Swapping to a newer MX=5?
Discussion
I bought a cheap Mk2.5 MX-5 18 months ago intending to keep it for 3 months as a summer car, but fell in love with the bloody thing and still have it now. I love having a convertible and make a lot of use of it.
I've moved jobs recently and am commuting three hours a day- 50 miles each way on main roads and a little dual carriageway, after 2 months the road noise is getting a bit much. I have looked at swapping to a diesel shed, as I worked out something doing 45mpg could save me 1.5k over the year on fuel BUT the garage I went to had a nice shiny 2008 Mk 3 MX5 2.0 sport with the mechanical tin top which has me sorely tempted! Working hard on the man maths at the moment...
I'd be very grateful if anyone who has made a similar change could give me the benefit of their experiences?
Does the newer car handle as well as the older? I'm a big fan of the tail happy nature of the Mk2 on deserted wet roads...
Engine- same revvy nature for the 2.0 as my 1.8? I suspect the power increase is going to be largely offset by the heavier car, but I would hate to lose the 'just thrash me' feeling of the mk2.5.
Range? I get 300 miles a tank at present and spend more of my life than I would like in petrol stations...
Road noise? The noise is the main reason I'm looking at swapping. I don't want to just get a bolt on hard top for mine, I like doing the commute with the roof down fairly often and I suppose I'm after the best of both worlds. Is the roof reliable? Simplicity is normally best which is against the tin top.
Heater/leather seats as good in the new car?
Comfort?
Thanks in advance. I've stuck this in general gassing as it seems a lot of PH have experience of these cars, and I think they are to be encouraged to those who are still scared of looking like hairdressers!
(And it turns out I can't edit the topic title, so stuck with the algebra!)
I've moved jobs recently and am commuting three hours a day- 50 miles each way on main roads and a little dual carriageway, after 2 months the road noise is getting a bit much. I have looked at swapping to a diesel shed, as I worked out something doing 45mpg could save me 1.5k over the year on fuel BUT the garage I went to had a nice shiny 2008 Mk 3 MX5 2.0 sport with the mechanical tin top which has me sorely tempted! Working hard on the man maths at the moment...
I'd be very grateful if anyone who has made a similar change could give me the benefit of their experiences?
Does the newer car handle as well as the older? I'm a big fan of the tail happy nature of the Mk2 on deserted wet roads...
Engine- same revvy nature for the 2.0 as my 1.8? I suspect the power increase is going to be largely offset by the heavier car, but I would hate to lose the 'just thrash me' feeling of the mk2.5.
Range? I get 300 miles a tank at present and spend more of my life than I would like in petrol stations...
Road noise? The noise is the main reason I'm looking at swapping. I don't want to just get a bolt on hard top for mine, I like doing the commute with the roof down fairly often and I suppose I'm after the best of both worlds. Is the roof reliable? Simplicity is normally best which is against the tin top.
Heater/leather seats as good in the new car?
Comfort?
Thanks in advance. I've stuck this in general gassing as it seems a lot of PH have experience of these cars, and I think they are to be encouraged to those who are still scared of looking like hairdressers!
(And it turns out I can't edit the topic title, so stuck with the algebra!)
Edited by vexed on Tuesday 1st December 17:57
Mrs Garvin just swapped her Mk3 Roadster Coupe (the correct name for the folding tin top) for a Fiesta ST. Bought the MX-5 new intending to keep it for 3 years, kept if for 8!
The good:
- Most reliable car I have ever known and, possibly, will ever know. No problems whatsoever with the folding hard top. In our tenure it required new tyres, new brake pads and a new battery - that's all and the latter only because the boot was left open with boot light on for a period of 3 days which saw off the 7 year old battery.
- Usual brilliant steering, gear change and braking.
- Handling put most cars to shame, except for the earlier version MX-5s.
- Enormously enjoyable and uber convenient roof down motoring and completely water tight with the roof up - and I mean ducks rear end tight.
- Nice revving engine although it was only a 1.8.
- Heated seats to toast anyone's buns and quickly.
- Never burnt any oil whatsoever.
- Cheap servicing and insurance.
The bad:
- Noisy - engine and wind noise.
- 1.8 engine did not provide that much oomph.
- Uncomfortable - Mrs Garvin OK but my 6' 2" frame could only bear 30mins or so.
- Rubbish OEM ICE.
- Original suspension ride height (to comply with pedestrian impact safety laws - but easily and cheaply lowered)
- Headlights not up to much.
The ugly:
- Horrendous fuel consumption for a small 1.8 litre car - overall average mpg just scraped over 30!
The good:
- Most reliable car I have ever known and, possibly, will ever know. No problems whatsoever with the folding hard top. In our tenure it required new tyres, new brake pads and a new battery - that's all and the latter only because the boot was left open with boot light on for a period of 3 days which saw off the 7 year old battery.
- Usual brilliant steering, gear change and braking.
- Handling put most cars to shame, except for the earlier version MX-5s.
- Enormously enjoyable and uber convenient roof down motoring and completely water tight with the roof up - and I mean ducks rear end tight.
- Nice revving engine although it was only a 1.8.
- Heated seats to toast anyone's buns and quickly.
- Never burnt any oil whatsoever.
- Cheap servicing and insurance.
The bad:
- Noisy - engine and wind noise.
- 1.8 engine did not provide that much oomph.
- Uncomfortable - Mrs Garvin OK but my 6' 2" frame could only bear 30mins or so.
- Rubbish OEM ICE.
- Original suspension ride height (to comply with pedestrian impact safety laws - but easily and cheaply lowered)
- Headlights not up to much.
The ugly:
- Horrendous fuel consumption for a small 1.8 litre car - overall average mpg just scraped over 30!
Garvin said:
Mrs Garvin just swapped her Mk3 Roadster Coupe (the correct name for the folding tin top) for a Fiesta ST. Bought the MX-5 new intending to keep it for 3 years, kept if for 8!
The good:
- Most reliable car I have ever known and, possibly, will ever know. No problems whatsoever with the folding hard top. In our tenure it required new tyres, new brake pads and a new battery - that's all and the latter only because the boot was left open with boot light on for a period of 3 days which saw off the 7 year old battery.
- Usual brilliant steering, gear change and braking.
- Handling put most cars to shame, except for the earlier version MX-5s.
- Enormously enjoyable and uber convenient roof down motoring and completely water tight with the roof up - and I mean ducks rear end tight.
- Nice revving engine although it was only a 1.8.
- Heated seats to toast anyone's buns and quickly.
- Never burnt any oil whatsoever.
- Cheap servicing and insurance.
The bad:
- Noisy - engine and wind noise.
- 1.8 engine did not provide that much oomph.
- Uncomfortable - Mrs Garvin OK but my 6' 2" frame could only bear 30mins or so.
- Rubbish OEM ICE.
- Original suspension ride height (to comply with pedestrian impact safety laws - but easily and cheaply lowered)
- Headlights not up to much.
The ugly:
- Horrendous fuel consumption for a small 1.8 litre car - overall average mpg just scraped over 30!
Useful insights, thanks!The good:
- Most reliable car I have ever known and, possibly, will ever know. No problems whatsoever with the folding hard top. In our tenure it required new tyres, new brake pads and a new battery - that's all and the latter only because the boot was left open with boot light on for a period of 3 days which saw off the 7 year old battery.
- Usual brilliant steering, gear change and braking.
- Handling put most cars to shame, except for the earlier version MX-5s.
- Enormously enjoyable and uber convenient roof down motoring and completely water tight with the roof up - and I mean ducks rear end tight.
- Nice revving engine although it was only a 1.8.
- Heated seats to toast anyone's buns and quickly.
- Never burnt any oil whatsoever.
- Cheap servicing and insurance.
The bad:
- Noisy - engine and wind noise.
- 1.8 engine did not provide that much oomph.
- Uncomfortable - Mrs Garvin OK but my 6' 2" frame could only bear 30mins or so.
- Rubbish OEM ICE.
- Original suspension ride height (to comply with pedestrian impact safety laws - but easily and cheaply lowered)
- Headlights not up to much.
The ugly:
- Horrendous fuel consumption for a small 1.8 litre car - overall average mpg just scraped over 30!
I've made a decision... I bought a miserable old diesel (1.9 tdi pd) golf which I'm going to run for a year. Over 30,000 miles it will save a significant amount of cash on fuel hopefully (barring a knackered turbo or similar) , and I'll buy a mk3 next year, and stick with a soft top which I prefer anyway when hopefully I'm commuting less. The joys of being a junior doctor and being moved jobs miles across the countryside every year! Incidentally the golf thinks it has done 50mpg for the first couple of days, will be interesting to see if that is realistic the first time I brim it again!
Edited by vexed on Friday 4th December 14:10
I have just part ex'd a Boxster 3.2S against a 2010 2.0 Sport Tech. My wife has a 89 Eunos 1.6
Has Bose, cruise & 6 speed.
Astonished on how flexible it is, 4th gear at 30ish in town. Probably quieter than the Boxster, much more agile (280kg lighter). The Eunos is great fun down a country lane, buzzy & very chuckable but far too noisy for touring & the boot is very small.
The Mk3 is a lot more refined & feels a lot more solid. Currently doing 33MPG overall in the 2 months since I bought it, but I do use the performance & it does some short journeys.
Has Bose, cruise & 6 speed.
Astonished on how flexible it is, 4th gear at 30ish in town. Probably quieter than the Boxster, much more agile (280kg lighter). The Eunos is great fun down a country lane, buzzy & very chuckable but far too noisy for touring & the boot is very small.
The Mk3 is a lot more refined & feels a lot more solid. Currently doing 33MPG overall in the 2 months since I bought it, but I do use the performance & it does some short journeys.
vexed said:
Does the Mk3 still feel as 'chuckable' on the small roads, or does it lose that when it gains the feeling of sturdiness? I'm already missing my mk2.5 and looking forward for the year of commuting to be up so I can get a mk3!
Not s much compared to the Mk1 but compared to the Boxster or anything similar it is still pretty nimble. Part of this is it feels small & has better visibility so easier to position. Also because of the torque you can concentrate moe on the driving, specifically the steering & road placement rather than rowing it along on the gearbox to get the performance. It also means it is faster out of corners.No, they are not particularly economical or useful for carrying anything much, but they are enormous fun. We're on our second Mk2.5 - bought the first one for my wife to commute in (about 50 miles a day) which did a lot for her state of mind and boosted her mood a lot. She's retired on health grounds, sadly, but we've acquired another much lower mileage car with the usual rust(now fixed - see other posts) I'd always be a bit scared of a folding automatic roof as an acquaintance had an Audi for a bit where the roof would stick halfway at inconvenient times - the simplicity and convenience of the Mazda roof is a joy.
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff