Some questions about NA versus Turbo versus Supercharged 5
Discussion
Hi all,
I have pretty much decided for certain that in 3 months time I will put my Integra up for sale to look for an MX-5. Having a roadster is an itch that I've always had and its not only not gone away, but is stronger than ever.
I now know for certain that I will be wanting a Mk1 for the lightness factor and the fact that the Mk1 is reputed to be the most fun model, not only that but I much prefer the look of it to the softer later models.
I did actually drive an MX-5 last year (mk2 5-speed 1.8), and found it rather slow, but I was in that "speed" phase of my driving career when I drove that. However, as I age I am finding that this does not matter so much to me any more, but that said, I dont want to end up bored with the performance either.
I have read some people on here say that in fact the cars are better left normally aspirated, some people saying they were more fun or that its how they were designed.
That said, I quite like the idea of having a more torquey car this time around as my current ITR is a real screamer.
I have done some reading about turbos and superchargers and it would seem that turbos allow for more power, but a slightly more abrupt response too (more of a kick perhaps), whereas superchargers would seem to make the engine almost still feel like a normally aspirated one, just a much more powerful one.
So, I'm just wondering if anyone has any comments on any of this. Should it be left normally aspirated? Or if not, which suits the car better? I am not after huge power, just enough not to make it feel slow, and for it to be reliable. Which is more reliable, a turbo or supercharger?
Any comments welcome.
I have pretty much decided for certain that in 3 months time I will put my Integra up for sale to look for an MX-5. Having a roadster is an itch that I've always had and its not only not gone away, but is stronger than ever.
I now know for certain that I will be wanting a Mk1 for the lightness factor and the fact that the Mk1 is reputed to be the most fun model, not only that but I much prefer the look of it to the softer later models.
I did actually drive an MX-5 last year (mk2 5-speed 1.8), and found it rather slow, but I was in that "speed" phase of my driving career when I drove that. However, as I age I am finding that this does not matter so much to me any more, but that said, I dont want to end up bored with the performance either.
I have read some people on here say that in fact the cars are better left normally aspirated, some people saying they were more fun or that its how they were designed.
That said, I quite like the idea of having a more torquey car this time around as my current ITR is a real screamer.
I have done some reading about turbos and superchargers and it would seem that turbos allow for more power, but a slightly more abrupt response too (more of a kick perhaps), whereas superchargers would seem to make the engine almost still feel like a normally aspirated one, just a much more powerful one.
So, I'm just wondering if anyone has any comments on any of this. Should it be left normally aspirated? Or if not, which suits the car better? I am not after huge power, just enough not to make it feel slow, and for it to be reliable. Which is more reliable, a turbo or supercharger?
Any comments welcome.
I want to supercharge my 5 but then its so much fun wringing its neck , it sounds like its on carbs with the pipercross filter . but my old chevette had a supercharger and it sounded fantastic , turbo charging is the cheapest way for more power though, just dosent sound as good as a charger on full howl .
This is such a "kettle-of fish" or "can-of-worms" subject that I'm just not going to go there. Being the owner of a very powerful supercharged car I couldn't be classed as impartial anyway (though I do recognise that turbos have their place - just not on my car 
)
The only real way to answer this is to get some test-drives and decide for yourself as it's all down to personal taste.
As for choosing a Mk1 because they are more fun - that ain't necessarily so. Yes a stock Mk1 will be more fun than a stock Mk2/2.5 but if you are planning to upgrade the shocks/springs/arbs (as I have done) then the Mk2 is a better platform than the Mk1. The added stiffness from extra braces are good when you add power and the extra weight stops becoming an issue.
)The only real way to answer this is to get some test-drives and decide for yourself as it's all down to personal taste.
As for choosing a Mk1 because they are more fun - that ain't necessarily so. Yes a stock Mk1 will be more fun than a stock Mk2/2.5 but if you are planning to upgrade the shocks/springs/arbs (as I have done) then the Mk2 is a better platform than the Mk1. The added stiffness from extra braces are good when you add power and the extra weight stops becoming an issue.
Edited by MX-5 Lazza on Sunday 25th November 23:42
If you are going to get a mk1, the 1995 r limited or rs limited had a lot of extra on it which make it easier to go fi'd then if you go for any other mk1.
Ive got a 1.6 turbo at the moment which is only about 160bhp. The plan by the begining of next year is to go up to approx 230bhp at 12psi. My car has the extra rb anti roll bars, chassis bracing, coilovers, etc and this week is having a torsen type 1 diff fitted.
If I had bought the r limited or rs limited extra chassis bracing and a torsen diff would not have been required as they both came as standard plus I would have had the 1.8 engine.
Im getting work done by performance 5 and mx5mad. If you dont plan to fit it yourself both are worth speaking to.
Turbo wise it only works out cheap if you go with a greddy kit. After this once you start talking FM or Begi kits prices rocket as you search for more bhp.
Supercharger wise if you get a 1.8 you can go for the more powerful MP62 (think thats the right name) which will give you plenty of options to run big bhp. If you have a 1.6 you will have to run the smaller supercharger (something 45) although I think the 62 will soon be available for the 1.6.
Lots of options available, you have to decide whats fits within your budget.
Ive got a 1.6 turbo at the moment which is only about 160bhp. The plan by the begining of next year is to go up to approx 230bhp at 12psi. My car has the extra rb anti roll bars, chassis bracing, coilovers, etc and this week is having a torsen type 1 diff fitted.
If I had bought the r limited or rs limited extra chassis bracing and a torsen diff would not have been required as they both came as standard plus I would have had the 1.8 engine.
Im getting work done by performance 5 and mx5mad. If you dont plan to fit it yourself both are worth speaking to.
Turbo wise it only works out cheap if you go with a greddy kit. After this once you start talking FM or Begi kits prices rocket as you search for more bhp.
Supercharger wise if you get a 1.8 you can go for the more powerful MP62 (think thats the right name) which will give you plenty of options to run big bhp. If you have a 1.6 you will have to run the smaller supercharger (something 45) although I think the 62 will soon be available for the 1.6.
Lots of options available, you have to decide whats fits within your budget.
One thing to bear in mind is the old saying: "Cheap, Reliable, Powerful - pick 2".
Basically this means that you can't buy a cheap £1500 turbo designed to give 5-6psi, spin it up to 14psi and get a reliable 250bhp. You might get 250bhp but it won't be reliable. To make it reliable you will have to spend a small fortune on upgrade parts by which time you might as well have gone for a more expensive one (unless you are the sort that likes tinkering).
Basically this means that you can't buy a cheap £1500 turbo designed to give 5-6psi, spin it up to 14psi and get a reliable 250bhp. You might get 250bhp but it won't be reliable. To make it reliable you will have to spend a small fortune on upgrade parts by which time you might as well have gone for a more expensive one (unless you are the sort that likes tinkering).
MX-5 Lazza said:
One thing to bear in mind is the old saying: "Cheap, Reliable, Powerful - pick 2".
Basically this means that you can't buy a cheap £1500 turbo designed to give 5-6psi, spin it up to 14psi and get a reliable 250bhp. You might get 250bhp but it won't be reliable. To make it reliable you will have to spend a small fortune on upgrade parts by which time you might as well have gone for a more expensive one (unless you are the sort that likes tinkering).
This used to be the case, but you can now get a basic but high quality 5psi BEGi 'S' turbo kit for around £1250, which is fully upgradable to over 300bhp (With the appropriate turbo/intercooler choice). Im severly tempted to ditch my S/C and go with this path.Basically this means that you can't buy a cheap £1500 turbo designed to give 5-6psi, spin it up to 14psi and get a reliable 250bhp. You might get 250bhp but it won't be reliable. To make it reliable you will have to spend a small fortune on upgrade parts by which time you might as well have gone for a more expensive one (unless you are the sort that likes tinkering).
http://www.mx5mad.com/begisturboindex.php?osCsid=6...
Aren't BEGI the people who used to supply FM? If so that is probably a new incarnation of the old basic FM Turbo (a very good starting point).
After adding more powerful fuel-pump/bigger exhaust/intercoolers/engine management/bigger injectors/mapping (ignoring things stronger dif etc as that is a separate issue and depends of the car) then you will have at least doubled the initial outlay so what I said still holds true.
After adding more powerful fuel-pump/bigger exhaust/intercoolers/engine management/bigger injectors/mapping (ignoring things stronger dif etc as that is a separate issue and depends of the car) then you will have at least doubled the initial outlay so what I said still holds true.
that's the best way mate - there are a fair few FI'd 5's around that come up for sale, and always at a price that is well below the actual costs.
i reckon 160 - 180 bhp is a really nice figure for a mk1, and should be fairly easily attainable.
my vote is turbo, then i'm biased. as above, try get some passenger rides
i reckon 160 - 180 bhp is a really nice figure for a mk1, and should be fairly easily attainable.
my vote is turbo, then i'm biased. as above, try get some passenger rides
Edited by skinny on Monday 26th November 13:05
pbirkett said:
Hi all, thanks for the comments so far. Reason I ask is because I would probably buy one with the stuff already done. I'd get one that I thought would keep me happy and so long as it was a good quality install I would probably just leave it as be...
Indeed there is quite a few about at the moment and all less then what it would cost to do yourself. However some of the fun is creating the beast.The green FM2 on pistonheads looks a good buy as it is the later fm2 kit while there is also a greddy turbo car on ebay at the moment. Both a differing prices but both with differing levels of performance.
Back in '98 I had a brand new DC2 and ran it as a daily driver for 12-18 months, I loved it. A change of job landed me with a company car, so I sold the Integra and bought a 1.6 MX-5 to play with. I first supercharged it with one of the old M45 kits, then added the big boost kit, intercooler and finally a programmable Link ECU. Then I got bored, pulled it all out, sold it and installed a FM2 turbo. The difference was night and day between 11psi supercharged and 12psi turbocharged. The car was a lot more tail happy in SC guise to the point I wouldn't let the missus drive it as it was a bit of a handful if you weren't delicate with it. Unfortunately some diesel on a wet road killed that car and since then I had another 2 1.8 FM2 MX-5's that had had brakes / suspension etc all sorted, and for a while after I sold the FM2's another 1.6 NA MX-5. They were good times, but to be honest I probably wouldn't do it again.
The problem was, I drove a lot of other cars in-between, the biggest problem being I borrowed a mate's DC2 again and it was just an amazing feeling to get back behind the wheel of what is an amazing car. I really had to stop myself buying that Integra off him, the way it felt on the road, it's stance, the driving position are all perfect IMO.
My advice would be to buy an MX-5 by all means, but spend your time learning how to drive it properly. A sweetly set up MX-5 with decent tyres and geometry is all the fun you would ever need. Make no mistake, a FI MX-5 is a very quick car but you will spend a lot of money to do it all properly and the market is not what it was when I sold up (not that you modify a car with any sort of intention of getting a significant amount of your money back out of it). You already own one of the best drivers cars on the road, an MX-5 will be quite a raw experience in many ways after a Honda - will you have to run it daily? I hated mine in the winter!
Phil.
The problem was, I drove a lot of other cars in-between, the biggest problem being I borrowed a mate's DC2 again and it was just an amazing feeling to get back behind the wheel of what is an amazing car. I really had to stop myself buying that Integra off him, the way it felt on the road, it's stance, the driving position are all perfect IMO.
My advice would be to buy an MX-5 by all means, but spend your time learning how to drive it properly. A sweetly set up MX-5 with decent tyres and geometry is all the fun you would ever need. Make no mistake, a FI MX-5 is a very quick car but you will spend a lot of money to do it all properly and the market is not what it was when I sold up (not that you modify a car with any sort of intention of getting a significant amount of your money back out of it). You already own one of the best drivers cars on the road, an MX-5 will be quite a raw experience in many ways after a Honda - will you have to run it daily? I hated mine in the winter!
Phil.
Thanks for your post PJLarge, it is very interesting to read since you were an Integra driver also.
Its funny what you say about the teg, after driving a standard MX-5 Mk2 1.8 NA, I personally felt that whatever the argument for RWD etc, the teg just feels like a much better car to drive in most circumstances than that one did, at the time I didnt even feel it could replace my 182, which is why I asked about FI, as I thought it would be better for the pace.
Strange thing is though, every time I get in the teg its almost like its saying to me "you aint getting shot of me that easily", and even with all of these thoughts in my head, I ALWAYS get out with a huge grin on my face.
Really, I would like both, I would to have an MX5 and a teg.
Yes I would be using it as a daily driver.
Part of me thinks I should just keep the teggy and save up for a cheapo NA 1.6 Mk1 MX5 for my RWD / Open top cravings, and keep the teggy as a daily driver and for those days I just want unadulterated nutter hoons (anyone who has owned a Type R will understand this
). I could probably even get one for peanuts!
Its funny what you say about the teg, after driving a standard MX-5 Mk2 1.8 NA, I personally felt that whatever the argument for RWD etc, the teg just feels like a much better car to drive in most circumstances than that one did, at the time I didnt even feel it could replace my 182, which is why I asked about FI, as I thought it would be better for the pace.
Strange thing is though, every time I get in the teg its almost like its saying to me "you aint getting shot of me that easily", and even with all of these thoughts in my head, I ALWAYS get out with a huge grin on my face.
Really, I would like both, I would to have an MX5 and a teg.
Yes I would be using it as a daily driver.
Part of me thinks I should just keep the teggy and save up for a cheapo NA 1.6 Mk1 MX5 for my RWD / Open top cravings, and keep the teggy as a daily driver and for those days I just want unadulterated nutter hoons (anyone who has owned a Type R will understand this
). I could probably even get one for peanuts!pbirkett said:
Part of me thinks I should just keep the teggy and save up for a cheapo NA 1.6 Mk1 MX5 for my RWD / Open top cravings, and keep the teggy as a daily driver and for those days I just want unadulterated nutter hoons (anyone who has owned a Type R will understand this ). I could probably even get one for peanuts!
I'd do that. ). I could probably even get one for peanuts!I have a, well it was last dyno'd at 250bhp MX5 and it now runs more boost and has had a re-map, VERY VERY fast car, basically in the dry will inihalate any thing this side of a Porsch Turbo. In the summer an absolute hoot, I feel that the increase in torque seems to bring the best out of the chassis. Pre turbo I'd accelerate hard out of a bend and the car would feel light and skittish, post turbo do the same and the torque pulls it into the road, the car seems to bite and be more precise.
However, this is my first real winter with the car (actual 1st winter I took it off the road to do the turbo conversion) and i don't like it. Noisey, leaky, poor visability with roof up, a handful when your half asleep in the morning, being so small nobody seems to see you in the dark wet night,.. its all quite stressful. So i'm buying another car, I had previously an MR2 that I hold in the regard you do the integra far easier to live with in the winter months. I'd never sell the mx5 as in the summer its un-beatable. I really do want another more suitable car (sports - I have an Accord as well) for the winter months now though.
My (supercharged 230ish bhp) MX-5 seems to be fine for winter driving with the exception of the "summer" tyres which really don't like cold weather.
I have a Mk2.5 which feels and looks a little bit bigger than a Mk1 (though the actual dimensions are almost identical - 5mm wider?) and it's very bright red so is very visible.
The heater works very well and warms up much quicker than any other car I have ever owned (and I had quite a few) and visibility is fine through the heated glass rear window.
The torque from my SC is very predictable and "always there" so it's easy to tip-toe on slippery roads.
I do have a boring 1999 1.8 Focus which I am currently using for the daily grind but only to keep the miles off the MX. I actually bought it to save fuel on my motorway journey to work but I have since changed jobs so I never have to go near motorways but have kept the Focus for work as I regularly need the boot-space and extra seats.
I have a Mk2.5 which feels and looks a little bit bigger than a Mk1 (though the actual dimensions are almost identical - 5mm wider?) and it's very bright red so is very visible.
The heater works very well and warms up much quicker than any other car I have ever owned (and I had quite a few) and visibility is fine through the heated glass rear window.
The torque from my SC is very predictable and "always there" so it's easy to tip-toe on slippery roads.
I do have a boring 1999 1.8 Focus which I am currently using for the daily grind but only to keep the miles off the MX. I actually bought it to save fuel on my motorway journey to work but I have since changed jobs so I never have to go near motorways but have kept the Focus for work as I regularly need the boot-space and extra seats.
Edited by MX-5 Lazza on Tuesday 27th November 15:33
pbirkett said:
Part of me thinks I should just keep the teggy and save up for a cheapo NA 1.6 Mk1 MX5 for my RWD / Open top cravings, and keep the teggy as a daily driver and for those days I just want unadulterated nutter hoons (anyone who has owned a Type R will understand this ). I could probably even get one for peanuts!
Well, if you can accommodate two cars and all the hassle that it entails (i.e 2x tax, 2x insurance, 2x fuel, 2x servicing / consumables etc etc) then it's got to be the way to go. You could probably get a perfectly servicable 1.6 from '89-'93 for £1500 or thereabouts. If you have a garage and can just leave it in there with the roof down for dry days only then you will have the best of both worlds. Go for it! ). I could probably even get one for peanuts!Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff