

True, but Fiesta's DSG and gear ratios are tuned with a heavy bias towards fuel economy (hence why the 1.6L is even more economical than any 1.4/1.5L competition), so shifts are slower than other DSG brands tuned for max. performance. A good driver could match or better performance in an MT, but not by much.

Edited January 14, 2011 by MoonRiverOasis

[culicine]

mro, can you also post 80-120 times/ these are more important for overtaking. Also do you have times for the new jazz/city mt?

MT Jazz, City, VIOS and Yaris untested.

Here are the numbers for 80-120km/hr though (same test conditions as 0-100 times):

• Ford Fiesta Hatch 1.6L 6AT: 8.4s
• Mazda 2 Sedan 1.5L 5MT: 8.4s
• Mazda 2 Hatch 1.5L 5MT: 8.6s
• Honda City 1.5L 5AT: 9.4s
• Toyota VIOS 1.5L 4AT: 9.6s
• Honda Jazz 1.5L 5AT: 10.2s
• Suzuki Swift 1.5L 4AT: 10.5s
• Toyota Yaris 1.5L 4AT: 10.6s
• Mazda 2 Hatch 1.5L 4AT: 11.0s
• Mazda 2 Sedan 1.5L 4AT: 11.8s
• Chevrolet Aveo 1.4L 4AT: 12.2s

Edit: Note that all times posted (0-100 and 80-120) are with A/C turned off. A/C on adds ~0.5 - 1.5s to all these times (depending on specific load, hence why tests are normalized with A/C off).

thanks for that. do you also happen to have official fuel economy figures? i'm curious to see what the 1.6 fiesta can return on bangkok roads compared to the competition. could it return comparable figures to the nissan march for example? thanks.

[MoonRiverOasis]

thanks for that. do you also happen to have official fuel economy figures? i'm curious to see what the 1.6 fiesta can return on bangkok roads compared to the competition. could it return comparable figures to the nissan march for example? thanks.

Have, but they're for s specific test route and not split into city/highway, so not useful for public comparisons. I got roasted last time I posted them too

I can say that Fiesta is the closest B segment to March's fuel consumption, and that real-world March consumption is higher than advertised ;P

Edited January 14, 2011 by MoonRiverOasis

[keemapoot]

This is not scientific on fuel consumption, but I can tell you the following as someone who owns both a new Mazda2 hatch (6 mos), and a new Honda City (sedan/saloon) (one year).

I drive every week the exact same distance for business, city to city, which is just over two hours each way, and spend the same amount of time in each city. I alternate driving the City and the Mazda. Both cost about the same to fill with 91 gasahol or 95. There is no doubt that the City gets much better gas mileage, as it uses about (one bar) less per week when I drive that car. I start out the trip with a full tank, and then measure the return amount.

As I say, I am too lazy to actually measure gas mileage, but the Honda City (and therefore Jazz) is superior in this respect.

Finally, just some observations from someone who owns both. As I said earlier, the Mazda is a blast to drive. It turns on a dime, accelerates in an old skool sporty fashion, and is sort of a pocket rocket in a non performance way. The City/jazz is much more sedate, more refined ride, better on road trips. Of course, as MRO pointed out, sedans have a smoother ride. But, I test drove the Jazz too, and the Mazda is a slightly stiffer ride. Second, the Mazda loses on storage space with the seats folded down compared with the Jazz, but then so do the other hatch backs.

All in all, if I had to only have one car, and it had to be a hatch, it would either be a Jazz or Fiesta.

[Kwasaki]

Many test drivers have commented that Fiesta does not feel as fast as brand x/y, but that's just due to smoother and quieter power delivery and less suspension squat.

Edit: Added VIOS numbers, and note on Honda CVT's being discontinued (just demonstrating how crap CVT was )

Just noted one thing Vios same engine Yaris, Vios heavier than Yaris !!!!! err!!

These numbers are correct. Tested using a G-Tech, same test course, temps within +/- 3 degrees C, average of 4 runs.

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Edited January 14, 2011 by Kwasaki

[MoonRiverOasis]

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Yes, correct.

Gearing, aerodynamics, suspension tuning, engine tuning, tires etc all major factors. E.G a car with a Cd of 0.25 will be faster than the same drivetrain with a Cd of 0.4. A 5-speed geared for a top speed of 120km/hr will accelerate faster than the same engine/car/weight/Cd geared for a top speed of 200km/hr. A Yaris with 14" magnesium wheels (and ballast to make up the wieght difference) will accelerate faster than if it had (heavier) 18" alloy wheels, etc etc

Fiesta would be capable of high 8s 0-100 with agressive gear ratios, but would have a negaitive impact on normal driveability, fuel economy, smoothness and top speed. Another car I am familiar with had it's acceleration reduced from 6.7s to 7.5s on the basis that the marketing dept. didn't like the "sound" (V8 revved too low for marketing nerds in best actual tune) - HP remained the same, only gearing changed to achieve higher revs (at the expense of speed). There's many more examples of other design criteria having higher priority over raw acceleration numbers (usually fuel effeciency these days, but can also be NVH goals).

Also, power is not one number, it's a curve. Brand X 125HP can be wildly different to brand Y 125HP in the real world. Classic example is a commonrail turbo diesel compared to the exact same HP in naturally aspirated petrol. Of course the TD will crap all over the petrol (with appropriate gearing), even though same HP on paper.

In short, Power:weight is very simplistic measure and is a very, very rough guide only.

Edited January 14, 2011 by MoonRiverOasis

[katabeachbum]

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Yes, correct.

Gearing, aerodynamics, suspension tuning, engine tuning, tires etc all major factors. E.G a car with a Cd of 0.25 will be faster than the same drivetrain with a Cd of 0.4. A 5-speed geared for a top speed of 120km/hr will accelerate faster than the same engine/car/weight/Cd geared for a top speed of 200km/hr. A Yaris with 14" magnesium wheels (and ballast to make up the wieght difference) will accelerate faster than if it had (heavier) 18" alloy wheels, etc etc

Fiesta would be capable of high 8s 0-100 with agressive gear ratios, but would have a negaitive impact on normal driveability, fuel economy, smoothness and top speed. Another car I am familiar with had it's acceleration reduced from 6.7s to 7.5s on the basis that the marketing dept. didn't like the "sound" (V8 revved too low for marketing nerds in best actual tune) - HP remained the same, only gearing changed to achieve higher revs (at the expense of speed). There's many more examples of other design criteria having higher priority over raw acceleration numbers (usually fuel effeciency these days, but can also be NVH goals).

Also, power is not one number, it's a curve. Brand X 125HP can be wildly different to brand Y 125HP in the real world. Classic example is a commonrail turbo diesel compared to the exact same HP in naturally aspirated petrol. Of course the TD will crap all over the petrol (with appropriate gearing), even though same HP on paper.

In short, Power:weight is very simplistic measure and is a very, very rough guide only.

but, 0-100 where aerodynamics is not cruisal, and assume on same wheels

Yaris has same engine and auto/final ratio as Vios, but lihter so should be faster

Jazz has same engine and auto/final ratio as City, but lighter so should be faster

[Ethan79]

hmm...with the fiesta price being relatively competitive, what the typical freebies one can get?

film/anti rust/leather seats/gps?

or is that not possible in thailand?

[MoonRiverOasis]

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Yes, correct.

Gearing, aerodynamics, suspension tuning, engine tuning, tires etc all major factors. E.G a car with a Cd of 0.25 will be faster than the same drivetrain with a Cd of 0.4. A 5-speed geared for a top speed of 120km/hr will accelerate faster than the same engine/car/weight/Cd geared for a top speed of 200km/hr. A Yaris with 14" magnesium wheels (and ballast to make up the wieght difference) will accelerate faster than if it had (heavier) 18" alloy wheels, etc etc

Fiesta would be capable of high 8s 0-100 with agressive gear ratios, but would have a negaitive impact on normal driveability, fuel economy, smoothness and top speed. Another car I am familiar with had it's acceleration reduced from 6.7s to 7.5s on the basis that the marketing dept. didn't like the "sound" (V8 revved too low for marketing nerds in best actual tune) - HP remained the same, only gearing changed to achieve higher revs (at the expense of speed). There's many more examples of other design criteria having higher priority over raw acceleration numbers (usually fuel effeciency these days, but can also be NVH goals).

Also, power is not one number, it's a curve. Brand X 125HP can be wildly different to brand Y 125HP in the real world. Classic example is a commonrail turbo diesel compared to the exact same HP in naturally aspirated petrol. Of course the TD will crap all over the petrol (with appropriate gearing), even though same HP on paper.

In short, Power:weight is very simplistic measure and is a very, very rough guide only.

but, 0-100 where aerodynamics is not cruisal, and assume on same wheels

Yaris has same engine and auto/final ratio as Vios, but lihter so should be faster

Jazz has same engine and auto/final ratio as City, but lighter so should be faster

In very simple theory, yes. Suggest you go ask a Honda Engineer if you really want to know why City is faster than Jazz, or a Toyota Engineer why VIOS is faster than Yaris

[MoonRiverOasis]

hmm...with the fiesta price being relatively competitive, what the typical freebies one can get?

film/anti rust/leather seats/gps?

or is that not possible in thailand?

Normal sort of freebies on offer for this level of car/price point doesn't include leather chairs or GPS (no LCD TV in the car anyway), what you would expect is free 1st class insurance, tabien rot, window tint, weathershields, floor mats, and maybe a chrome exhaust tip or something else similarly small from the accessories catalog. Total package would be worth ~30-40K max.

If it were me buying the big thing I'd be pushing for is the projector headlights (sold as an accessory only, not fitted to any normal models), so I could put high-power xenon's in and maintain beam pattern.

Note that aftermarket body kits for Fiesta are now readily available and cheap in TH, so you'd be wasting your discount to get genuine parts bundled in (if that's your thing).

Also note that top model sedan comes with factory leather chairs and auto climate control, but the top-model hatch does not get these.

Edited January 14, 2011 by MoonRiverOasis

[Ethan79]

what's the projector headlights for? i was thinking of pushing for the leather seats as i want the comfort...and gps is a must for me since i'm new in town. i guess both has to be both additional?

free 1st class insurance, tabien rot, window tint, weathershields, floor mats, and maybe a chrome exhaust tip are i guess thrown in free usually...let me ask...test drive at 11am!

[MoonRiverOasis]

what's the projector headlights for? i was thinking of pushing for the leather seats as i want the comfort...and gps is a must for me since i'm new in town. i guess both has to be both additional?

free 1st class insurance, tabien rot, window tint, weathershields, floor mats, and maybe a chrome exhaust tip are i guess thrown in free usually...let me ask...test drive at 11am!

Reflector headlamps use mirrors to reflect the bulb light and define a loose beam pattern on the road, projectors use a lens to define a much more exact beam pattern. The difference is more light output focussed where you need it with projectors, and further headlight range. If upgrading to HID Xenon bulbs (2x-3x brighter than standard halogen), reflectors will "bleed", wasting light, and blinding oncoming traffic with glare. Projectors will maintain a perfect beam pattern however. The difference is "night and day" (pun intended).

As for leather chairs (in hatchback) this is not a factory option, so getting the dealer to supply will mean that they outsource the work the a 3rd party and mark-up the price, and it will not be covered under the new car warranty. Cheaper to organize this yourself (20k-30k baht for a car this size), plus you'll be able to choose grade, color and trimming style, rather than just taking whatever the dealers comes up with (which will be whatever's cheapest and most profitable).

Standard Reflector headlamps:

Projector headlamps:

[SoloFlyer]

Is there a similar discussion on the mazda3 somewhere?

[WarpSpeed]

Both shit slow cars, but please get the ford.

Honda City is about the same price and is much more powerfull/confortable than both. Better resale value. Only bad thing in the city is the dumb side angle block on the front window. The honda feels like a F1 race car compared to the mazda/ford

hehehehe

Fiesta 1,6 has more hp, more tourque, more cc and a much more efficient 6 speed DSG auto. In addition Fieasta hatch suspension is on the sporty side, while City is designed to be comfy for old people.

Mazda 2 performs on par with City though

have no idea why you use a slash between Mazda and Ford, as they dont have specs in common. And if any of these would feel like a F1 car, it would be top spec Fiesta hatch

I agree with most of what you've said with the exception of the fact that Mazda/Ford share a significant amount of the same spec beginning with the largest piece being the chassis and suspension...

Edited January 15, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

This is not scientific on fuel consumption, but I can tell you the following as someone who owns both a new Mazda2 hatch (6 mos), and a new Honda City (sedan/saloon) (one year).

I drive every week the exact same distance for business, city to city, which is just over two hours each way, and spend the same amount of time in each city. I alternate driving the City and the Mazda. Both cost about the same to fill with 91 gasahol or 95. There is no doubt that the City gets much better gas mileage, as it uses about (one bar) less per week when I drive that car. I start out the trip with a full tank, and then measure the return amount.

As I say, I am too lazy to actually measure gas mileage, but the Honda City (and therefore Jazz) is superior in this respect.

Finally, just some observations from someone who owns both. As I said earlier, the Mazda is a blast to drive. It turns on a dime, accelerates in an old skool sporty fashion, and is sort of a pocket rocket in a non performance way. The City/jazz is much more sedate, more refined ride, better on road trips. Of course, as MRO pointed out, sedans have a smoother ride. But, I test drove the Jazz too, and the Mazda is a slightly stiffer ride. Second, the Mazda loses on storage space with the seats folded down compared with the Jazz, but then so do the other hatch backs.

All in all, if I had to only have one car, and it had to be a hatch, it would either be a Jazz or Fiesta.

One line more ?? Comparable fuel tank volume?? Don't know, just asking like .....

[WarpSpeed]

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Yes, correct.

Gearing, aerodynamics, suspension tuning, engine tuning, tires etc all major factors. E.G a car with a Cd of 0.25 will be faster than the same drivetrain with a Cd of 0.4. A 5-speed geared for a top speed of 120km/hr will accelerate faster than the same engine/car/weight/Cd geared for a top speed of 200km/hr. A Yaris with 14" magnesium wheels (and ballast to make up the wieght difference) will accelerate faster than if it had (heavier) 18" alloy wheels, etc etc

Fiesta would be capable of high 8s 0-100 with agressive gear ratios, but would have a negaitive impact on normal driveability, fuel economy, smoothness and top speed. Another car I am familiar with had it's acceleration reduced from 6.7s to 7.5s on the basis that the marketing dept. didn't like the "sound" (V8 revved too low for marketing nerds in best actual tune) - HP remained the same, only gearing changed to achieve higher revs (at the expense of speed). There's many more examples of other design criteria having higher priority over raw acceleration numbers (usually fuel effeciency these days, but can also be NVH goals).

Also, power is not one number, it's a curve. Brand X 125HP can be wildly different to brand Y 125HP in the real world. Classic example is a commonrail turbo diesel compared to the exact same HP in naturally aspirated petrol. Of course the TD will crap all over the petrol (with appropriate gearing), even though same HP on paper.

In short, Power:weight is very simplistic measure and is a very, very rough guide only.

I admire your patience to be able to explain these things to people. I know this is where I fall short with some and seem to be dismissive, confrontational or uninformed but for me it more comes to a lack of time and tolerance with so many factors to consider and account for..

Edited January 15, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[WarpSpeed]

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Yes, correct.

Gearing, aerodynamics, suspension tuning, engine tuning, tires etc all major factors. E.G a car with a Cd of 0.25 will be faster than the same drivetrain with a Cd of 0.4. A 5-speed geared for a top speed of 120km/hr will accelerate faster than the same engine/car/weight/Cd geared for a top speed of 200km/hr. A Yaris with 14" magnesium wheels (and ballast to make up the wieght difference) will accelerate faster than if it had (heavier) 18" alloy wheels, etc etc

Fiesta would be capable of high 8s 0-100 with agressive gear ratios, but would have a negaitive impact on normal driveability, fuel economy, smoothness and top speed. Another car I am familiar with had it's acceleration reduced from 6.7s to 7.5s on the basis that the marketing dept. didn't like the "sound" (V8 revved too low for marketing nerds in best actual tune) - HP remained the same, only gearing changed to achieve higher revs (at the expense of speed). There's many more examples of other design criteria having higher priority over raw acceleration numbers (usually fuel effeciency these days, but can also be NVH goals).

Also, power is not one number, it's a curve. Brand X 125HP can be wildly different to brand Y 125HP in the real world. Classic example is a commonrail turbo diesel compared to the exact same HP in naturally aspirated petrol. Of course the TD will crap all over the petrol (with appropriate gearing), even though same HP on paper.

In short, Power:weight is very simplistic measure and is a very, very rough guide only.

but, 0-100 where aerodynamics is not cruisal, and assume on same wheels

Yaris has same engine and auto/final ratio as Vios, but lihter so should be faster

Jazz has same engine and auto/final ratio as City, but lighter so should be faster

In very simple theory, yes. Suggest you go ask a Honda Engineer if you really want to know why City is faster than Jazz, or a Toyota Engineer why VIOS is faster than Yaris

For me, you explained you adequately.... I get it.... It's like trying to explain to people that there will never be one magic bullet to the current energy savings plans but rather an entire program across the spectrum of smaller solutions that all add up to large savings in the bigger picture, but that's a whole nother topic of it's own .. Or why certain safety measures on a race track and it's design makes for better racing not less exciting...

[Ethan79]

went to the show room...she wouldn't give me the 1st class insurance. just the mat / the rain proctector and gps...

1st class insurance is like 26k..

[katabeachbum]

Both shit slow cars, but please get the ford.

Honda City is about the same price and is much more powerfull/confortable than both. Better resale value. Only bad thing in the city is the dumb side angle block on the front window. The honda feels like a F1 race car compared to the mazda/ford

hehehehe

Fiesta 1,6 has more hp, more tourque, more cc and a much more efficient 6 speed DSG auto. In addition Fieasta hatch suspension is on the sporty side, while City is designed to be comfy for old people.

Mazda 2 performs on par with City though

have no idea why you use a slash between Mazda and Ford, as they dont have specs in common. And if any of these would feel like a F1 car, it would be top spec Fiesta hatch

I agree with most of what you've said with the exception of the fact that Mazda/Ford share a significant amount of the same spec beginning with the largest piece being the chassis and suspension...

but not engines, transmission, bodypanels, lights, interior, electronics,wheels, and 3000 more parts

making them same size but very different

[changnaam]

went to the show room...she wouldn't give me the 1st class insurance. just the mat / the rain proctector and gps...

1st class insurance is like 26k..

Where did you go for the dealer? We went in Pattaya recently looking at the 1.6 Sport and they did not offer insurance which I was surprised at but the extra list was pretty normal. I am going to check in BKK over the next couple of weeks as I think insurance should be offered somewhere.

[Ethan79]

went to the show room...she wouldn't give me the 1st class insurance. just the mat / the rain proctector and gps...

1st class insurance is like 26k..

Where did you go for the dealer? We went in Pattaya recently looking at the 1.6 Sport and they did not offer insurance which I was surprised at but the extra list was pretty normal. I am going to check in BKK over the next couple of weeks as I think insurance should be offered somewhere.

Bangkok...Sukhumvit 62 branch. Let me know if you find one that offers insurance. Or if you are keen, we can try to buy together and drive a harder bargain. Honestly right now for me the lack of 1st yr insurance is a deal breaker for me. If I don't find a dealer which gives the insurance, i guess i'll move to buying a Mazda 2.

[Kwasaki]

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Yes, correct.

Gearing, aerodynamics, suspension tuning, engine tuning, tires etc all major factors. E.G a car with a Cd of 0.25 will be faster than the same drivetrain with a Cd of 0.4. A 5-speed geared for a top speed of 120km/hr will accelerate faster than the same engine/car/weight/Cd geared for a top speed of 200km/hr. A Yaris with 14" magnesium wheels (and ballast to make up the wieght difference) will accelerate faster than if it had (heavier) 18" alloy wheels, etc etc

Fiesta would be capable of high 8s 0-100 with agressive gear ratios, but would have a negaitive impact on normal driveability, fuel economy, smoothness and top speed. Another car I am familiar with had it's acceleration reduced from 6.7s to 7.5s on the basis that the marketing dept. didn't like the "sound" (V8 revved too low for marketing nerds in best actual tune) - HP remained the same, only gearing changed to achieve higher revs (at the expense of speed). There's many more examples of other design criteria having higher priority over raw acceleration numbers (usually fuel effeciency these days, but can also be NVH goals).

Also, power is not one number, it's a curve. Brand X 125HP can be wildly different to brand Y 125HP in the real world. Classic example is a commonrail turbo diesel compared to the exact same HP in naturally aspirated petrol. Of course the TD will crap all over the petrol (with appropriate gearing), even though same HP on paper.

In short, Power:weight is very simplistic measure and is a very, very rough guide only.

I admire your patience to be able to explain these things to people. I know this is where I fall short with some and seem to be dismissive, confrontational or uninformed but for me it more comes to a lack of time and tolerance with so many factors to consider and account for..

Yeah !! thanks you guys, I get a bit carried away because I am really about motorbikes and weight ratio matters there, and again I understand Warpspeed getting the hump with people but really we only or should I say I, only wish to know and understand things, cars are a bit of a mystery to me these days to when I use to repair my own motors, it was all points and distributors then and anyone remember air control wiper blades, dynamo's. :lol:

The Yaris my wife has was in J & P sports of Bangkok, and I don't exactly know what they have done, it's lowered and has quite hard suspension with 205 / 45 / 17 F1 goodyear tyres, Japanese Samurai alloys, sports skirts alround, a K & N air filter, it does appear to be on rails around corners and it hits 170 km pretty quick and goes to a snip over 185 km. I like it, it is nothing like the one I test drove.

[transam]

If there correct as you say ?? does not make a lot of sense because that's the weight to ratio theory out the window then.

Yes, correct.

Gearing, aerodynamics, suspension tuning, engine tuning, tires etc all major factors. E.G a car with a Cd of 0.25 will be faster than the same drivetrain with a Cd of 0.4. A 5-speed geared for a top speed of 120km/hr will accelerate faster than the same engine/car/weight/Cd geared for a top speed of 200km/hr. A Yaris with 14" magnesium wheels (and ballast to make up the wieght difference) will accelerate faster than if it had (heavier) 18" alloy wheels, etc etc

Fiesta would be capable of high 8s 0-100 with agressive gear ratios, but would have a negaitive impact on normal driveability, fuel economy, smoothness and top speed. Another car I am familiar with had it's acceleration reduced from 6.7s to 7.5s on the basis that the marketing dept. didn't like the "sound" (V8 revved too low for marketing nerds in best actual tune) - HP remained the same, only gearing changed to achieve higher revs (at the expense of speed). There's many more examples of other design criteria having higher priority over raw acceleration numbers (usually fuel effeciency these days, but can also be NVH goals).

Also, power is not one number, it's a curve. Brand X 125HP can be wildly different to brand Y 125HP in the real world. Classic example is a commonrail turbo diesel compared to the exact same HP in naturally aspirated petrol. Of course the TD will crap all over the petrol (with appropriate gearing), even though same HP on paper.

In short, Power:weight is very simplistic measure and is a very, very rough guide only.

I admire your patience to be able to explain these things to people. I know this is where I fall short with some and seem to be dismissive, confrontational or uninformed but for me it more comes to a lack of time and tolerance with so many factors to consider and account for..

Yeah !! thanks you guys, I get a bit carried away because I am really about motorbikes and weight ratio matters there, and again I understand Warpspeed getting the hump with people but really we only or should I say I, only wish to know and understand things, cars are a bit of a mystery to me these days to when I use to repair my own motors, it was all points and distributors then and anyone remember air control wiper blades, dynamo's. :lol:

The Yaris my wife has was in J & P sports of Bangkok, and I don't exactly know what they have done, it's lowered and has quite hard suspension with 205 / 45 / 17 F1 goodyear tyres, Japanese Samurai alloys, sports skirts alround, a K & N air filter, it does appear to be on rails around corners and it hits 170 km pretty quick and goes to a snip over 185 km. I like it, it is nothing like the one I test drove.

You mean vacuum controlled wiper blades.

[Kwasaki]

motors, it was all points and distributors then and anyone remember air control wiper blades, dynamo's. :lol:

The Yaris my wife has was in J & P sports of Bangkok, and I don't exactly know what they have done, it's lowered and has quite hard suspension with 205 / 45 / 17 F1 goodyear tyres, Japanese Samurai alloys, sports skirts alround, a K & N air filter, it does appear to be on rails around corners and it hits 170 km pretty quick and goes to a snip over 185 km. I like it, it is nothing like the one I test drove.

You mean vacuum controlled wiper blades.

Yeah !! your right, on my old Ford Consul Mk 1, didn't reallies you was as old as me.

[MoonRiverOasis]

The Yaris my wife has was in J & P sports of Bangkok, and I don't exactly know what they have done, it's lowered and has quite hard suspension with 205 / 45 / 17 F1 goodyear tyres, Japanese Samurai alloys, sports skirts alround, a K & N air filter, it does appear to be on rails around corners and it hits 170 km pretty quick and goes to a snip over 185 km. I like it, it is nothing like the one I test drove.

Emtirely off-topic, but the little-known (in TH) best single perfromance upgrade for the 1NZ-FE (1.5L used in Soluna, VIOS, Yaris and Avanza) is to replace the throttle body with the one from a 2.4L Camry. The OEM TB pretty much acts as like governer. Camry unit is a direct bolt-on requiring new inlet pipe only, and shaves almost 3 seconds off the 1/4 mile time - fuel economy suffers a little though Most other mods (Exhaust, ECU and intake) are flat-out making 10HP. Do them along with the throttle body upgrade and you have more HP than the '04/05 Soluna VIOS Turbo had, and a 0-100 in the high 7's MT (high 8's for AT)