Yesterday, Ford announced that its Focus “is officially the world’s best-selling passenger car,” with 1,020,410 units sold worldwide in 2012. That according to registration data compiled by Polk.

“Wrong” Toyota said today.

Toyota’s spokesman Ryo Sakai told Reuters that Toyota sold 1.16 million Corollas in 2012 and that “Toyota still sees the Corolla as the world’s most popular car”.

Last year, Ford got into similarly hot water by quoting a report by HIS Automotive, setting off an intense discussion about the finer differences of models, body styles and name plates.

TTAC obtained a spreadsheet from Toyota’s car counting department that shows the Corolla ahead of the Focus any way you look at it.  The Toyota Sedan alone racked up 1,083,610 in sales, handily beating the 1,020,410 of the Focus. Various other Corolla versions bring the name plate total to 1,160,764.

Would one count the many derivatives and other model names under which the Corolla is sold around the globe, the total would grow to 1,381,842 units.

Ford says now what Matt Gasnier said months ago: The Ford Focus model was the world’s best-selling passenger car in 2012. Ford’s assertion is based on data from automotive consulting firm Polk.

According to Reuters, Ford sold 1,020,410 of its Focus compact in 2012. More than one out of four Focus cars were sold in China, where registrations climbed 51 percent.

Focus was launched in China in late March last year, and was on top of China’s sales charts for most of the months to follow, a remarkable achievement for late-to-China Ford.  Ford’s China sales rose 65 percent in March to 81,387 units.

According to Matt, the Focus was followed by Toyota’s Corolla in second place, and Hyundai’s Elantra in third.

Zack writes:

Hi Sajeev,

I’ve been following a series of discussion on a MK3 Ford Focus forum; in particular I’ve been following the technical discussion about how to squeeze more power from the MK3′s new 2.0 GDI motor. Of course, this involves talk of CAIs, Cat-deletes (inadvisable), and free flow exhaust. One of the more curious things to emerge is…

…the notion that re-gapping the spark plugs can account for +5whp. I’m dubious to say the least that something seemingly inconsequential could generate that much power. It’s almost seems akin to slapping turbo badges on the rear lid expecting some similar black magic. This being an internet car forum there is much breathless back and forth, but few actually explanations. I was hoping you might have heard of this “trick” and whether or not there’s any validity.

I think for questions like this we need a carforum Snopes.com, but then again we have you. Thanks in advance!

Sajeev answers:

You sir, have made my day.  Putting me on par with Snopes is a high honor indeed. That said, now I wonder if Snopes is as horribly inaccurate and clueless as yours truly on many, MANY occasions. (sad trombone sound)

Now about the spark plugs: I won’t say that a re-gap cannot possibly increase horsepower.  I will say that it isn’t very probable.  At all. Two things:

1.  Spark plug gap can make a huge difference, especially in forced induction (turbo or supercharger) applications where adding extra boost is on the table.  But that low hanging fruit (i.e. extra power) is usually not there in factory setups: they normally hide the power in tame air/fuel/timing parameters in the engine computer’s tune.
2. If it isn’t backed by a dyno sheet from a local tune shop, this is pure, un-stepped on, pharmaceutical grade bullshit.

Look, I’ve been messing with Ford products for a looooong time. And while not everything I do has been proven with dyno results, there’s always that low hanging fruit proven many times over with other’s dyno sheets: conservative factory computer tunes, intake boxes with inlet tubes significantly smaller than the engine’s throttle body and mediocre (i.e. quiet and restrictive) mufflers on inadequately shaped crush bend exhaust tubing (older models only).  The first is solved with an SCT tune, the second is free (remove something) or requires a trip to Home Depot for a slice of PVC pipe/glue/black paint,  and the latter is not a big deal with an exhaust shop and a muffler from a 2005-present Mustang GT.

But spark plug gap? The forums never show that as a credible performance modification.   Perhaps GDI motors are a game changer, but I doubt it.  That will be optomized to perfection by Ford’s engineers, the low hanging fruit will be the things mentioned in the previous paragraph.

Best and Brightest, you go right ahead and prove me wrong. Snopes ain’t got nothin’ on me. Or not.

Send your queries to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com. Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry.

Up till now there hasn’t been a “real” Prius alternative on the market. Sure Honda has the Civic and Insight, but their real-world MPGs can’t hold a candle to the green-car poster child and Honda’s IMA hybrid system is far from smooth and refined. The Volt is more of a novelty with its lofty price tag and the last time we tested one we revealed a lowly 32MPG average when running gasoline only. This brings us to the blue oval. Despite Ford using essentially the same technology as Toyota for their hybrid systems, Ford resisted creating a dedicated hybrid model. Until now. Meet the 47MPG 2013 Ford C-MAX Hybrid. Of course we’ve all heard the news that the C-MAX doesn’t hit 47MPG, so click-through the jump to find out what we averaged and whether or not that should matter to you.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Exterior

What Ford didn’t do was create a futuristic wedge-shaped car on a dedicated platform crafted from light-weight ultra-eco-friendly materials in an attempt to create the most efficient car in America. Disappointed? Don’t be, because the benefits may just outweigh the drawbacks. Instead Ford took the existing (since 2011) Focus-based C-Max from Europe, stuffed Ford’s most powerful hybrid drivetrain under the Euro sheetmetal and slapped some wide (for a hybrid) tires on what might just be the first hybrid hot hatch.

Speaking of that sheetmetal, the C-MAX strikes an interesting pose on American roads looking like the product of crossbreeding a Focus and a Windstar. The resulting hatchback has a tall greenhouse, tall roof-line and some crossover styling cues no doubt to confuse entice the suburban set. Measuring in at 173 inches long, the C-MAX is 2 inches longer than the Focus hatchback on which it is based, but 3 inches shorter than a Prius and 8 inches shorter than a Prius V.

Of course none of this really explains the strange “C-MAX” name. Yes, that’s what it’s called in Europe, but why? Still, it’s no stranger than “Prius” and whatever you think of its name, the C-MAX is considerably more attractive than Toyota’s bulbous hybrid wagon.

Interior

The C-MAX doesn’t just look like a wannabe crossover on the outside, it does on the inside as well. There’s a reason for this. Instead of sharing heavily with the Focus hatch as you might assume, the C-MAX shares parts and interior styling with the 2013 Escape. The only major style change to the dash is a unique instrument cluster similar with twin 4.2-inch LCDs like the Fusion hybrid. Unlike the Prius, you won’t find any thin, hard, weight saving plastics in the cabin. There are no blue-tinted transparent button arrays, no shifter joystick and no center-mounted disco dash either. Instead you will find a premium cabin that would pass muster in any $30,000 vehicle and looks notably more premium than the Lexus CT 200h. The Prius on the other hand is full of plastics and fabrics more at home in a $16,000 econo-box.

The C-MAX seats can be had in your choice of charcoal or a “greyish” tan fabric or leather but regardless of your choice, the majority of the interior is black-on-black. The overly black theme is both very European (in a good way) and a bit cold (in a bad way) for my tastes. Front seat comfort is good thanks to a relatively upright seating position, wide seat cushions and a good range of motion when you get the power driver’s seat. The tilt/telescopic steering wheel made finding a comfortable driving position quick and easy. The upright seating is what allows the C-MAX to have Prius matching rear leg room, an improvement of three inches over the Focus hatchback’s more reclined thrones.

The rear seats are a bit close to the floor for adult passengers but are the right height for most children and young teens. Despite looking tall and narrow, the C-MAX is more than three inches wider than the Prius and this allows three to sit abreast in the rear in greater comfort. The rear seat backs fold completely flat with the 24.5 cubic foot cargo area. Because the C-MAX wasn’t designed as a hybrid from the start, the battery pack occupies all the spare tire space in the C-MAX as well as a few inches on the cargo area floor. The reduced cargo space is a few cubes larger than the Prius liftback but smaller than the Prius V. Despite the cargo hauling reduction vs the European gasoline-only model, the C-MAX easily swallowed four roller bags with room to spare.

Infotainment

Like the Android vs iPhone debate, “infotainment systems” spark fierce debate. No system other than iDrive has received as much bad press, fan-boy rave reviews and healthy imitation as the strangely named “MyFord Touch.” (Really, what was wrong with SYNC?) The system (optional on SE, standard on SEL trim) combines your climate, entertainment, telephone and navigation chores into one integrated system that looks snazzy and responds via voice commands to your every whim. When it landed in 2010 it became obvious the software was rushed to market complete with more bugs than a bag of 5-year-old flour. Still, the system is still unique in the market for allowing you to voice command just about everything from your destination to your temperature and what Madonna track you want to listen to from your iPod.

The C-MAX benefits from a major software update released in March of 2012 (for all Ford products) to make the system more responsive. While the system never had a melt-down during my testing (a first for MFT), the slowness the system is known for persists. Like most MFT equipped vehicles, the C-MAX teams a snazzy in-dash touchscreen with twin 4.2-inch LCDs on either side of the speedometer. Perhaps a first for a hybrid vehicle, you won’t find a single screen on the main MFT screen that displays hybrid system information. No animated screen with a battery/motor/engine scree, no wacky driving hints, no fuel economy charts. Aside from the efficiency leaves that replace the climate option on the right-side 4.2-inch LCD and the intuitive kW gauge on the left LCD, there is nothing to identify the C-MAX as a trendy gasoline/electric people mover, and I think I like the move. Despite the system’s obviously flaws, MFT is far slicker and user-friendly than the Prius or Volt’s infotainment options.

Is Ford’s transmission a Toyota transmission?

The short answer is no. Long before Ford produced a hybrid vehicle, Ford and Toyota put out plenty of prototypes and concept cars. Both companies recognized the similarities of their competing hybrid designs and geared up for lawsuits. (Both designed shared plenty of cues from a TRW system from the 1960s.) Ford and Toyota did something rare in our litigious society, they settled and cross-licensed each-others technologies but (and most importantly) NOT their specific designs. Ford continued developing the Escape Hybrid solo and Toyota went on their way with Hybrid Synergy Drive. Some confusion was caused by Ford choosing Aisin build their hybrid transaxle for the Escape and Fusion hybrids because they didn’t have the capacity or expertise internally. Fast forward to 2012. Ford decided that in order to reduce costs and drive hybrid sales (for some CAFE credits of course) they had to take the design and manufacturing of hybrid systems in-house.  This means that Ford’s hybrid system’s level of vertical integration is vastly similar to Toyota.

Drivetrain

Under the stubby hood of the C-MAX you’ll find Ford’s completely redesigned hybrid system with a downsized 2.0L Atkinson cycle four-cylinder engine good for 141HP and 129lb-ft of twist. This is down slightly from the old 155HP 2.5L engine in the old Fusion and Escape hybrids, but considerably higher than the Prius’s 98HP mill. In order to achieve the 188 system horsepower (11 more than the old Ford system and 54 more than the Prius) and a TTAC estimated 200-220lb-ft of twist, Ford put a hefty 118HP motor/generator into their in-house designed HF35 hybrid transaxle. If you want to know more about how the Ford and Toyota Hybrid systems work, click here.

Beneath the cargo area in the C-MAX sits a 1.6kWh lithium-ion battery pack. The lithium battery chemistry allows the hybrid system to charge and discharge the pack at rates higher than the old nickle based battery pack (used in the Escape and the Prius). This new battery allows the C-MAX to drive electric only up to 62MPH vs the 34MPH of the Prius. In addition, the C-MAX doesn’t need you to be as gentle on the throttle as the Prius or the older Ford hybrids.

Oh that fuel economy

Fuel economy is a tricky business because your driving style and topography are the biggest factors involved. I would caution readers to never compare my numbers with other publications because the driving conditions and styles are different. The 2012 Prius, when driven gently on my commute, (120 miles round trip with a 2,200ft mountain pass) averaged 46-47MPG which is fairly close to its 51/48/50 EPA rating (City/Highway/Combined). The C-MAX on the other hand averaged 41.5 during our 568 miles of testing and the lowest one-way figure on my daily commute was 39MPG. Sound good so far? There’s a problem, even on a level freeway at 65MPH the C-MAX struggled to get better than 45MPG in 60 degree weather. The Prius in the same situation averaged 50MPG. The Prius V suffered a similar shortfall in my week of testing coming in four MPG below its EPA combined 42MPG rating. We need to put these numbers in perspective. Driving 15,0000 miles a year with gas at $4 a gallon the C-MAX would cost $144 a year more to operate than a Prius and $148 less than a Prius V.

On the road

There are a few reasons the C-MAX fails to meet Ford’s fuel economy claims. The first is the portly 3,600lb curb weight, the second is the wide 225/50R17 tires which have a 23% larger contact patch than the Prius’ 195/65R15 rubber. On the flip side, the wide low-profile rubber pays real dividends when the road bends and the heavy curb weight helps the C-MAX to feel lass “crashy” than a Prius over broken pavement. Coupled with a Focus derived suspension, the tires help the C-MAX set a new benchmark for hybrid handling easily besting the CT 200h. While the electric power steering robs the hybrid hatch of 99% of its road feel, it still manages to be more engaging than a Prius. Admittedly not a hard thing to do.

Stomp on the C-MAX’s accelerator pedal and something surprising (for a hybrid) happens: acceleration. If the road surface is right you’ll even get some one-wheel-peel. Despite weighing a whopping 600lbs more than a Prius, the C-MAX sprints to 60MPH 2 seconds faster posting a solid 7 second run to highway speeds. I’d like to compare it to the Prius V and  Lexus CT 200h, but I gave up after 9.5 seconds. This makes the C-MAX as fast as the Focus ST and faster than a Volkswagen GTI.

In addition to being more powerful, the C-MAX’s hybrid system is capable of operating in EV mode at higher speeds and in a broader range of conditions than the Prius. While it doesn’t seem to help the C-MAX hit its advertised 47/47/47 MPG (City/Highway/Combined) it is a novelty that entertained drivers and passengers alike. Thanks to a more powerful motor, faster discharging battery, and aggressive software, it’s possible to accelerate up to40 MPH in EV mode without pissing off the cars behind you. Doing so brings the C-MAX’s other selling point to light: Ford’s sound deadening measures are extensive and make the C-MAX the quietest hybrid this side of the insane LS 600hL.

Ford has wisely priced the C-MAX aggressively starting at $25,200 and there’s already a Ford $1,000 cash back offer dropping the price to the same as the 2013 Prius’ MSRP and $2,450 cheaper than a Prius V. The up-level SEL model which comes standard with leather, heated seats, rain sensing wipers, backup sensors, ambient lighting, keyless entry/go for $28,200. Should you desire some plug-in love, the Energi model will set you back $32,950. The deal gets even better when you consider the C-MAX has more standard equipment and features and options unavailable in the Prius at any price.

The week after Ford lent me the C-MAX hybrid Consumer Reports’ “bombshell” about the C-MAX’s fuel economy numbers dropped. But does it matter? Is a 41MPG C-MAX a failure? No, and here’s why. The only measurable way the Prius is better than the C-MAX is real world fuel economy where the Prius will save you a few Grants a year. In every other way the C-MAX is superior to the Prius and even the Lexus CT 200h. Does this compensate for the “lackluster” fuel economy? It does in my book. If you’re willing to spend $144 a year in higher fuel costs for a more entertaining ride, this Ford’s for you. The C-Max isn’t just a shot across Toyota’s bow, it’s the first honest-to-goodness competitor on the market. Better yet, it’s not a me-too Prius, it’s a unique and compelling alternative.

Ford provided the vehicle, one tank of gas and insurance for this review

Specifications as tested

0-30: 2.9 Seconds

0-60: 7.05 Seconds

1/4 Mile: 15.55 Seconds @ 92 MPH

Average Fuel Economy: 41.5MPG over 625 Miles

Click here to view the embedded video.

Today, we’re trying something new. Alex is doing his review in video-only format. Let us know how you like it.

Ford provided the vehicle, insurance and a tank of gas for this review.

Specifications as tested

0-30: 2.93 Seconds

0-60: 7.61 Seconds

1/4 Mile: 16 Seconds @ 86 MPH

Average Fuel Economy: 30.5 MPG over 679 miles

Patrick writes:

Sajeev,

My winter car is a 2001 Focus, 170k, duelcam, with a stick. At about 155k the original clutch was replaced. A year and a half later the replacement clutch was replaced. Now the car is in my hands, roughly a year from the previous replacement, and the clutch is in dire need of being replaced. My local trusty mechanic does not do engine and tranny work because he doesn’t want business to back up with tear downs. That’s fine, but I asked his advice anyway.

The first symptom was a clunk from the drive wheel when engaging first from a stop. Feathering the clutch and slow on the gas prevents this but is annoying. The second symptom started on the highway, in cruise control, on a rise, the clutch would start to slip. It would rise about 1500 rpm, and then slowly fall back into place. The first has not gotten any better or worse in the last month or so, and the second has gotten to be much worse.

So, my question. 3 clutches in 3 1/2 years? I have had a ’97 Probe GT and the clutch lasted 130k, ’01 Miata replaced at 120k as preventative maintenance with the water pump. My only guess about this is that the seals were not replaced when the clutches were replaced and that oil is leaking onto the clutch and prematurely burning it out. However, I smell no burning oil, I have no oil leaks, and the oil level remains steady. I have no evidence that it is oil on the clutch but I cannot explain why the clutch on this car has needed to be replaced repeatedly in such a short amount of time.

My mechanic was non-committal on is answer, but he didn’t think it was oil on the clutch. I’d like some advice before wheeling into an unknown mechanic.

Thanks,

-patrick

Sajeev answers:

Did the flywheel ever get machined?  Did someone put on a new pressure plate?  How bad is the throwout bearing?  Why do I get a brain freeze when I shovel ice cream down my throat?

All those questions are important, and I assume you cannot answer any of them…except for the brain freeze one. Since it sounds like you can’t go back to the installer of the last clutch, the only way to know is to make sure the next person installs it correctly: machining the flywheel and replacing the pressure plate if needed.  Maybe the throwout bearing needs replacement too…might as well do it all when you go in there.

Whomever does the work next time ’round, make sure they give you a good diagnosis of all the critical parts of the clutch system.  If they do, odds are the problem will disappear.  Fingers crossed on that.

Best and Brightest, off to you.

Send your queries to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com. Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry.

These F-words were brought to you by Ford. Yesterday, Ford’s 350 millionth vehicle rolled off the lines. It was a Ford Focus, and an occasion to celebrate an even more auspicious record: The Ford Focus “is the world’s best-selling car for the first half of 2012,” says a Ford press release. Media from Associated Press to Autoblog obediently announced the record. The record went down in a hail of protests.

The Wall Street Journal deemed it below its ethics to parrot a press release and asked questions. Answers in hand, they write:

“The company announced on Friday that through seven months of 2012, the car had sold 522,000 units around the world, making it the best-selling single nameplate vehicle, ahead of the Toyota Corolla and Volkswagen Golf. Outselling the Corolla, which similarly is a model sold around the world, would be a great accomplishment for Ford.

But according to Toyota, the Focus actually hasn’t outsold the Corolla. Through that same seven-month period, it said it has sold 722,000 vehicles. Ford, when notified about the difference, said they made a mistake and issued a new press release, saying they actually sold 489,616 units in a six month period – not seven months – and the Toyota Corolla had sold 462,187 units. They also, in the new release, attributed those numbers to IHS Automotive, an independent auto research and forecasting firm that tracks data like global sales.”

That should settle it, no? No, says the WSJ.

Toyota says it sold 603,840 in that same six-month period. Which would give the Corolla a slight lead of 114,224 units over the Focus. IHS and Ford overlooked what is familiar to TTAC readers: The Corolla goes by different names in different countries, where it is known as the Matrix, Corolla Axio, Corilla Fielder, Corolla Rumion, and we possibly missed some.

Even if you only count global sales of the Corolla sedan and Auris hatchback, the two body styles available on the globally-sold Focus, that would give 524,000 units to the Corolla, which would still be ahead of the Focus, says Toyota.

Ford should know better than to rely on IHS Automotive. Its predecessor, IHS Global Insight, once received the nickname “Global Oversight” in the business for consistently erroneous numbers. In November 2009, IHS Global Oversight infamously crowned Volkswagen as the World’s largest automaker. A month later, Volkswagen ended the year correctly in place 3.

IHS concedes that its worldview is a bit blurred, as its numbers cover only 90% of the world and “the 10 percent that we miss out on may be in countries where Toyota is strong,” Christopher Hopson of IHS told the Journal.

In the end, muses a gracious Wall Street Journal, “it’s fair to say both companies are selling a lot of cars, even if no one can agree on how many.”

Bloomberg, after first buying into Ford’s 489,616 Focus vs. 462,187 Corollas story,  has second thoughts.  In a new story, the wire correctly reports that Ford and Toyota  “are each saying they produce the best-selling car in the world in the first half. Their definitions are the key.”

PS: Flagwavers, take note: The 350 millionth Ford and allegedly best-selling Focus rolled off the assembly lines in Thailand, at Ford’s Rayong plant.

Mark writes:

Hi Sajeev and Steve,

Sajeev tried to save me once before but I didn’t listen. Maybe this time I will. Last year, I bought a bomb of a project and he did his best to scare me away. He saw the monstrosity in person. That monster being the 1995 Ford Bronco I bought on a whim. We talked on the phone before I purchased the OJ Bronco. Sajeev told me to avoid it like the plague. Yet, I didn’t listen. I got burned. I owned it for less than 6 months (3 of those months being spent in my garage) before selling it to an offroader in Ohio.

But, now I am in a different situation…

I am back in Canada where gas is significantly more expensive (very unlike cheap Houston Texas gas). My girlfriend and I will be in the market soon for a vehicle and we have the following criteria:

1) Fun to drive: must be a manual, preferably RWD or AWD, and a bit chuckable (not in the “chuck it in the garbage” sense of the Bronco).
2) Practicality: I don’t need a gas guzzler. Something efficient. Two doors are doable. Four doors are better. Wagon or hatch is best. However, it must have enough room for my girlfriend and I, plus two black Labrador mixes (see cute doggy brothers picture).
3) Utility: It needs to be able to tow two motorcycles (~400lbs each) and trailer. Also, we need another room for camping gear, even when the dogs are with us.
4) Realistic: We have finite funds (like most people) so we would definitely be going for something used, under $8000. I couldn’t care less what badge is on the front.

Thanks,
Mark

Steve answers:

Zach writes:

Dear Sajeev and Steve,
My wife has recently started insisting (more along the lines of demanding) that I get a new(er) car.  While the junkyard gem 97 civic has only served me about a year, it has only cost me $1000 total.  With 270k on the odometer and counting, it is really starting to show its age but runs 80 down the road with cold air and no issues.  I drive 130 miles round trip everyday with practically all of it on the interstate.  The civic gets 34-38 mpg which is the part I like, but I am starting to question the reliability.

So now I am looking for a good commuter car.  The only option that I am dead set on is cruise control for the obvious reason.  While initially an 08 Impreza hatch grabbed my attention, 26 mpg was unacceptable for me.  So now I am left searching again.  I have test drove the Mazda2 and Fiesta and either would meet my needs as far as size goes.  They both seemed pretty peppy for all 100 hp.  I have plans to test drive an Accent but havent made it that far yet.

So now for the question, what else should I consider?  I have no issues with buying CPO or used.  We have an extra car in case something did happen to the civic so I am really in no hurry except for the nagging about how much dislike there is for the civic.

Needs:

• Price <25k, preferably <=20k
• Cruise control
• Comfortable
• Throw kids (7&9) in back in a pinch
• good radio
• >=35 mpg highway, city doesn’t matter

Wants:

• heated seats
• leather
• bluetooth
• hatchback
• cheap/easy maintenance

Sajeev Answers:

I dunno what’s worse: the fact that there’s no proper successor to a 1990s Honda Civic (the 6th generation was the last I really cared for) or that your wife makes you feel that way. Then again, I understand how pressure from a loved one makes something as mundane as a new Civic be more like torture to own.  This V8 Luxo Barge fanatic finally gave into such pressure and decided a little four banger truck was all I needed.

Quite honestly, the latest Ford Focus and Hyundai Elantra get the mileage you need, have the stuff you want and get pretty amazing mileage.  And they’ll be far more refined than an old Civic on the highway.  While I have problems with your need for leather (think of the depreciation!), these will be the right way to go.  But I am still feeling nostalgic for the good old days of Hondas, and wonder if we’ll ever get a light-ish weight runner like ye olde Civic ever again.

Steve Answers:

I would go at least one step up in size to a compact vehicle.

Bing writes:

I am a financially stable 27 year old engineer living in the Bay Area, where it seems BMWs and Audis are about as pedestrian as Camrys.  I’ve been getting the car itch, but I don’t like the idea of getting an entry level luxury car like everyone else.

Almost by accident, I stumbled upon the idea of buying a early 2000s Aston Martin DB7 Vantage Volante, which can be had in the low to mid $40s.  Aside from the car being gorgeous and powerful, I get to pretend that I’m not just another boring Silicon Valley yuppie (which, believe me, I am) while not being overly flashy (it’s old enough to have a “classic car” vibe).  Financially, I would also like to think it has steadied out in depreciation, and if I sell it a few years from now, I may be able to recoup more of my investment compared to getting a much newer car.  Finally, there’s something attractive about the idea of having your dream car while you’re young, rather than waiting until you’re 65.  So the question is: is this a stupid idea?

1: Am I wrong about the depreciation?  Is this car likely to keep falling in value?  Will there be a demand for it in a few years?

2: Will this be too impractical of a car to drive on a regular basis?  I live less than 2 miles from work so the low mpg is less of an issue.  Will maintenance eat me alive?

3: Is this car too much for me to handle?  My current car is a Ford Focus (which I won on the Price is Right, incidentally).  I’d be getting a Touchtronic auto, which should be relatively tame, right?

4: Should I get a normal car now and wait another few years for the DB9 (which is just stunning) to depreciate to a similar price level?  If I got the DB7 now, I may still end up secretly yearning for the DB9.

This is very unfamiliar territory here, so any thoughts and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks!

Steve answers:

Let’s answer your questions point by point…

1: Am I wrong about the depreciation?  Is this car likely to keep falling in value? Will there be a demand for it in a few years?

Depreciation is always a big question mark. But that’s not so much of a make or break issue if you want an exotic. The real question is whether you fully understand the potential costs involved and the complete maintenance history on the vehicle.

If you don’t understand both, skip the exotic.

2: Will this be too impractical of a car to drive on a regular basis?  I live less than 2 miles from work so the low mpg is less of an issue.  Will maintenance eat me alive?

That gives me caution. Less than 2 miles means that your car is not going to fully warm up by the time you get to your business. You can make up for this by going on a nice pleasurable weekend ride. But a couple thousand small drives over four years would likely have an impact on your engine.

3: Is this car too much for me to handle?  My current car is a Ford Focus (which I won on the Price is Right, incidentally).  I’d be getting a Touchtronic auto, which should be relatively tame, right?

No, it may be a good fit for your desires. By the way, have you price about maintenance and known issues for this vehicle? The four figured price may be ‘over or under’ your expectations.

4: Should I get a normal car now and wait another few years for the DB9 (which is just stunning) to depreciate to a similar price level?  If I got the DB7 now, I may still end up secretly yearning for the DB9.

Your commute gives me a bit of pause. If you have the means or are willing to pay the premium, then go for it. But I would personally opt against driving the two miles, and just walk whenever it’s practicable.

Sajeev answers:

I literally LOL’d at the word “investment” for a 10-ish year old Aston Martin. You are not looking at this right, not by a long shot. Or, put in terms of your Focus, “The Price is Wrong!” Yes, you can make money on anything if you buy it “low” enough. And Steve did a good job explaining the pitfalls of owning an exotic vehicle. All of which makes the word “investment” a bit of a massive lie.

What Steve forgot to mention is that you’ll be a tool for owning a flashy, 100% Not A Classic, not a current body style Exotic with mediocre performance. If someone in a new V6 Mustang challenges your stunt and floss…well, you see where I’m going with this. And your snotty yuppie friends will agree, if one of them has the balls to call you out. Or say it behind your back.

That’s because you have to really like a DB7 to own it. And as the inherently cooler DB9s and V8 Vantages drop in price, so does the DB7.  This isn’t a Ford GT, it still has another good decade or so before the depreciation curve hits rock bottom. Then again, if you buy it for pennies at a police auction…

So keep the Focus if you get a DB7.  And be ready to spend a lot of money on upkeep, none of which you will get back when you sell it for the car you really want: the DB9. Or sell the Focus, get a normal sports car (cough, Corvette) and deal with the lack of prestige while owning a real performance vehicle without the excessive maintenance costs. More to the point, LS7-FTW.

Need help with a car buying conundrum? Email your particulars to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com , and let TTAC’s collective wisdom make the decision easier… or possibly much, much harder.

Shawn writes:

Hey Sajeev and Steve,

I recently asked the Best and Brightest for help regarding my friend’s car buying dilema, but now I’m in one of my own! I am looking to get rid of my 2006 Mazda5 GT, which has been quite problematic. I can no longer tolerate the frequent trips to the shop. Its got about 125,000km on it, and I’ve been getting offers ranging from $6000-8000 for it on trade. The cars I am considering are in the compact to mid-size class, but there are benefits to each car, and I can’t seem to make up my mind. I am seeking a car with decent fuel economy that is fairly engaging to drive. However, I DO NOT want a harsh ride. The GTA is filled with pot holed roads, and I know the stiff ride would get tiresome. Manual transmission is preferred, but not necessary. I do carry four people occasionally, so cross out any coupes. On the Mazda I’ve taken quite a hit in the residual value, so this time around, I am looking to buy something that is a couple of years old. That way, someone else takes the largest depreciation hit. Here is the list so far:

1. 2007 or 2008 Acura CSX w/premium package and manual tranny: Essentially a Civic with a nicer front and rear end, leather, a bit more sound deadening, and the motor from the RSX. Really fun to drive, but the manuals that I’m seeing in the GTA carry a price premium… The 2008 that I test drove with 58,000km is going for $18,900. At this point, does it not make sense to just buy a brand new one for $23,000?
2. 2008 Honda Civic EX-L w/ manual: The CSX, while it only has 15 more hp, does feel noticeably more powerful than the Civic. My main problem with the Civic is that it feels a little gutless on the highway. However, it does deliver great fuel economy. Going in the $15-17,000 range.
3. 2007 or 2008 VW Rabbit: These are surprisingly cheap in the GTA… There are quite a few 2007 and 2008s with low mileage going in the $12-15,000 range. I don’t find this car as engaging to drive as the Acura, and the VW shifter just doesn’t compare to the Honda’s. I do love the “solid” VW feel, but I am concerned about the reliability of the Volkswagen. Fuel mileage is also disappointing. Jettas carry a price premium and I prefer the hatch.
4. 2007 or 2008 Ford Fusion SEL: This is the lazy commuter choice. It was surprisingly good to drive, but I am not a huge fan of the looks, which I find to be a little bland and cheap looking. I would be looking at a 4 banger with auto in this case, because the manuals are just about impossible to find. Quite cheap as well, with low mileage examples going in the $13-16,000 range. Not the greatest on gas either.
5. 2007 or 2008 Honda CR-V: In Canada, only the LX was offered with front-wheel drive. If you step up to the EX, you need to get AWD, which I am hearing is a little problematic. Apparently, there is a grinding issue in reverse? Either way, I had this car as a rental for a week when the Mazda was in the shop and found it to be quite easy to live with. The steering and brakes were just right and the car was roomy. Downsides? LOUD on the highway, and the ride is a little harsh. Fuel mileage is so-so. Holds it’s value really well, so we’re talking $18-24,000.

Lastly, 2012 Ford Focus Titanium: Ford has really outdone themselves with this one. I found that the car felt like it was worth the admittedly steep price tag. The car has a refinement to it that is not matched in the compact class, and I found the MyFordTouch to be pretty easy to use. Downsides? Rear seat legroom is a joke. Also, I am assuming that this car is not going to hold it’s value well, since most Fords do not. Probably best to wait a couple of years for a lightly used one?

Well, Best and Brightest? What to do? Am I forgetting something that I should be driving? I have intentionally left out the TSX and GTI as I do not want to purchase a vehicle that takes premium when regular is already at $1.38/L.  Help Sajeev and Steve!

 Atlanta, Houston, Austin, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Detroit, Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, New York City, Orlando, Florida,Phoenix, Tucson, Portland (OR), Raleigh-Durham, Richmond, Virginia, Seattle, or Washington, D.C.

But only California and New York will get a Focus EV this year… the rest will be waiting until Q2 of next year. And the remainder of the US market could be waiting even longer, as Ford has not yet announced a full rollout date. But then, a little exclusivity never hurts when you get above the $40k price point.

You know it’s time to say “Toto, I don’t think we’re in traditional journalism any more” when fanboys get better access than industry rags. In a story picked up by Automotive News [sub], myfocuselectric.com commenter whitgallman showed the auto media what can be done if you just send a few emails… as long as you make it clear that you are only interested in buying a car, not embarrassing the program. Because then, instead of languishing in some disinterested inbox, your emails actually draw a response, like this from David Finnegan, Electrified Vehicles Marketing Manager at Ford:

For the first few months of production, we will be concentrating on California and New York. Our dealers in those areas will be the first to have their retail orders scheduled and receive the Focus electric. We will be rolling out to the remainder of our initial markets starting in spring 2012.

Well, that was news to Automotive News [sub], which had been told (along with everyone else) that the Focus Electric was supposed to launch in “late 2011″ in 19 US markets. So what happens to Focus EV intenders in Chicago, Detroit and Seattle (among others)? Per AN [sub]:

As for the rest of the country’s markets, no word yet from Ford, so the best advice is to be patient.

Uh-huh. We’ll send some emails ourselves, but we aren’t holding our breath for Ford to admit that, say, buying the Focus EV wholesale from a supplier may not have been a great idea. Or that there are problems with the batteries (again, hypothetically). But there I go thinking like a “traditional journalist” again…

When should a redesigned car get a new name? Whenever the old one wasn’t a success? Or virtually never? Can car companies count on the excellence of a new car to reverse whatever damage was done to the public perception of the model name in the past?

GM, as Paul Niedermeyer noted a few years ago, has a tendency to give a redesigned car a new name when the old one fared poorly in public perception. Which has been every time with its compact cars: Corvair, Vega, Monza, Cavalier, Cobalt, Cruze. Most recently, GM opted to abandon the Aveo name in North America in favor of “Sonic.”

Ford started to replace the names of many of its cars a few years ago. Not because the cars hadn’t sold well, but because someone had the brilliant idea that all Ford car names should start with the letter F. The Windstar became the Freestar, partly in an attempt to escape the minivan’s bad reputation. And there was also a Freestyle crossover. My wife wondered if they might replace “Thunderbird” with “Freebird.” After all, there was already a song to serve as the car’s theme. Then new CEO Alan Mulally, an outsider with virtually no knowledge of the auto industry, decreed that the “F” fixation was stupid. (Though for some reason he let the even more confusing MK_ mess continue at Lincoln.) Despite the damage Ford had done to the old names, they retained broad recognition by car buyers and thus equity. The Taurus name, after being reduced to fleet queen status, was returned to Ford’s current large sedan, from which it progressed to the current semi-premium car. And Ford’s redesigned compact remains a Focus despite a huge upgrade in both its specification and price.

I’ve always possessed a visceral dislike for GM’s willingness to flit from nameplate to nameplate. But this is because (apparently unlike GM) I refuse to admit defeat and give up. I also don’t like to throw anything away (luckily I have a wife to counterbalance the latter). But these reasons aren’t rational. Perhaps giving up on a nameplate when a model has failed in public perception and starting over with a new one is the smart thing to do?

Thanks to Ford, we have an answer. Until recently, Dearborn didn’t think it could sell a Euro-spec car at profitable prices in the U.S. So while Europe received better and better C-segment cars, the North American Focus soldiered on with minimal updates, and with even these focused on taking cost out of the car more often than they improved it. Then Mulally decreed that Ford would make and sell the same cars in Europe and North America. So the next Focus (a 2012 model which arrived earlier this year) would have to command much higher prices from American car buyers. A challenge in itself, retaining the Focus name for the new car should have made this even more difficult. Americans had learned to think of the Focus as a cheap car for people who couldn’t afford a better one, right? Would those seeking a premium small car even consider one with this tarnished nameplate attached?

As much as I don’t believe it replacing nameplates, I don’t think I’d have made this bet. But Ford did, and they’ve won. The Focus’s average transaction price year-to-date in 2010 was $15,424. This year, despite a few months with the old model, it’s $20,684. Despite this massive jump in the car’s price, in percentage the largest I’m aware of, the cars have been in short supply. They’ve been attracting an entirely different group of buyers, people who could afford a larger car or any direct competitor, but who are choosing the Focus because they like it the best, not because of “the deal.” Six percent of those sold are even the Titanium trim, which can list for over $27,000.

Conversely, look at GM’s experience. Many of the new cars gifted with new nameplates were mediocre, so it’s not clear how blame for lackluster sales should be apportioned. The Cobalt and G6 were significantly better than the Cavalier and Grand Am, but perhaps not good enough to sell without heavy incentives even if the old names with their broader public awareness had been retained. But what about the G8? Might it have sold better, and perhaps saved Pontiac in the process, if it had been labeled a Bonneville or Grand Prix? One possible exception: the Cadillac CTS, though it likely would have done just as well if the Catera nameplate had been retained. Then there’s the height of stupidity: scrapping a strong nameplate. Acura replaced “Integra” and “Legend” with “RSX” and “RL.” Today the former is gone and the latter might as well be.

Judging from the success of the 2012 Ford Focus, when the car is good people quickly forget any negative associations attached to a nameplate by the previous generation. On the other hand, GM has rarely if ever benefited from scrapping old nameplates in favor of new ones. The upcoming Chevrolet Sonic might well succeed—initial media reports have been positive—but this will be despite rather than because of its new name.

As recounted in an earlier review, the new Focus in Titanium trim is good enough to justify a price tag over $27,000 for a compact Ford. But what if you don’t want to spend that much, or want a manual transmission, which is not available with the SEL or Titanium trim levels? How much do you give up with the SE? I requested a $21,380 Focus SE hatchback with the Sport Package to find out.

With small cars, hatchbacks are often more attractive than their related sedans. To my eye, the Focus is an exception. With the hatch, the rear quarters appear scrunched and drawn out, with a bit too much going on. The oversized tail lamps don’t help. I also found myself wondering about a cutline below the tail lamp, before realizing that was someone’s overly clever way of locating the fuel filler door. The smaller Fiesta hatch is a cleaner, more attractive design. All of this said, current competitors are either less attractive, less stylish, or both. The Focus at least lacks the sort of deal-killing aesthetic flourishes found on the Mazda3. A possible exception: black wheels that attend the $495 17-inch tire upgrade. Easily fixed: don’t tick that box and go aftermarket (more on this later). Wheels make a big difference on either bodystyle: both sedan and hatch look much better with the Titanium’s optional five-spoke 18s than with the other, smaller rims on the menu.

Inside the SE loses the padded upper door panels and trades some of the Titanium’s titanium and “piano black” trim bits for more prosaic silver ones. I thought I’d miss these, and find the SE interior dreadfully cheap in comparison. But during the week I had the car I didn’t. Not one bit. Everything looks and feels solid and precise. The SE’s rugged black cloth with gray accents looks and feels both sporty and upscale. This is the way BMW used to do cloth back in the 1980s, before leather (or something that resembled it closely enough to fool the masses) became de rigeur in ultimate driving machines. Need more color inside the car? For $795 Ford will substitute red and black leather. With the sun out and outside temps in the mid-90s, I was happy the tested car lacked this option.

As noted in the earlier review, the instrument panel is quite large, its height and depth pushing the limits of what I consider a sufficiently open forward view. I once again cranked the seat up a few clicks to get a good view over it. You can’t get MyFord Touch on the SE. Instead, as in the Fiesta there’s a confusing, unconventional array of buttons to contend with for the audio and communications systems. I figured out the basics after a few days, but full use of the system requires either extensive, often frustrating trial and error or (horrors) a trip through the owner’s manual.

The Sport Package includes a leather-wrapped sport steering wheel and aggressively bolstered sport bucket seats. These are both comfortable and supportive. The headrests don’t jut too far forward to be obtrusive. The non-adjustable lumbar support fit my back well, but others will no doubt wish for a larger and/or higher bulge. At 5-9 and 160 pounds, I’m not a big guy, and had plenty of room in the front seat. Larger drivers might find the instrument panel and center console overly constricting. Perhaps the seat’s side bolsters as well–they were about perfect for me.

Ditto the back seat. I could very comfortably sit behind myself with an inch of air ahead of my knees, an inch over my head, and a high well-shaped cushion supporting my thighs. A six-footer would be more of a squeeze.

Cargo volume is typical of a compact hatch. The 60/40 second row seats fold to form a perfectly flat floor, but not easily. Instead:

1. Unless the front seat is already pretty far forward or upright, move it out of the way.

2. Tip the rear seat bottom forward.

3. Remove the rear seat headrest.

4. Fold the rear seatback.

5. Return the front seat at least part of the way to its original position. (The seat can no longer slide all the way back, but enough for drivers up to about six feet.)

I’m guessing that there was a choice between ease of use on one hand and a flat floor and full-sized rear seat on the other, and the latter priorities won out. It would help if the rear headrests folded like those on the Explorer, but this was likely ruled out for cost reasons.

Get the car moving, and the Focus SE instantly impresses as much as the Titanium did. This $20,000 Ford has the thoroughly refined slickness, solidity, quietness, and composure you used to have to buy a hyper-expensive German machine to get. This is evident during the first fifty feet, and remains impressive after a week in the car. Even over Michigan’s pockmarked streets the Focus rides well, with tightly controlled body motions. Some cars absorb bumps a little better, but they have the advantages of a longer wheelbase and wider track. A Chevrolet Cruze isn’t far off in overall refinement. But the Hyundai Elantra trails considerably, and the new-for-2012 Honda Civic is hopelessly far behind.

The usual downside of this level of refinement: curb weight. At 2,920 pounds the new Focus has plenty of it (though still about 200 pounds less than a Cruze). One impact: even a strong, smooth 2.0-liter engine like the direct-injected, 160-horsepower, 146-foot-pounds unit employed here isn’t going to generate gut-wrenching acceleration. Don’t slip the clutch a bit off the line, and the first few seconds turning onto a busy road can seem to take forever. Especially if the AC is on. At other times performance is easily adequate, but well short of thrilling.

A sixth cog would help. The five-speed manual is geared to provide grunt off the line and economy on the highway, so the ratios are spread a little too widely for an engine with a 4,450 rpm torque peak. On the other hand, operating the shifter and clutch couldn’t be easier. Throw length and effort are both moderate, and their feel is as thoroughly refined as the rest of the car. One contributor: a fairly heavy flywheel that blunts some of the potential of the engine.

An upcoming Focus ST with a 247-horsepower turbocharged four and a six-speed manual should cure these performance ills, and then some, at the cost of, well, a higher cost. For those who want more than 160 horsepower, but who don’t need or want to pay for license-threatening looks and speed, Ford should consider offering a naturally-aspirated 2.5-liter four with roughly 200 horsepower. This would hit a sweet spot.

The 2.0-liter engine is economical, especially considering the weight of the car. The EPA estimates 26 city / 36 highway. The trip computer reported low 30s in suburban driving with the AC on high.

The Sport Package does not alter the suspension tuning, which is currently “sport tuned” for all trim levels (per Q&A with Ford). Handling is very good, but again short of thrilling. The steering, while well-weighted and generally better than most buyers will be used to, could feel sharper, more precise, and more nuanced. The Mazda3 retains a clear edge in this area, and even the previous Ford Focus felt more direct. Partly this is the cost of refinement, but also that of an economy-maximizing full electric system instead of the electro-hydraulic hybrid employed by Mazda. The Focus SE’s chassis will do just about everything you ask of it well (except feel light on its feet), with sharp turn-in, minimal understeer (partly due to electronic wizardry involving the brakes), good communication, and excellent composure—until you approach the outside front tire’s limits. Then things get a bit mushy, if very safe.

Step up to the Titanium, and an extra $595 for the Handling Package gets you moderately firmer struts and 235/WR18 Michelin Pilot Sport3s that grip harder and feel sharper in aggressive driving. Or just do as suggested earlier: don’t spend $495 on the factory’s 17-inch Contis, and go aftermarket.

As mentioned in the intro, the tested car lists for $21,380, while the equivalent sedan lists for $20,780. You can save $495 by doing without the 17-inch wheels and tires, but in this case you’ll definitely want to spend considerably more on an aftermarket set. You could also save $800 by doing without the SYNC system’s USB and Bluetooth connectivity and satellite radio, but you won’t unless you’re still living in the twentieth century.

Similarly equip a 2011 Mazda3s hatchback, and it’s a $110 less. Adjusting for remaining feature differences using TrueDelta’s car price comparison tool finds the two are nearly even. So the decision between these two isn’t going to be based on price. Rather, on refinement and fuel economy (the Mazda is rated only 21/29) vs. acceleration and steering feel. For most people the Ford will easily win this match-up.

A Kia Forte5 SX is the budget buy in the segment, with a list price of $19,090. With a larger engine, it’s quicker than the Focus, and has a longer warranty, but is less economical (22/32) and far less refined in just about every way (materials, powertrain, ride, handling). Features are about even here as well. Is it worth saving $2,000 to get a car that looks and feels $5,000 less expensive?

To get the premium look and feel of the Focus in a semi-affordable car, it’s necessary to go with a Volkswagen Golf—and even the not-yet-decontented VW hatchback isn’t at the same level as the Ford. You also cannot get the sporty look and feel of the Focus SE Sport without stepping up to the much more expensive (and much quicker) GTI. Compare a base 2011 Golf with Bluetooth to a Focus SE with SYNC but without the Sport Package and 17s, and the VW is about $400 more. So close to both the Focus and the Mazda3, but without their sportiness.

The 2012 Ford Focus isn’t a hooner’s delight right out of the box, but I’m nevertheless amazed by just how good it is. Even in SE trim it has the look, feel, and refinement of a much more expensive car. And it drives better than 90 percent of the population will ever expect it to. So, if you simply want a really good, nicely trimmed compact car, but don’t want to spend $27,000+ for it, $21,000 or so (before dealer discounts and taxes) will do the trick.

Ford provided the vehicle, insurance and one tank of gas for this review.

Michael Karesh operates TrueDelta, an online source of automotive pricing and reliability data.

TTAC Commentator tresmonos writes:

OK.  So I used to work for Ford and am now gainfully employed by them (again).  My dilemma is as follows:

I am rolling on a Z24 cavalier that I bought brand new in 2001.  It has 160K on the clock and the only thing I can see that’s wrong with it is a AC compressor that’s been on limp mode since 2007 (bearing), bad drum brakes due to my laziness (LMAO – SM), and interior fan’s lowest two resistors being shot.  The twin cam has a bad coil as it misses at idle, but I could care less.  The car’s exterior filth has literally out lasted my marriage. It’s been a hell of a financial savings for me.  But we all know the twin cam dream won’t last much longer.

I temporarily moved to SC and blew my car savings load on a 100% rust free 1984 lincoln continental turbo diesel.  I repainted it and have slaved over some wiring nightmares on it.  I’ve got 6K invested in the thing.  And I need a new mode of transportation.  Foolish purchase, I know… but if you would look at the clean, rust free body, and sit in that Corinthian plush leather seats whilst romping on the gas to behold two dual plumes of diesel particulate whooshing in the rear view, you’d understand.

The Focus ST is coming out and working at my current employer has me torn between a new ride and being cost effective with a used one.  When you work around the product, you want it.  I love the fact I know every little thing about my cavalier.  I know immediately when I need to address something, and luckily, it’s been just electrical issues thus far (I’ve rewired the entire acc harness in the engine bay due to cheap mexican made delphi spliced together sh**).  So, with that preference (being weary of a used vehicle), do I spring on the ST if the Cavillac stays alive long enough?  Or do I buy a lightly used Ford/Lincoln for 10K less?  I already have a Lincoln, but I cannot find a desirable used Ford sans a SVT focus, though the SVT isn’t known for quality.  What do you think I should do?  I have an easy 10-15K that I can put down on a purchase.  Used SVT focus or new ST?  Or make my household 100% lincoln?  I’m torn between my cheap habits and the desire for something fun, and I want something as trouble free as my Z24 has been.

I think you know one of my friends. (Yup, I do. – SM) I’m one of his college buddies and he mentioned you would love my new Foxbody Lincoln.  Next time you’re in Detroit, let me know and you can drive the shit out of it.

Sajeev answers:

Your college buddy called me out of the blue to tell me about your Foxy Conti.  He was there when I towed my Fox-Conti to a ranch in central Texas where it rotted for almost a decade, so he knows those cars. And now that I will be spending an ungodly/vulgar/stupid amount of cash to restore mine, I would be honored to drive your little BMW-Steyr-Foxbody-Continental at some point.  And maybe give you a spare part or two for the trouble. Thank you.

Now on to your quandary:

I wouldn’t trust a used Focus SVT, mostly because I worry about a lack of upkeep and a ton of hooning under it’s belt.  And because you are a Ford employee, you are almost obligated to lease a new car every two years. Not for corporate advancement or to “fit in”, although those undercurrents creep up in any company in some way/shape/form…but let me tell you a story:

I lived in Metro Detroit when I was a student at CCS.  One of my friends, who was very aware of private school tuition, totally surprised me when I saw a brand new Chevy S-10 (that’s how old I am) in the student parking lot.  I thought this guy MUST be a fraud, a brand spankin’ new truck?  Turns out his Dad was a GM Engineer.  And GM offered employees a sweet deal on 4-cyl 5-speed trucks…to keep their CAFE standards up?

Whatever, my point was that this little truck was only $98 a month for a two-year lease.  No money down either, I think.  So here’s my plan of action for you.

1. Lease whatever little compact car they have on heavy incentives.
2. Use the money saved over buying a Focus ST/fixing an SVT to tweak it with an SCT tune, bigger swaybars, Eibachs, +1 tires,  whatever you want. It’ll still be slow-ish, but it will do if you make it to your tastes.
3. Use the money saved to buy a house, if you didn’t already come up with a down payment for one in the Detroit area using the change in your ashtray.
4. Use the money to address problems on the Foxy Conti…you see where I am going with this?
5. Sell the Cavalier on craigslist before it dies.
6. Worry about getting an ST Focus or any other hot button purchase after your short term lease on a shitty car is over. Because, much like the Taurus SHO, Focus SVT and Contour SVT before it, I see this vehicle getting discounted heavily…once the small market that demands it is saturated by it’s excellence.
7. Have your cake and eat it too, via delaying your gratification.

Send your queries to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com. Spare no details and ask for a speedy resolution if you’re in a hurry.

Animal...housed?

Brenden writes:

Sajeev and Steve,

My buddy is in college and needs a used set of wheels.  After 2 years of depending upon Baltimore’s awful public transportation system and the generosity of friends, roommates, frat brothers, and total strangers for car rides, his school work is starting to suffer and he’s decided to buy a car.  Unfortunately, his budget is about $2000.  His living situation and total lack of mechanical skills rule out anything German, Swedish, or otherwise maintenance intensive.

His criteria for the car are reliable/durable, fuel efficient, and cheap to run.  Working AC and heat would be a bonus, but he really only intends to drive the car about 15-20 minutes per day for school.  He has absolutely no pretensions about the car’s badge, perceived coolness, sporty driving dynamics, etc., but he probably won’t spring for a total crapcan like a metro or echo. Also, he’s currently unemployed, and I don’t think he intends to find a job due to his course load.

His prior cars have all been automatic Volvos, but he’s driven drunken frat brothers’ manual-equipped cars before, and he’s willing to drive a stick on a daily basis.  Any kind of repairs on a high mileage automatic would probably bankrupt him.  Personally I would never advise anyone to buy a high mileage automatic; I’d feel like I was telling them to buy a ticking time bomb.

My first advice for him was to budget at least $1000 for future repairs, maintenance, taxes, registration and insurance out of his original $2k. What are your recommendations/advice for finding a sub $1000 set of wheels that won’t kill my buddy with repair bills?

Here’s what I’ve come up with:

• Saturn S cars – as long as he avoids the DOHC motors, which I’ve heard require head gasket replacements every 70k or so.
• Geo/Chevy Prizm – it’s basically a toyota with heavier depreciation, and I haven’t heard of any ‘known’ issues with these cars.
• Corolla/camry/Civic/Prelude/Accord – again, do you know of any issues with these cars for the 90′s models?  I checked Craigslist and autotrader and couldn’t find any examples of these within the $1000 price range.
• Neon – I’ve heard that except for the last few model years, the Neons had head gasket issues, so I’m inclined to tell my buddy to avoid these.
• Focus – no clue on these
• Contour – Mondeo FTW!  Obviously, the I-4 motor.
• Cavalier – again, no idea whether these had common problems

So, what advice can you offer regarding vehicle selection?  Buying from a dealership would be ideal, since it would be easier to take the car to his family mechanic for a pre-purchase checkup, but I think we’re going to end up on Craigslist and at auctions.  Assuming we can’t get any of our mechanically inclined buddies to show up, what checks can I reasonably perform on the cars to weed out total dogs?  Offhand, I know to check oil levels and check for oil frothiness/discoloration, check transmission and hydraulic fluids, coolant levels and colors, belts and chains, and to do things like run the AC, wipers, etc.

Steve answers:

I would avoid the dealership like a harsh case of psoriasis. You need to go to the private owner. As for the sub-$2000 car in this economy you should look for…

1. No A/C: This automatically knocks off $500 to $1000 off the price
2. The EXTRA car: Folks who already have one more car than they need will sell the leftover ride for cheap. I was able to buy a 10 year old Camry for $500 back in the days when I was getting started. Don’t bet on that happening in today’s times.
3. Older folks: Owners who are middle-aged and beyond tend to be less abusive than younger folks. Feel free to visit some of the retirement communities in your area and you’ll see exactly what I mean. 4) Gas Guzzlers: Although any vehicle in good condition will do, your friend may actually come out ahead by buying an older vehicle that drinks gas but requires minimal maintenance.

The brand name is completely unimportant at this price point. What is important is that once your friend finds what will work, it is immediately taken to an independent mechanic for an inspection.

Once he buys the car he will want to bring the car back into ‘day one’ condition with it’s fluids. I would buy a Mityvac and replace all the fluids as soon as possible. $80 for a manual pumping Mityvac and about $50 in fluid and filters should be more than enough if his friends are willing to help him out. If not then let the mechanic do the work.

Right now your friends only concern should be to get good grades, great work experience, and a pathway to a good job. Don’t worry about the ‘type’ of car. Just by something that has been well kept and keep focused on the work and grades.

Sajeev answers:

Both your and Steve’s assessment are correct. Quite honestly, you will buy the first vehicle on Craigslist with a smattering of service records and a sub $1000 asking price.  And yes, anything European is entirely out of the question, but automatic transmissions are a hit or miss at this price point.  I would not rule them out, especially if you stick with slushboxes made by GM or the major Japanese brands.

From there I can only guess: any GM sedan, a non-Z car Nissan, or some other non-Honda and non-Toyota from Japan (i.e. resale value) is a good idea. In theory.  Or maybe an ex-cop car Panther, in reality.  Because, why the hell not?

Need help with a car buying conundrum? Email your particulars to sajeev@thetruthaboutcars.com, and let TTAC’s collective wisdom make the decision easier… or possibly much, much harder. In a rush? Don’t be shy about asking to cut in line.

Yes, this is a $27,340 Ford Focus. And nav would add another $795. How could a Ford Focus possibly be worth this much? Read on.

As with the smaller Fiesta, there’s a whole lot going on in the exterior design of the 2012 Ford Focus. But all of the curves and creases manage to come together to form a coherent whole the looks both upscale and sporty—especially in the top Titanium trim with the $595 18-inch alloys and $495 “yellow blaze metallic tri-coat” paint. Some would prefer cleaner, simpler lines, but among the current crop of compacts this one looks the best to my eyes. Unlike many complicated designs, it shouldn’t age badly, as the proportions are good and none of the many details seems excessive or extraneous. (The large tail lights come closest to crossing this line.)

Inside the Focus, aesthetic complexity continues, and not quite as successfully as with the exterior. The design struggles to successfully combine both gunmetal and piano black trim, chrome highlights, contrasting stitching on the seats, and a prominent multicolored display. Like the exterior, the interior looks both upscale and aggressively sporty. In the upper trim levels materials and construction are as good as they get in this segment, and far, far ahead of those in the new Honda Civic. But on repetitive commutes or long drives it can help for an interior to be calming. This one is always sharply dressed for a night on the town. It’s not a place to kick back and relax.

Reviews of Ford’s latest-and-greatest controls have been mixed, at best. The touchscreen display looks fantastic—competitors’ control systems appear dated in comparison—and it’s fun to play with. But it isn’t easy to operate while driving. A very good voice control system reduces the need to use the touchscreen, but this isn’t a valid excuse. Luckily, well-designed knobs and buttons are provided for the HVAC controls and heated seats. There’s a physical power control for the audio system, but I couldn’t initially find it—it’s the small button beneath the left side of the CD slot.

As in the new Honda Civic, though for different reasons, the instrument panel is surprisingly tall. I had to crank the drivers seat up to comfortably see over it. Thankfully, the windshield isn’t laid back as far as some, and the pillars flanking it aren’t overly thick. Spotter mirrors aid rearward visibility; a good thing, as the rear deck is high. The front seats are outstanding, with both abundant padding for comfort and large, firm bolsters for lateral support. Perhaps Ford learned a thing or two from Volvo?

A disadvantage of the large front seats: there’s barely enough room behind them for the average adult. This could be a deal killer for some. A shame, as the rear seat is mounted high off the floor—for good thigh support and forward visibility—and nicely shaped. The trunk is a little larger than the class average, though conventional hinges do cut into the usable space.

Fire up the four and get going, and the initial impression is of a heavy, well-insulated car. As speed climbs the car feels lighter and more compact, but never quite tossable. Even with the Titanium’s sport suspension and the optional ultra-low-profile high performance tires ride quality is very good, only getting a touch abrupt over some minor bumps. The quantity and quality of the noise that enters the cabin suggest a premium car. The new Focus sounds and feels like money.

Even optioned for best performance, the handling of the new Focus isn’t overtly sporty. Like some high-end European sedans the new Focus feels a bit lazy in casual driving, but rises to the occasion on a challenging road. The 235/40WR18 Michelin Pilot Sport 3 summer treads that attend the optional 18-inch wheels provide a ton of grip, and the well-damped chassis has composure to spare. Perhaps due to the sport suspension there’s none of the on-center squishiness that afflicts the Fiesta. The steering feels quick and well-weighted around town—but borders on twitchy at highway speeds. As is almost always the case, feedback through the thick, heavily-padded rim could be better. For a direct, delicate feel and nuanced feedback, a Mazda3 remains the way to go. Though certainly fun to drive, the Focus Titanium is a luxury sedan first and a sport sedan second.

The powertrain could be the car’s weakest link. The direct-injected 2.0-liter four kicks out a very respectable 160 horsepower at 6,500 rpm, but it has to contend with over 3,000 pounds of curb weight. Consequently, while acceleration is easily adequate, it’s short of thrilling. The sound of the engine is also a bit out of line with the rest of the car. Though not unpleasant, and largely suppressed, the high-pitched whir is clearly that of a smallish four, and would seem more appropriate is a less luxurious, lighter-feeling car.

While a five-speed manual is offered in the lower trim levels, a six-speed dual-dry-clutch automated manual is mandatory with the SEL and Titanium. This transmission didn’t behave well when I sampled it in a Fiesta, with overly frequent, sometimes clunky shifts. This time around Ford’s new box behaved much better, more or less mimicking a conventional automatic. What it didn’t do: contribute to a sporty driving experience with lightning quick, firm shifts the way Volkswagen’s dual-wet-clutch DSG does. Unlike in the Fiesta, it is at least possible to manually select gears via a rocker switch on the shift knob. While this should do for grades and such, shifting via the lever would be better and paddles flanking the steering wheel would be ideal.

With the manually-shiftable dual-clutch transmission, the Focus earns EPA ratings of 27 city and 37 highway, very good numbers for such a well-equipped, rock-solid, reasonably quick sedan. The Hyundai Elantra does a couple mpg better, but it has a less refined, less granitic feel to it. The Focus weighs a couple hundred pounds more, and this has benefits as well as costs.

Reliability could be an issue. Based on responses to TrueDelta’s Car Reliability Survey, the smaller Ford Fiesta has gotten off to a rocky start. Many of the reported repairs involved a poorly functioning electrical ground, because of which the car would not start or the transmission would not go into gear. In a few cases the dual-clutch transmission shared with the Focus suffered a major failure. Hopefully Ford spent more time working the bugs out of the 2012 Focus.

Then, of course, there’s the price. The sticker only tops $27,000 if you get the top-level Titanium trim and load it up with options—many of which are not even available on competitors. For the features included and the car’s premium look and feel, the price isn’t out of line. Equip the new Focus SE like the $21,255 2012 Honda Civic EX, and it lists for $21,165. The main outlier: an Elantra Limited lists for $20,700, and includes heated leather in both rows. Even after adjusting for feature differences using TrueDelta’s car price comparison tool, the Hyundai is about $1,300 less at MSRP and $700 less invoice-to-invoice (Ford dealers have larger margins to play with). The Ford’s higher price seems justified: it rides and handles better than the Hyundai, and simply looks and feels like a more expensive car.

Overall, the new Ford Focus is very impressive, with the look, feel, and features of a premium car, but also very good fuel economy. By most metrics it’s the best car in an increasingly competitive segment. The Mazda3 remains more fun to drive, and the Elantra costs a little less. But most people care more about ride than handling, and will be willing to pay a little more for the Ford’s advantages over the Hyundai. The big question mark: reliability. Time will tell. With owners’ help, TrueDelta—and TTAC—will have initial reliability stats for the new Focus in November.

Frank Cianciolo, an excellent salesperson at Avis Ford in Southfield, MI, provided the car for this review. Frank can be reached at 248-226-2555.

Michael Karesh operates TrueDelta, an online source of automotive pricing and reliability data.

TTAC tested the street version of this car a few years ago: check it out for a classic example of mid-RF-era TTAC reviews, complete with withering attention to interior-quality issues and not-so-gentle comments regarding the unwillingness of the average automaker to purchase a Ford.

At the time, the Focus sold for about fifteen grand. That was for the street car. How much does a racing Focus cost? The answer: One dollar. The answer is also $2500. And $6000. And $25,000. Confused yet?

The success of the Spec Miata racing class, both in the eager-to-embrace-it NASA and hideously-reluctant SCCA, was a pointed lesson to manufacturers struggling to build enthusiast bases for their cheap-and-cheerful cars. A few more spec street-car classes were spontaneously spawned from owner interest: the SE-R Cup, Spec Neon, and Spec E30 (BMW) classes all managed to get off the ground and running with little or no manufacturer help.

The Spec Focus class, on the other hand, was a deliberate creation of a few well-known Ford engineers and marketroids. A couple of so-called “dollar cars” were signed over to Leo Capaldi Racing, which had previously campaigned a Focus in Speed World Challenge competition. “Dollar cars” are cars which cannot be sold to the public for some reason. Normally they are crushed; VW, for instance, crushed the Phaetons by its reps to travel the country and train mechanics on Phaeton service. They might as well have crushed it before sending it out, if the quality of Phaeton service I received is any indication of said training program, but I digress.

Capaldi built the cars to a very high standard, finishing the cage and preparation almost to a Grand-Am Cup level — which, as we will later see, wasn’t the greatest idea. The coin-operated people at NASA were easily persuaded to carve out a separate class for the three Foci to race, and thus Spec Focus was born.

Ford engineers did a lot of homework to ensure that the four major Focus variants — 2.0 Zetec, 2.0 Zetec SVT, 2.0 Duratec, and 2.3 Duratec — would all produce about the same power with the permitted parts. A rather modest National Championship was held in 2006 among the rental cars, with a Ford SVT engineer thrown in to make sure there were enough competitors to round out a podium.

In 2007, two private competitors built their own Spec Foci and all of a sudden it was a five-car class. I joined Spec Focus as a renter, paying between $2500 and $3500 a weekend to drive the red ZX4 sedan. It was a complete arrive-and-drive program for me; I just showed up, paid, and was given a well-prepared car. When necessarily, Capaldi himself suited up to give me some competition. Just watching him race was worth the money; a lifetime racing in murderous Detroit kart classes and Speed WC had taught him every trick in the book and then some.

With Capaldi’s guidance and coaching from a variety of reasonably distinguished fellows, I obliterated the lap records set by the 2006 champion and prepared to cruise to a nearly uncontested 2007 National Championship. The private cars weren’t even close to Capaldi’s rent-a-racers; at one Mid-Ohio race I ran a 1:45.6 while the fastest private car ran 1:51. To put this in perspective, a reasonably-skilled “HPDE 3″ driver in a completely stock 911 GT3 or Corvette Z06 might expect to run a 1:43. These weren’t slow cars; although they only made 170hp or so at the wheels, grippy Toyo RA-1 tires and high-quality Multimatic suspension made them quick in the turns.

What’s a Focus race car like to drive? Well, it likes to roll:

My driving style was different from everyone else’s in the class; I have a particular touch for loading up an outside sidewall and I ended up deflating a tire during a race from bead separation under conditions worse than pictured above. (As a result, Ford changed the tire spec for 2008.) This was not a car for the faint of heart or stomach to race; although the handling was very safe, there was a lot of motion in the car. On the plus side, it had ABS, which absolves a multitude of driving sins.

Most importantly, however, a Spec Focus is a race car. That means: no interior trim anywhere, very loud inside, no rubber or slop in the bushings, full cage, deep seat, limited visibility. It actually feels a lot more like a conventional racer than a Spec Miata, which is not as obviously transformed in its journey from street car to race car.

During the 2007 National Championship itself I made a mistake going into the first turn, dropping into third place, and then kicked another driver into the dirt making up the time. Although I set fast lap of the race, I was demoted down to the third step of the podium in the disciplinary session afterwards. Including damages, entry fees, and incidentals, that was a $6000 weekend. Had I totaled the car, I would have had to write Leo a $25,000 check. When people asked me why I raced an economy car, I always replied,

“Because it’s only slightly more expensive than leasing a Murcielago.”

Despite the obvious merits of the cars, private racers have been slow in coming. I suspect it’s because racing against a fully-prepared team like Capaldi Racing is tough enough for other pro teams. For a guy with an open-deck trailer and a $300 Craftsman toolset, it’s even tougher. No private Spec Focus racer has experienced significant success.

My experience as a rent-a-driver convinced me that I could run my own team, and I was more or less correct. The Neon I built for a total of $9500 the next year was slightly faster than Capaldi’s Focus rentals and far ahead of the private Foci. I had the satisfaction of lapping one of my most outspoken critics in the Focus community during a 2008 race. Later on in the season, one of the Spec Focus drivers and I came together in a collision that totaled my Neon and put the other driver on the Life Flight, but that’s a story for another time. Eighteen months later, everybody’s friends. Things happen in racing. It isn’t World of Warcraft; temper can cost lives.

Capaldi Racing can still put you behind the wheel of a Spec Focus; click for details. The class hasn’t had a lot of subscription in 2010, but it’s a solid way to get started in your race career. The conventional wisdom is that it’s better to start in a large class like Spec Miata, but I found that having a relatively small number of in-class cars at every race allowed me to, ah, focus on getting my personal act together as a driver and racer. It might be the right choice for you, as well.

Here’s some encouragement for the folks freaking out about BMW’s front wheel drive heresy. Ford has found a way to make 345 horsepower work in an FWD chassis, shattering the conventional wisdom that 250 hp marks the reasonable limit for front-drive performance. Well, at least until the 500 lucky owners of this limited-edition mega-hatch start adding up their tire bills in a few years. According to Ford, the RS500 should be looking at a 5.6 second 0-60 time and a top speed of 163 mph. And no, you can’t order one at your Ford dealer in the US.

When GM axed four brands in bankruptcy, it seemed for one bright, shining moment that the era of America’s auto brand bloat was drawing to a close. No such luck. Both Chrysler and Ford passed up opportunities to hack off purposeless brands, and in doing so perpetuated some of the worst examples of brand engineering surviving in the US market. If there were one brand that needed the hatchet, it is and was Mercury. Now, after a decade of Jill Wagner-supplied life support, Ford is breaking the silence surrounding its entry-luxe brand, announcing that a Mercury-badged vehicle will be built “on the same platform” as the new Ford Focus. Put simply: the Mercury Tracer is coming back.

The automotive answer to the question “what do you call a tarted-up escort?” has been blessedly absent from the automotive landscape since the Focus replaced the Escort in Ford’s lineup in 1999. The Focus arguably ushered in Ford’s recent era of renewed focus on the blue oval brand, providing a far more sophisticated Euro-derived compact drive than the long-in-tooth Focus it replaced. Notice that the past decade slipped by without a single street riot of rampaging suburbanites, demanding a Merc-badged re-skin of the Focus.

In the second half of the last decade, Ford’s shifted its branding strategy towards ever-greater emphasis on the Ford brand. Though the mechanical underpinnings and exterior styling of the US-market Focus have taken a turn for the worse, entry-luxe gizmos like Ford’s SYNC system have proliferated into the humble compact, rather than being held out as enticement to trade up to Mercury or Lincoln. Meanwhile, decidedly up-market vehicles like the new Ford Taurus have steadily whittled away at any justification for Mercury’s continued existence. As with so many branding conundrums, Ford’s success in moving upmarket came only at the expense of its allegedly upscale cousin.

And now comes word that the new 2011 Ford Focus will be joined by a Mercury-badged rival, with two Ford dealers telling Automotive News [sub] that the new compact will bear the old Tracer nameplate. The decision is especially ironic, considering that the latest Focus re-unifies the American and European models of the Focus nameplate, once again lifting the Ford brand out of a compact-car rut by replacing an aged US-market afterthought with a fresh, European-developed, global model. If Ford had any sense, this vehicle would be yet another step in the premiumification of the Ford brand.

But that would make too much sense. Ford had reached a defecate-or-get-off-the-pot moment with Mercury, and without belaboring the metaphor, it has missed a huge opportunity to stand up, wipe off and move on. Given that the Tracer will be released simultaneously with the new Focus, there can be little doubt that it will be yet another cynical rebadge, with a few unique interior plastic compounds and a small factory’s annual output of cheap chrome hanging off its haunches.

From a business perspective, Ford can still cobble together weak justifications for this decision. A quick rebadge provide extra profit on each vehicle, meaning there’s little incentive to boost Mercury’s volume. As long as suckers keep being born every few minutes, Mercury will sell a few thousand rebadged vehicles each month. Besides, there are still Lincoln-Mercury dealers who need new product.

The downsides to rebadging the Focus are more subtle, and can’t be seen as immediately on the balance books. First, it prevents a definitive decision on Mercury’s future, and cements itself as America’s predominant purveyor of cheap rebadges. Given the steady disappearance of grossly cynical rebadges from American dealerships, it seems safe to argue that being known as “the rebadge brand” is not a recipe for long-term success.

Moreover, Mercury rebadges undercut the equity built up in the blue oval brand in two distinct ways. First, their mere existence implies a lack of premiumness in the Ford brand that must be overcome with two-tone interiors and cheap chrome. Secondly, by not offering distinct sheet metal, a McMerc’d Focus casts both brands in an unflatteringly cynical light. After all, even the most uninformed consumer can look at a pair of brand-engineered twins and wonder “do they think we can’t notice the difference?”

These impacts won’t be registered as visible declines in profit, but rather a long-term, lingering suspicion in the minds of consumers. At a time when Ford is making great strides in the public perception, consumers will point to Mercury as the most egregious example of the brand engineering that GM was most infamous for. Though GM still has more than its fair share of branding and product-differentiation challenges, at least its brand engineering have become far less immediately obvious on the street level. If GM “gets it” that Americans are insulted by rebadges, why shouldn’t Ford, which otherwise enjoys a more favorable image with the public?

In fairness, Ford’s product planners and brand executives probably aren’t especially proud of the last 20 years of Mercury products, and certainly don’t get any pride out of being Detroit’s new king of the rebadge. The problem is that Ford simply doesn’t have the cash to differentiate platform-mates the way Volkswagen, GM and others can. Since this is likely going to be the case for another solid decade, as Ford has ruinous debts to pay off, the Dearborn Boys should focus on what they’re doing right (Ford brand) and push extra development money into making a single line of well-differentiated luxury vehicles. Which should be branded as Lincolns. For the good of the whole company, Mercury needs to be shown the door.

When the Ford Focus first went on sale in the US, it was a rare glimpse for the still-SUV-centric US market at how the rest of the world gets from the Blue Oval. Of course, as time went by, Ford eased away from the Euro-funk of the first generation, first blandifying the model with a mid-cycle “refresh,” before eventually replacing it with the current embarrassment to the nameplate. And it’s not just the current model’s Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers-meets-Pep Boys look that makes it unworthy of the Focus name: the whole idea behind the original Focus was the dream of a world car, that would be sold, largely unchanged, in markets around the world. With the 2012 model, now being previewed before the Detroit Auto Show [press release here], Ford has gone back to the model’s original vision.

There’s no special American-market version, though the four-door sedan and five-door hatch will be the first to our market. Only a two-liter engine has been confirmed so far, reportedly equipped with stop-start and making 155 hp and 145 lb-ft (1.6 Ecoboost and EV versions could come later). A three-door hatch and a larger station wagon could come to the US later, as could the C-Max minivan built on the same global C-platform. Between all these bodystyles (and likely more for Europe), Ford is eying 2m units of global volume for its global C-segment platform by 2012, making the Focus family something of the global K-car of Ford’s turnaround. Ford claims that this whack at the “Holy Grail” of world-car unification will turn out better than the last several, as design and performance expectations are aligning globally. It’s worked fairly well with the Fiesta so far, but as with the Focus, the important piece of the puzzle is making the model work in the US. We shall see how that works out.

Ten years ago I test drove the then new to North America Ford Focus ZTS. “Give it some gas,” the salesman prodded as we entered a freeway onramp. I showed her the whip. “Can you feel that,” he yelled enthusiastically over the buzz of the straining engine. “Well, it’s certainly making a lot of noise,” I thought, “but we don’t seem to be getting anywhere very fast.” A decade later it’s deja vu all over again, except my copilot has the good sense not to pretend that this 2009 Focus is any kind of street demon. And rather than fouling the atmosphere with noxious gasoline exhaust, birds are singing and bees are sweetly humming as I explore the green virtues of driving with Compressed Natural Gas.

My test car, provided by Zeit Energy of Dallas, Texas, is a bestickered homage to the company and the natural gas industry. Other than the black beauty mark on its right rear heinie (the CNG refueling receptacle), it is the same kaleidoscope of geometric shapes that is the Ford Focus.

The S-trim package is a throw-back to the good old days of manual doors locks and window cranks – perfect for the fleet buyers that are most likely to delve into the realm of natural gas powered vehicles. The ergonomics are perfectly satisfactory in every respect for a vehicle at this price point. The car’s greatest feature is the five-speed manual stick shift that’s smooth, accurate and forgiving.

The only indication this car isn’t like all the rest is a square regulator control button at the base of the center console that glows green or orange, depending on the fuel pressure, and reads NG or OFF, to indicate whether the engine is drawing natural gas form the CNG tank or unnatural gas from the gasoline tank. A progress bar below the NG indicates how much CNG is left.

The bi-fuel CNG conversion kit, manufactured by Altech-Eco Corporation of South Carolina, operates seamlessly in the background. For the most part drivers simply sit behind the wheel, turn the key, and drive it like any other car. If the system determines that the CNG tank is empty a computer controlled regulator switches to gasoline.

The 9.1 gallon CNG tank is made of half-inch aluminum reinforced in a cocoon of fiberglass is as subtle as Akebono Tarō in a dohyō. It has to be in order to contain the gas, which is 90% methane, at 2900-3200 pounds per square inch. But the weight devours the 140 hp 2.0-liter Duratec I4 engine. Be sure to make reservations before attempting to merge into traffic.

The tank resides in the trunk. It dominates the trunk. Not to reinforce the unsubstantiated fear that the CNG tanks can rupture explosively in an accident, but when the trunk is wide open it looks like Bruce the shark in his final scene in Jaws.

With both fuel tanks filled, the car averages about 35 mpg and has a cruising range in excess of 700 miles. That’s a good thing because public CNG refilling stations are few and far between. In the Dallas-Fort Worth area, there are only eight of them. These high-pressure CNG fueling stations can fill the 9.1 gallon tank in about the same amount of time it takes a gasoline pump to fill the 13 gallon petrol tank.

My tester cost Zeit Energy $12,500 for the Focus and $9500 for the conversion kit and installation. The Focus with an EPA certified CNG kit like this one qualifies for a $4000 federal tax credit, so the net cost of the upgrade was $5500. In other words, you would pay $18,000 for a $12,500 car that is slower and has a fraction of the trunk space of the original. That’s a hard sell for most people. Currently in DFW, an equivalent amount of CNG costs about $0.50 less than a gallon of regular gasoline so you would have to drive 385,000 miles burning only CNG to recoup the investment.

Owners would have to take consolation in the fact that CNG emissions are fee of lead and benzene, and produce 70% less carbon monoxide, 87% less nitrogen oxide, and 20% less carbon dioxide.

The bottom line is that right now CNG-powered vehicles are not ready for Prime Time in America. The EPA has its boot on the throat of natural gas transportation. How? It requires a $10,000 annual fee per engine type per year of manufacture. These fees ensure that few shops will offer installation and that prices will remain impractically high for those that do.

As for the Ford Focus CNG? If you want to conserve gasoline at an affordable price, you would be much happier with a Honda Insight.

[Car and fuel were provided by Patrick Zeiter of Zeit Energy.]