Seriously thinking about an mx5...
Discussion
I feel the need to change my 147 GTA for something lighter, smaller and less financially destructive.
I'm looking at mk2 mx5's; after reading up on them it seems the mk2 is the one for me.
There are 2 disadvantages I can see to the plan:
1. Only 2 seats - will I buy one then realise I took 4 seats and a hatchback boot for granted?
2. Speed - I'm resigned to the fact that the mx5 will be slower, but by how much?
I reckon I'm looking to spend about £8k max on the new car - hopefully that would include a few extra goodies (supercharger?)
Couple of questions I haven't found the answers to yet:
When did the mk2 become the mk2.5 and what are the differences?
How much (very roughly!) does a basic supercharger kit bugger your insurance by?
I'm looking at mk2 mx5's; after reading up on them it seems the mk2 is the one for me.
There are 2 disadvantages I can see to the plan:
1. Only 2 seats - will I buy one then realise I took 4 seats and a hatchback boot for granted?
2. Speed - I'm resigned to the fact that the mx5 will be slower, but by how much?
I reckon I'm looking to spend about £8k max on the new car - hopefully that would include a few extra goodies (supercharger?)
Couple of questions I haven't found the answers to yet:
When did the mk2 become the mk2.5 and what are the differences?
How much (very roughly!) does a basic supercharger kit bugger your insurance by?
think the cross over was around 2001 ish? main difference (to me anyway) is cosmetic - different nose and lights on the 2.5, possibly a little at the rear too. looks slightly meaner i reckon
if you are old enough to have sensible insurance, s/c shouldn't add that much, say 50-80 a year.
as for going slower - in a drag race or on a straight line, it probably is. once you start hitting the bends, it probably isn't
and yeah you might miss the boot and the second two seats - a topless drive on a warm night might help soften the blow tho...
if you are old enough to have sensible insurance, s/c shouldn't add that much, say 50-80 a year.
as for going slower - in a drag race or on a straight line, it probably is. once you start hitting the bends, it probably isn't
and yeah you might miss the boot and the second two seats - a topless drive on a warm night might help soften the blow tho...
Thanks for the info, will look into the mk2/2.5 differences.
Your probably right about the speed, I imagine the mx5 would be a bit of a revelation in the corners, but I don't want to lose too much of that overtaking ability (bit concerned about the sound too, I think I've been spoilt with the v6).
I do want to keep insurance down a bit, I'm 23 with no points and a good dollop of no claims etc.
Your probably right about the speed, I imagine the mx5 would be a bit of a revelation in the corners, but I don't want to lose too much of that overtaking ability (bit concerned about the sound too, I think I've been spoilt with the v6).
I do want to keep insurance down a bit, I'm 23 with no points and a good dollop of no claims etc.
JackGTA said:
Your probably right about the speed, I imagine the mx5 would be a bit of a revelation in the corners, but I don't want to lose too much of that overtaking ability (bit concerned about the sound too, I think I've been spoilt with the v6).
In a straight line, I don't think anybody on here will argue that MX-5s are anything but slow.As skinny says though, show a '5 some corners and you'll understand what all the fuss is about.
(By the way, very nice choice with the GTA. If ever I needed a practical car and could get over my entrenched bias towards rear wheel drive the 147 GTA would be near the top of my list. That sound...)
MX-5 Lazza said:
I disagree. I don't think any MX-5 is a slow car. It's certainly not a fast car but not slow either.
Not when it has 220bhp it isn't...Seriously though, I consider the MX-5 as slow compared to most other cars on the road these days (I'm thinking most repmobiles etc, particularly the diesels that can out-torque a '5 with barely a thought).
Maybe slow is unfair, in hot hatch terms I might consider it tepid verging on warm. All IMO of course.
But of course, staright line speed really isn't the point.
Wigeon Incognito said:
I consider the MX-5 as slow compared to most other cars on the road these days (I'm thinking most repmobiles etc, particularly the diesels that can out-torque a '5 with barely a thought).
I can often get caught out in the Alfa if I'm in the wrong gear by some TDIs etc.Your right though, the straight line speed isn't the point of the mx5. That said, I would seriously look at a supercharger though if I got one.
Am I right in thinking the 1.6 will just be too slow?
Slowly focussing my criteria - Mk2 1.8 leather interior, preferably a hard top, with money left for some go faster bits.
Edited by JackGTA on Wednesday 26th March 16:40
JackGTA said:
Am I right in thinking the 1.6 will just be too slow?
Slowly focussing my criteria - Mk2 1.8 leather interior, preferably a hard top, with money left for some go faster bits.
Avoid the 1.6 in the MK2. It's not a bad or unreliable engine. But why get one when you can get the 1.8.Slowly focussing my criteria - Mk2 1.8 leather interior, preferably a hard top, with money left for some go faster bits.
I would make sure to get one with a LSD. Fitted to the UK MK2 1.8is but not the standard UK 1.8i. Also fitted to many of the imports.
My favourate go faster part on my MK1 was ARBs. I found the body roll on standard suspention way too drastic. So on went the ARBs and less body roll, but also even sharper steering feel.
Wigeon Incognito said:
(I'm thinking most repmobiles etc, particularly the diesels that can out-torque a '5 with barely a thought).
Up to 80 mph (in France of course ) an ST TDCi Mondeo stayed behind me. Now given it prodigious torque and the MX-5s lack of torque this suprised me somewhat. Not fast...but definitely NOT slow.most modern hot hatches can take me in a straight line if they choose (although they never have). and mine is quicker than stock. they aren't fast cars but that isn't the point of them.
also, i wouldn't discount any cars without an LSD from your search, they really aren't that important imo.
also, i wouldn't discount any cars without an LSD from your search, they really aren't that important imo.
skinny said:
also, i wouldn't discount any cars without an LSD from your search, they really aren't that important imo.
Really? Do you mean for normal road driving? I'd like to track it and maybe even do a few sprints or hillclimbs so would've thought that for that kind of use an LSD would be best...MX-5 Lazza said:
I disagree. I don't think any MX-5 is a slow car. It's certainly not a fast car but not slow either.
It's certainly no dragster but the ease and instantaneous manner with which the available power can be exploited should certainly be taken into account.If you rag it off up a straight piece of road the TDi repmobile behind you can almost certainly keep up as it vomits forth its ferocious 2000-4000rpm powerband like a drunk in a quiet alleyway, but throw a few tight bends into the equation and you can claw it back on the simple physical reality that an old '5 is a light rear-drive car without a boat anchor under the bonnet, and you're not having to deal with the vagaries of a turbo and a fly-by-wire throttle every time you want some power at the wheels.
Plus the most important thing, what I think of as the whole MX-5 ethos, is that as driver you're one half of a tightly knit two-part team, rather than merely a board member on an executive committee of computer management systems. It's not about the destination, but the journey.
growlerkat said:
I feel abit of a numpty,but what is an LSD please???
Limited Slip Differentialhttp://auto.howstuffworks.com/differential4.htm
The one fitted to the 1.8 MX5 is a TorSen type.
My 1.8 mk1 Eunos when n/a felt slow initially, BUT I had just come from a 260bhp MR2 and I do however remember thinking that on booting it above 5800rpm coming out of a grippy cambered tight bend, "this is quite fast" and it made me grin a lot. If I tried the same now I'd fly off the road backwards but thats another story. 
n/a you do have to wring them out to get the full fun effect just like you should with a sports car.
n/a you do have to wring them out to get the full fun effect just like you should with a sports car.
As Skinny said, LSD isn't really that important for road or track use. It helps with traction so getting off the line can be quicker - great for a 1/4 mile drag run but not that important once you are rolling. They do help if you want to drift it around hair-pins or roundabouts but that's not the quickest way around a corner.
Personally I'd go for a very early Mk1 1.8, a 93 or 94. After that they got heavier with additional crash protection. A UK Mk1 1.8i (not iS) isn't likely to have air-con or electric windows and you can even find them without power steering if you want.
I think the early 1.6 was about 850-900Kg with the later 1.8 starting at about 950Kg growing to about 1000-1050Kg on later Mk1 1.8. The Mk2 & 2.5 1.8 was also about 1050Kg with the mk2.5 Sport being nearer 1100Kg.
Personally I'd go for a very early Mk1 1.8, a 93 or 94. After that they got heavier with additional crash protection. A UK Mk1 1.8i (not iS) isn't likely to have air-con or electric windows and you can even find them without power steering if you want.
I think the early 1.6 was about 850-900Kg with the later 1.8 starting at about 950Kg growing to about 1000-1050Kg on later Mk1 1.8. The Mk2 & 2.5 1.8 was also about 1050Kg with the mk2.5 Sport being nearer 1100Kg.
940kg is the quoted weight I've seen for an '89 Mk1 1.6 Eunos - AFAIK that should include AC, PS, EW which seem to be standard on most JDM versions?
I might try and get mine on a weighbridge at some stage to find out - its standard other than the suspension braces which won't be more than a kg or 2.
I might try and get mine on a weighbridge at some stage to find out - its standard other than the suspension braces which won't be more than a kg or 2.
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff