Ford Focus RS Buyers guide (MK3) 2016-2018. Avoid buying a broken Focus RS (2.3T)

[@themilesdriven]

📖 -- Miles Driven book - amzn.to/47NeoC2 if you want to support The Miles Driven check out the products below 😁 👕 -- Merch Shop - themilesdriven.myspreadshop.com/ 🟡 -- (UK 🇬🇧) Casio Mudmaster G-Shock watch - amzn.to/3R5h5cu 🟡 -- (USA 🇺🇸) Casio Mudmaster G-Shock watch -amzn.to/47tuCAl Podcast - linktr.ee/themilesdriven www.themilesdriven.com instagram.com/themilesdriven/ facebook.com/themilesdriven ➡ Check out fiction books by Miles 📖 -- First book - amzn.to/3W8owip 📚 -- First in Heist series - amzn.to/3w6JBiU 📘 -- Short read (Novella) - amzn.to/3ZCcVLC

[@juancruz-jg5pq]

Jus buy one with proof of the recall was done . After that just beat the s#$t out of it. I have had it for 70k miles hitting rev limiter, drifting driving at high rpm for long periods. Amazing vehicle way overengeniered for street use.

[@grandfinish2364]

That’s exactly why I bought mine. 🎉😂

[@davidreynolds9842]

big brother to the focus svt's!

[@tonyorourke5066]

I’ve had a blue edition since 2018 from new. Just had its 5th service. The issue not mentioned is the chronic rust around stuff underneath. It’s shocking. Mine hasn’t been driven that much only 4.5k on the clock. Bit of a garage Queen. When fords did a video of the underneath it was like looking at a 20 year old car. My 10 year old fiesta has hardly any rust underneath with 40k on its clock. I’m getting a quote in a few weeks to get it under sealed. Just be aware guys it doesn’t look pretty under there.

[@themilesdriven]

Thanks for adding this extra information, a great thing to check when looking at a used purchase 👍

[@davidbrownjohn327]

Well I was going to add a comment but it seems so err, inadequate. So I’ll just say, enjoyed the video!

[@themilesdriven]

All comments have equal value to us 😁 great to hear you enjoyed it, hope it was helpful

[@poker_18rs92]

With regards to the head gasket: In the US market: every 2016 has the wrong gasket & needed to be fixed. Most of the 2017s also had the wrong gasket, unless the engine build date was after 07/06/17, stamped on the side of the engine. So you need to be concerned with the engine build date & not the date inside the driver’s side door. Also, it’s a different block vs. the Mustang & thus why the HG failed causing many to have to replace the cylinder head. A field service action letter was sent out in January’18. The number was 17B32 (cylinder head gasket). Lastly, all of the 2018s had the right head gasket & had no issues. There were also damper improvements made on the ‘18 suspension & all are RS2’s. If you’re a big person, then the heavily bolstered Recaro’s will be an issue for you & so will the seating position. It’s a great car, for a specific person.

[@raheemb321]

Thanks good information I’m getting one this weekend

[@snotwurfit]

Very good video. Thanks.

[@ThomMurphy]

The engine is not the the "same" as the Mustang 2.3L, as the differences are more significant than those you listed. Also, the headgasket issue was not officially a "recall" by North America standards. That said, most everything you suggest looking at is worth a look. Also, probably worth looking for turbo oil line leaks along with RDU leaks. In addition to checking for the proper headgasket, it may be worthwhile to scope the cylinder walls, and do a oil analysis as the piston skirts have been know to degrade.

[@themilesdriven]

Could you give a few more details on the differences? Our understanding is identical engine blocks, both modified from the Ecoboost 2.0-litre platform, with interchangeable parts numbers (RS to Mustang) listed throughout the engine block, with the cooling channels and head being the only difference to the motor (although the drivetrain is different due to the RS all-wheel drive). In 2020 the Mustang 2.3T Ecoboost had the cylinder head of the RS swapped onto the existing engine design by Ford to increase power, no other known engine changes were listed and internal engine parts are the same. The exception is the cylinder head which seems to suggest that the Valencia engine is identical in all ways between RS and Mustang but the cooling channels and cylinder head, but we would be happily proven wrong to help get to the bottom of this 😁 A great spot on us of the word 'recall. Ford U.S owners were given a 'Warranty fix' associated with CSP 17B32. However in this particular case Ford also instructed dealers to perform the 'fix' even if a customer had not received prior notification or correspondence from Ford as is the normal process for a 'warranty fix'. This has lead to lazy misreporting (including from ourselves) as a recall in the USA.

[@ThomMurphy]

​@@themilesdriven Wow! Great response! I suppose the first thing to do regarding the identification of engine differences would be trying to agree on what constitutes the engine. It seems, based on what you've written, that for you "engine" may be limited to the block and head (even though your video showed a picture of an engine including hardware such as the turbo). For me, in a general sense, much like you, at a minimum, a "engine" would be everything in a long-block. So, block, rotating assembly, and head. Also, I think it might be important to talk about which Ford 2.3L Mustang engines are being discussed specifically. It may be obvious to us that you don't mean the RS engine is the same as the 4 cylinder 2.3L Mustang engine from the the 1990s, but maybe it's not obvious to everyone. Then there's the latter 2.3L High Performance Mustang engine, built in the same Valencia (Spain) factory as the RS's engine, which was introduced years after RS production ended. That engine is actually more similar to the RS engine than the Mustang engines made while the RS was being made. (Also, as a very slightly related aside, I've never seen a source that said the RS engine was "code named" Valencia. If you could share your source for that information I'd appreciate it.) That said, when it comes to these vehicles, built by the same manufacturer during the same time period with engines of the same displacement, I'm inclined to include any and all differences related to the engine, including not only all the hardware in the picture of the RS engine you displayed while saying they're the same ( 5:43 ), but also things like the engine calibrations. Including all of these things as elements of the engine, or motor as you say, perhaps it becomes obvious the many differences. In fact, it the list of similarities would be shorter than the list of differences. Obviously the software calibrations are different, also is most of the hardware. Hardware wise, the part numbers that are the same for both is few, and that's not just a case of the same parts being given different part numbers. I'm not going to bother listing out all the differences or all the similarities, especially as we haven't mutually agreed on the scope of the definition of engine for these purposes or even the particular Mustang 2.3L engine. The most similar 2.3L Mustang engine (to the RS's) would be the 2020 and later high performance, but that particular engine is about as equally similar to the 2.3L used in the Bronco. Likewise, the Bronco's 2.3L is about as similar to the RS's as the Mustang's, but I don't see you or anyone else claiming these are the same. It seems, based on your comment, that you may recognize that the 2020 (and later) Mustang high performance engine is more similar to the RS's engine than the 2.3L Mustang engines which were made while the RS was made. If so, I think it's then weird to call the RS engine the same as the Mustang's, rather than the (later) Mustang's High Performance 2.3 similar to, though less powerful than, the RS's. IDK, it just seems backwards or disjointed chronologically, like saying a parent has a kid's eyes instead of the other way around. OK, not like that... its even more confusing, like if the kids name was Jack (Later Mustang 2.3L Performance), but also there was an uncle named Jack (Mustang 2.3L sold while RS was sold new), and there's also a great uncle named Jack (1990s 4cyl 2.3L Mustang), and you said a parent (RS) had Jack's eyes. Um, what? (and) Which Jack, exactly? Whichever Jack, it's confusing, especially while also talking about cousin once removed Jack ("being modified" 2.0 blocks) which might be nearly as similar as some second cousin twice removed Jack (Mazda blocks). Anyhow, if anything, maybe this will help you understand my perspective a bit, and we can reign in some details and/or definitions to make sense of all this. Maybe you can also explain some of your choices like showing an engine with components including the turbo while saying it's the same as another, but not considering the turbo as part of the engine. I mean, it's a cool picture and a RS engine, but incongruous.

[@themilesdriven]

@Thom Murphy Thanks for the detailed response Thom it helps clear up your perspective, especially on how the term 'engine' is being used in our guide. 👍 You're right that our engine picture is of the whole bay. We generally do this just because most people switch off our videos when we get overly technical but appreciate it is not as detailed as some viewers will like. In short, we consider the engine to be the minimum needed for motion. We appreciate that other interpretations could be very different, especially as it needs an ECU to talk to the car and understand what to do, including what it is connected to since no cars with the exception of the Koenigsegg Regara have been built direct drive in recent memory and there's more to that can that just a long rod at the end of the crankshaft and onto a wheel. 😅 To help narrow our understanding of the engine differences from RS to Mustang we'll limit it to four sections. Engine block - The engine block (bottom end and walls) and components within are identical. The cylinders are both Teflon coated, the Valencia factory began building this motor in 2015 for the Mustang, the crankshaft is the same 4340 forged steel design, the deck height is the same, and both have 30mm sodium-filled exhaust valves which are oversized. The major difference is the cylinder head, which in the RS is made of different materials and features different cooling channels. Some RS engines left the Valencia factory with incorrectly fitted Mustang head gaskets, causing the now-known issues as the cooling channels differ. (If you have different information please let us know to help those looking to buy one, its always great to have additional info and if we're wrong then we're happy to add a correction.) 😁 External engine parts indirectly or directly bolted to the motor - matching manifold with increased plenum volume, intake has matching diameters. The radiators do not crossover and have separate part numbers, this may be because of the front area design, we're not sure. The Turbochargers are both twin-scroll designs and identical in size and shape, however, the compressor itself is believed to be marginally different to boost airflow in the RS. We haven't held both turbocharges in our hands to see this ourselves and there seems to be disagreement online whether there is truly any difference between 2015-2019 Mustangs and 2020 onwards Mustangs (or the 16-18 RS). As per above any different info just let us know Engine electronics - The Canbus systems and the majority of modules that pertain to engine timing and function appear to crossover with cross-referenced part numbers. You mention calibration, as far as we can see the ratios are the same between the two motors but again we're happy to be proven wrong if you have some more detailed info. There is a difference in the modules for a variety of vehicle-specific aspects (all-wheel drive / HVAC etc). We appreciate some may consider all of these electronic parts as the 'heart' of a car. Driveline - This is where the Mustang and the RS separate. Parts that connect to the engine, from the gearbox to the CV shafts are all different. Again this is where we may differ in how we refer to the engine, to us this would be a drivetrain and so again any issues here we would generally list as common faults rather than in the engine section of the video, but appreciate some may still consider it the engine. You're absolutely right that we could have been a little clearer that the 2.3 Ecoboost motor is not a long descendant of the 2.3 Mustang from decades ago. Several manufacturers do still to this day have 90's engine designs in modern guises. The first to our mind (because we are currently researching the 958 gen Porsche Cayenne for another video) is the 3.6 VR6 motor, which VW still sell in China, and originates as a 2.9-litre VR6 sold in the early 1990's Volkswagen Carrado. So great spot. For anyone interested the Ford Ecoboost 2.0-litre has roots in the Mazda MZR, and the 2.3 is a reworking of that 2.0 Ecobbost, so this engine is much older and does trace back to the early 2000's, albeit tenuous at this point as so much development has happened. Again you're correct, we could have mentioned the Bronco and even the Lincoln MKC, along with the 4th Generation Focus ST sold in Europe as the 'same' engines (although we would have to check if Turbochargers are the same as power varies and this is likely done for lower down torque including in the new Ford Ranger and so may have different part numbers that don't crossover). The main reason we picked the Mustang is that we've already made a Mustang buyers guide and as is our understanding these motors are nearly identical in almost every way, and 2020 on Mustangs we believe to be identical, (exhaust components and other piping needed to match the available space being the exception). Again any different info, parts numbers, ect, please just let us know All in all, we should stress our guides are created for people who like cars, and may want to buy them, but they are not technical breakdowns.

[@johnjohn9081]

I bought a 2017 from a impound with the old version HG with 130k miles. Previous owner never got it done, is the recall still active?

[@andrewmoriarty993]

Lower door seals fall off! Easy fix with black sickaflex.

[@bretth3224]

Did anyone else get the headlight failure due to broken wires inside the headlight it self?

[@benjensen5609]

Definitely add the synchros in the transmission to your list of shitty parts on these cars 😂

[@lordbongkage8509]

No you suck at shifting

[@piotrwozniak7840]

410hp and 620Nm of torque>blown engine. Its not as strong as ea888 from VW