RE: Another special edition MX-5
Tuesday 29th May 2007
The new MX-5 IconMazda is introducing a new ‘Special Edition’ MX-5 soft-top model to its product line-up this summer, finished in a choice of red, white or blue paint.
Another special edition MX-5
Introducing the MX-5 Icon
The new MX-5 Icon
The Mazda MX-5 Icon is available in two versions – the ‘entry-level’ 1.8i Icon with a 126ps engine and a five-speed transmission priced at £16,825 and the 2.0i Icon powered by a 160ps engine mated to a six-speed transmission and costing £17,825.
Both Icon models offer up to £1,500 worth of additional extras. Special features of the Icon include climate control air-conditioning and Icon-branded black Medici leather seats.
Icon owners will also enjoy a degree of exclusivity as production of this latest Mazda MX-5 model will be restricted. Just 875 examples of the MX-5 1.8i Icon and 375 units of the MX-5 2.0i Icon will be available in the UK.
Discussion
andyinPembs said:
A special edition featuring less guff, rather than more guff would be a tad more interesting..
More power perhaps..
Exactly, I have the standard 160 BHP 2.0i Sport on order as a new company car.More power perhaps..
There was a special edition out at the time of ordering but that wasn't 'that special'
Now 220bhp on the other hand......
The best thing about MX5s has always been the handling, not the power. In fact, less power is sometimes good because you can enjoy more time with foot to floor.
Problem is (according to all road tests I've read) the handling got messed up with the 3rd generation.
They need to fix that.
John
(owned a Mk2 MX5 for 4 years - best car I ever had)
Problem is (according to all road tests I've read) the handling got messed up with the 3rd generation.
They need to fix that.
John
(owned a Mk2 MX5 for 4 years - best car I ever had)
I would suspect with the new introduction of the folding tin top soft top sales have plumited somewhat. Another promotion hoping to gain sales. Bad idea though I would rather see like previously stated a bit more power.
Whats wrong with the third generation handling? I find my wife's Mk 3 2.0 sport very good in the handling stakes. Just as good as the daughters old Mk1
Whats wrong with the third generation handling? I find my wife's Mk 3 2.0 sport very good in the handling stakes. Just as good as the daughters old Mk1
Al Up North said:
blowy84 said:
*Yawn* not much happening in the world of motoring today then PH? if this story is anything to go by
Yip,... What he said!someothersource said:
Celebrating its status as `Britain's favourite sports car brand' -blahblahblah
as you might have got a bit of a slap from some folks here.. ;-)cen said:
I would suspect with the new introduction of the folding tin top soft top sales have plumited somewhat. Another promotion hoping to gain sales. Bad idea though I would rather see like previously stated a bit more power.
Whats wrong with the third generation handling? I find my wife's Mk 3 2.0 sport very good in the handling stakes. Just as good as the daughters old Mk1
I'd agree with the comments on handling. Having driven a Mk 1 of my own, many Mk2's in work and a Mk3 2.0 sport for the last year I disagree that the handling has been messed up on the new one.Whats wrong with the third generation handling? I find my wife's Mk 3 2.0 sport very good in the handling stakes. Just as good as the daughters old Mk1
Yes it could do with a bit more power imo but thats never what the MX5 has been about. It still makes you grin when hurled around country lanes or roundabouts with the traction off.
....and yes before anyone points out that I actually make a living from selling Mazdas, can I point out that when it comes to enjoyable cars I am unbiased.
JPW231 said:
What about an MX5 MPS with the 260bhp Mazda 6 or 3 MPS engine 
then you'd be talking!
well well... I posted about a possibly mazdaspeed version and no one really seemed to be bothered then you'd be talking!
IF they ever decide to roll out with one I would imagine the Mazdaspeed3 engine would be a perfect match and should do away with anyone going on about the lack of power
as far as these special editions are concerned... more of a marketing thing I guess
Yeah the MP3 engine would be interesting, but the macho quest for power might spoil some of the essence of the car. Driving on the road you can still work the engine and enjoy a safe cross ccountry blast. Once you get high power the joy of working the engine is removed and its just point and squirt, at legal speeds anyway.
I suspect the 120ps version is just as fast in the corners as the "quick" version, but you lose macho bragging rights, which everyone seems to be obsessed with now.
Still why would anyone bother with the softtop against the hard top?
The MX5 is an untouchably balanced ace IMO, and better than ever.
I suspect the 120ps version is just as fast in the corners as the "quick" version, but you lose macho bragging rights, which everyone seems to be obsessed with now.
Still why would anyone bother with the softtop against the hard top?
The MX5 is an untouchably balanced ace IMO, and better than ever.
andyturner said:
chris_freebie said:
Exactly, I have the standard 160 BHP 2.0i Sport on order as a new company car.
Which hairdressing company is that?
shu'up
One that gives you a couple of floating agreements that basically mean you get a company car (free) without paying the tax.... oh shame that! MX-5 with free tyres, damn...
Mr MoJo said:
Having driven a Mk 1 of my own, many Mk2's in work and a Mk3 2.0 sport for the last year I disagree that the handling has been messed up on the new one.
Only what I've read in the press, e.g.Autocar of the 1.8i said:
...The car rolls less and engenders a feeling of sure-footedness absent in the previous model. But this behaviour is specific to better surfaces, because for all its competence this isn’t a car that ever really flows over a road or picks up the kind of rhythm I’d hoped.
The spring and damper rates feel distinctly continental European. As in very firm, especially under rebound damping: all too often you’re impressed by how supple the car is when it dips into a compression, only to have it jack back up through its suspension travel in one sudden jerk.
I don’t remember ‘charm’ being listed in the damper handbook, but somehow Mazda located and implemented it with the first two generations, and I feel it has been slightly lost in this version.
Continuing the theme, the steering still chatters, but at reduced volume and through a wheel that is curiously large and whose spokes are so thick there isn’t a natural grip point...
The spring and damper rates feel distinctly continental European. As in very firm, especially under rebound damping: all too often you’re impressed by how supple the car is when it dips into a compression, only to have it jack back up through its suspension travel in one sudden jerk.
I don’t remember ‘charm’ being listed in the damper handbook, but somehow Mazda located and implemented it with the first two generations, and I feel it has been slightly lost in this version.
Continuing the theme, the steering still chatters, but at reduced volume and through a wheel that is curiously large and whose spokes are so thick there isn’t a natural grip point...
Evo of the 2.0i Roadster Coupe said:
..The steering seems to have been given more weight, which eliminates the two-stabs-at-a-corner feeling [found in previous tests of the Mk3]. However, the wheel still doesn’t really provide you with any tangible evidence of what sort of contact there is between Messrs Macadam and Bibendum. You could put up with this in isolation, but from the moment the rear squats strangely as you turn in, the MX-5’s suspension feels all at sea. It just never feels poised or planted through a corner.
The 2-litre engine is really not a nice thing either, emitting a noise like a diesel transit at constantly high revs on a motorway. The gearbox is lovely and snickety, but up amongst the admittedly high roads of the Austrian Tyrol you certainly have to use it a lot – this engine would struggle to pull on a poorly lit singles night in a student union. Despite a 33bhp deficit, the 1.8 actually feels like the sweeter motor.
It rained heavily on our second day out in Austria, making the hard-top seem like an even more sensible idea. It also made the MX-5 more interesting to drive – as grip decreases, reduced lateral loading means the chassis leans less, and consequently the MX-5 will generally slide before the wallowy motion sets in. Also, the weedy engine now has some hope of overcoming the rear tyres round the hairpins. It’s still a very disconnected car to drive, though, particularly at the front, and I’m glad the Austrians keep their roads racetrack-smooth, but it is at least more fun.
The MX-5 is ultimately a very frustrating car. You just know that it should be brilliant, and if Mazda can engineer something like a metal folding roof for a small roadster without any major compromises, then they must be able to sort the rest of it out.
JohnThe 2-litre engine is really not a nice thing either, emitting a noise like a diesel transit at constantly high revs on a motorway. The gearbox is lovely and snickety, but up amongst the admittedly high roads of the Austrian Tyrol you certainly have to use it a lot – this engine would struggle to pull on a poorly lit singles night in a student union. Despite a 33bhp deficit, the 1.8 actually feels like the sweeter motor.
It rained heavily on our second day out in Austria, making the hard-top seem like an even more sensible idea. It also made the MX-5 more interesting to drive – as grip decreases, reduced lateral loading means the chassis leans less, and consequently the MX-5 will generally slide before the wallowy motion sets in. Also, the weedy engine now has some hope of overcoming the rear tyres round the hairpins. It’s still a very disconnected car to drive, though, particularly at the front, and I’m glad the Austrians keep their roads racetrack-smooth, but it is at least more fun.
The MX-5 is ultimately a very frustrating car. You just know that it should be brilliant, and if Mazda can engineer something like a metal folding roof for a small roadster without any major compromises, then they must be able to sort the rest of it out.
Firstly, it looks pretty much like the Mk 3 is a very good car. But, does it have the alround 'focus' of the Mk 1 (and Mk 2) and 'magic' - I think some of that is lost (open the bonnet, and there's just some plastic covered creation, rather than the alloy capped Lotus twin cam lookey - likey design.
Looks - I think the Mk 3 regained some of the cheekiness.
Power, I think this is where some of the Mk 3 has lost (or shed deliberately?) some of the orignal concept. They do seem to shift more (the Mk 3's) - but was that what the MX5 was about? If people want more power, the aftermarket has plenty of proven routes (although I guess the Mk 3 is relatively young in this respect)
Weight - they've done a good job of keeping this under control, and it's a very key elemeent of the MX5 package
Handling - sounds like they've lost out here, and don't get handling confused with roadholding, I suspect it produces good 'g' figures, but many of the press reports have reported the communication and on limit handling not to be at the same level as the older cars.
My 2p worth - I'll shut up now!
Looks - I think the Mk 3 regained some of the cheekiness.
Power, I think this is where some of the Mk 3 has lost (or shed deliberately?) some of the orignal concept. They do seem to shift more (the Mk 3's) - but was that what the MX5 was about? If people want more power, the aftermarket has plenty of proven routes (although I guess the Mk 3 is relatively young in this respect)
Weight - they've done a good job of keeping this under control, and it's a very key elemeent of the MX5 package
Handling - sounds like they've lost out here, and don't get handling confused with roadholding, I suspect it produces good 'g' figures, but many of the press reports have reported the communication and on limit handling not to be at the same level as the older cars.
My 2p worth - I'll shut up now!
Why more power ? Ditto better "on the limit" handling ? Where can you safely explore "on the limit" handling on UK roads ? From two test-drives, (Mk2 and Mk3), I reckon the MX-5 is a beautifully balanced bit of kit and does the job it was designed to do very well, plus the price makes it accessible. The current vogue for more and more BHP looks rather like a sad pi**ing contest; pointless but great for bragging rights. For me, the MX-5 is still the spiritual decsendent of Colin Chapman's original Elan - but with much better build quality/reliability. Just wish they'd do a diesel version. (Coat on, heading for door).
There again, I think the Fabia vRS is a good bit of kit, so what do I know ?
There again, I think the Fabia vRS is a good bit of kit, so what do I know ?
Skodaku said:
Why more power ? Ditto better "on the limit" handling ? Where can you safely explore "on the limit" handling on UK roads ?
To compete with other Marques. My wife's mk3 2L sport looks good, handles well but lacks the little bit extra in the power stakes. Compared to the Son's S2000 yes a 2L engine its embarrassing. Albeit the S2000 will keep up with my 3.2 V6 well up to a certain point. I don't expect the same performance figures from the Mk3 to that of he S2000 but do expect a 2L in such a light body to produce that little extra.On the limit handling on UK roads
living in the right locationEdited by cen on Sunday 3rd June 05:12
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff