Discussion
So I'm now officially shopping for a '5, yay!
Just a quick question, which you can probably guess from the title. I'm looking at getting a mk1 and to spend £1600 maximum!
For that money I can get a fair few 1.6s but not many 1.8s. Coming from a motorbike I'm worried I'd miss the grunt with a 1.6 (even with a 1.8, but still), is it worth holding out for a 1.8 or will I not notice the difference from 200cc missing/added? You can of course point in the direction of good examples
but don't think I haven't lived in the MX-5 section of the PH classifieds for the last few weeks, eek!
Over to you guys.
Just a quick question, which you can probably guess from the title. I'm looking at getting a mk1 and to spend £1600 maximum!
For that money I can get a fair few 1.6s but not many 1.8s. Coming from a motorbike I'm worried I'd miss the grunt with a 1.6 (even with a 1.8, but still), is it worth holding out for a 1.8 or will I not notice the difference from 200cc missing/added? You can of course point in the direction of good examples
but don't think I haven't lived in the MX-5 section of the PH classifieds for the last few weeks, eek!Over to you guys.
There was no way I was buying a 1.6. Thats with me coming from a 167bhp Hatchback. The 1.8 I've got is noticeably slower - its not a problem, but I can see that as I get used to the car then its probably gonna start to grate. Theres very little of anything other than noise unless your over 5000 rpm. Still, at least like my old car, it feels like it wants to run round to the redline, rather than you having to force the power out of it.
The 1.6 must be extremely frustrating.
Course, you get plenty of people who will disagree with me...
The 1.6 must be extremely frustrating.
Course, you get plenty of people who will disagree with me...
Edited by snotrag on Wednesday 29th October 11:10
te engine.If you can stretch your buget a little further you can get a 1.8 JRSC, ok, so it's in the IoM, but still, a bargain!
http://www.mx5ocforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=67774
Here's a 1.6, needs a little bit of work, but if you're handy with diy that should be ok
http://www.mx5nutz.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2...
I think the 1.6 pre'94 are the best to go for as they have 116bhp compared to the later models with 90bhp. (Is that just the UK spec ones? I think the imports might be different, ie 116bhp as standard)
http://www.mx5ocforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=67774
Here's a 1.6, needs a little bit of work, but if you're handy with diy that should be ok
http://www.mx5nutz.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2...
I think the 1.6 pre'94 are the best to go for as they have 116bhp compared to the later models with 90bhp. (Is that just the UK spec ones? I think the imports might be different, ie 116bhp as standard)
Imports the same (1.6 Eunos) as the early UK 1.6's.
I will disagree with Snotrag - if you want a straight line machine you'd ought go somewhere else, if you like the challenge of keeping the speed up round the twisties to keep up with faster traffic it's great.
It certainly (in my opinion) doesn't feel underpowered.
I will disagree with Snotrag - if you want a straight line machine you'd ought go somewhere else, if you like the challenge of keeping the speed up round the twisties to keep up with faster traffic it's great.
It certainly (in my opinion) doesn't feel underpowered.
snotrag said:
There was no way I was buying a 1.6. Thats with me coming from a 167bhp Hatchback. The 1.8 I've got is noticeably slower - its not a problem, but I can see that as I get used to the car then its probably gonna start to grate. Theres very little of anything other than noise unless your over 5000 rpm. Still, at least like my old car, it feels like it wants to run round to the redline, rather than you having to force the power out of it.
The 1.6 must be extremely frustrating.
Course, you get plenty of people who will disagree with me...
Are you not that pleased with it then? You seemed really chuffed when you got it, but reading this it seems you've gone off it?! I ask this as I'm about to take the plunge with one....The 1.6 must be extremely frustrating.
Course, you get plenty of people who will disagree with me...
Edited by snotrag on Wednesday 29th October 11:10
Ok, that is informative.
Sorry Hornetrider, I didn't mean to annoy you, just trying to find out.
I'm not looking for it to blow everything else into the weeds, just worried it would feel sloooooooooooow after a bike, which isn't about straight line either. Its just nice to have a bit of go when you need it. Thanks for that Fran, I'm glad it doesn't feel underpowered.
I may just grab the best 1.6 I can get, save a bit on tax and insurance and enjoy it.
Still worried I'd feel as if I was missing the 1.8 though
Sorry Hornetrider, I didn't mean to annoy you, just trying to find out.
I'm not looking for it to blow everything else into the weeds, just worried it would feel sloooooooooooow after a bike, which isn't about straight line either. Its just nice to have a bit of go when you need it. Thanks for that Fran, I'm glad it doesn't feel underpowered.
I may just grab the best 1.6 I can get, save a bit on tax and insurance and enjoy it.
Still worried I'd feel as if I was missing the 1.8 though
nakedninja said:
Ok, that is informative.
Sorry Hornetrider, I didn't mean to annoy you, just trying to find out.
I'm not looking for it to blow everything else into the weeds, just worried it would feel sloooooooooooow after a bike, which isn't about straight line either. Its just nice to have a bit of go when you need it. Thanks for that Fran, I'm glad it doesn't feel underpowered.
I may just grab the best 1.6 I can get, save a bit on tax and insurance and enjoy it.
Still worried I'd feel as if I was missing the 1.8 though
I share your concern, as I didn't no wether to got for a 1.6 or a 1.8, but think I will go for a 1.6 as neither are 'fast' but its all about having fun in them! I agree with your point about petrol and insurance, may asweel save a few quid and still have loads of fun!! Just for the record I used to have the same debate about the 205 GTi 1.6 OR 1.9, I had both and was quite happy with the 1.6 (I know its a totally different car, but the sentiment is the same, before I get heckled!!)Sorry Hornetrider, I didn't mean to annoy you, just trying to find out.
I'm not looking for it to blow everything else into the weeds, just worried it would feel sloooooooooooow after a bike, which isn't about straight line either. Its just nice to have a bit of go when you need it. Thanks for that Fran, I'm glad it doesn't feel underpowered.
I may just grab the best 1.6 I can get, save a bit on tax and insurance and enjoy it.
Still worried I'd feel as if I was missing the 1.8 though
nakedninja said:
Ok, that is informative.
Sorry Hornetrider, I didn't mean to annoy you, just trying to find out.
I'm not looking for it to blow everything else into the weeds, just worried it would feel sloooooooooooow after a bike, which isn't about straight line either. Its just nice to have a bit of go when you need it. Thanks for that Fran, I'm glad it doesn't feel underpowered.
I may just grab the best 1.6 I can get, save a bit on tax and insurance and enjoy it.
Still worried I'd feel as if I was missing the 1.8 though
I was directing my frustration at snotrag, for his inaccurate comments Sorry Hornetrider, I didn't mean to annoy you, just trying to find out.
I'm not looking for it to blow everything else into the weeds, just worried it would feel sloooooooooooow after a bike, which isn't about straight line either. Its just nice to have a bit of go when you need it. Thanks for that Fran, I'm glad it doesn't feel underpowered.
I may just grab the best 1.6 I can get, save a bit on tax and insurance and enjoy it.
Still worried I'd feel as if I was missing the 1.8 though
In case you don't know, there are two different 1.6 engines. The early ones (pre-94) are best because they have 116bhp. After 95 they only had 90 odd bhp. The early 116bhp engine is lighter than the 1.8 unit, which has 130bhp. Therefore the power to weight ratio is similar in the two cars (pre-94 1.6 and any 1.8).
Edit to add: To illustrate this fact, there is only a .1 or .2 difference in the 0-60 times.
I have a 1.8. In terms of character of the two engines, apparently the 1.6 is revvier, but the 1.8 has more torque.
Edited by hornetrider on Wednesday 29th October 12:26
Right, it appears that may have come across as criticism. Well, its not.
As said, straight line speed is only one facet of the performance of the car, and certainly not the reason why I bought mine.
I am over the moon with mine. it is a fantastic car - its all about balance, keeping it on the boil, neat driving. I love it. The only time you miss power is for opportune overtakes and pulling onto fast flowing motorways.
You just have to stir it along a bit. Once your off the main roads onto the twisties and got the roof down, it feels even faster.
My experience with 1.6's is on test drives and paz rides only - so of ocurse this may have skewed my opinion. I've never had the opportunity to ring the neck of one.
I wanted a 1.8 so I held out for one - The difference between buying a nice example of one or the other is down to how patient you are, it seems. I'm glad I waited.
As said, straight line speed is only one facet of the performance of the car, and certainly not the reason why I bought mine.
I am over the moon with mine. it is a fantastic car - its all about balance, keeping it on the boil, neat driving. I love it. The only time you miss power is for opportune overtakes and pulling onto fast flowing motorways.
You just have to stir it along a bit. Once your off the main roads onto the twisties and got the roof down, it feels even faster.
My experience with 1.6's is on test drives and paz rides only - so of ocurse this may have skewed my opinion. I've never had the opportunity to ring the neck of one.
I wanted a 1.8 so I held out for one - The difference between buying a nice example of one or the other is down to how patient you are, it seems. I'm glad I waited.
I've got a 1.6 (OK mine is newer than you are looking for being 2004) and have driven both 1.8 and 1.6 (early higher bhp model) in the Mk1.
I really don't notice too much difference between the two. and there is not that often that I feel like I need more power. Sometimes, just on overtaking or the like. Generally the 1.6 is fine for me, it's my everyday car.
As was said above, it does like the revs, but once you get used to it, then you realise you can carry the speed through the corner that you need to keep up with others who have much more grunt.
Will just add, whichever one you get, you will love it. I even enjoy my drive to work in the mornings now
I really don't notice too much difference between the two. and there is not that often that I feel like I need more power. Sometimes, just on overtaking or the like. Generally the 1.6 is fine for me, it's my everyday car.
As was said above, it does like the revs, but once you get used to it, then you realise you can carry the speed through the corner that you need to keep up with others who have much more grunt.
Will just add, whichever one you get, you will love it. I even enjoy my drive to work in the mornings now
Ok peeps, who am I going to annoy with my opinions - probably everyone 
The 114bhp 1.6 was available until 93/94 when it was replaced with the 130bhp 1.8 in all markets. There is no 116bhp 1.6 after that date. The 88bhp 1.6 was introduced in some markets in 94 as a low insurance option.
There is a difference in performance between 1.6 & 1.8, not a big difference but it is there. The "official" 0-60 figures were something like 9.1 for the 1.6 and 8.4 for the 1.8 but that's a pointless stat as nobody ever gets near any manufacturer quoted figures on the road. In real driving the 1.8 is a fair bit quicker due to having more torque where it's really needed.
The best Mk1s are the very early 93/94 1.8s as they were pretty much the same weight as the 1.6. It wasn't until later (95?) that additional bracing and safety features were added such as door-bars which raised the weight of the car. Of course you could look at this the other way - that later cars were safer and had a stiffer chassis so better handling & ride as a consequence...
However. If I was buying a Mk1 I'd go for a 1.6. The lack of performance wouldn't bother me as the fun would be in keeping the little 1.6 engine buzzing and trying to hold on to speed rather than just blatting out of corners. The cheaper insurance, tax & fuel costs are a bonus. That might sound a bit odd coming from someone with a 230bhp supercharged Mk2.5 but just because I have all that power it doesn't mean I actually use it all on the road every day. Most of the time I'd be quite happy with 114bhp.
The 114bhp 1.6 was available until 93/94 when it was replaced with the 130bhp 1.8 in all markets. There is no 116bhp 1.6 after that date. The 88bhp 1.6 was introduced in some markets in 94 as a low insurance option.
There is a difference in performance between 1.6 & 1.8, not a big difference but it is there. The "official" 0-60 figures were something like 9.1 for the 1.6 and 8.4 for the 1.8 but that's a pointless stat as nobody ever gets near any manufacturer quoted figures on the road. In real driving the 1.8 is a fair bit quicker due to having more torque where it's really needed.
The best Mk1s are the very early 93/94 1.8s as they were pretty much the same weight as the 1.6. It wasn't until later (95?) that additional bracing and safety features were added such as door-bars which raised the weight of the car. Of course you could look at this the other way - that later cars were safer and had a stiffer chassis so better handling & ride as a consequence...
However. If I was buying a Mk1 I'd go for a 1.6. The lack of performance wouldn't bother me as the fun would be in keeping the little 1.6 engine buzzing and trying to hold on to speed rather than just blatting out of corners. The cheaper insurance, tax & fuel costs are a bonus. That might sound a bit odd coming from someone with a 230bhp supercharged Mk2.5 but just because I have all that power it doesn't mean I actually use it all on the road every day. Most of the time I'd be quite happy with 114bhp.
MX-5 Lazza said:
Ok peeps, who am I going to annoy with my opinions - probably everyone
The 114bhp 1.6 was available until 93/94 when it was replaced with the 130bhp 1.8 in all markets. There is no 116bhp 1.6 after that date. The 88bhp 1.6 was introduced in some markets in 94 as a low insurance option.
There is a difference in performance between 1.6 & 1.8, not a big difference but it is there. The "official" 0-60 figures were something like 9.1 for the 1.6 and 8.4 for the 1.8 but that's a pointless stat as nobody ever gets near any manufacturer quoted figures on the road. In real driving the 1.8 is a fair bit quicker due to having more torque where it's really needed.
The best Mk1s are the very early 93/94 1.8s as they were pretty much the same weight as the 1.6. It wasn't until later (95?) that additional bracing and safety features were added such as door-bars which raised the weight of the car. Of course you could look at this the other way - that later cars were safer and had a stiffer chassis so better handling & ride as a consequence...
However. If I was buying a Mk1 I'd go for a 1.6. The lack of performance wouldn't bother me as the fun would be in keeping the little 1.6 engine buzzing and trying to hold on to speed rather than just blatting out of corners. The cheaper insurance, tax & fuel costs are a bonus. That might sound a bit odd coming from someone with a 230bhp supercharged Mk2.5 but just because I have all that power it doesn't mean I actually use it all on the road every day. Most of the time I'd be quite happy with 114bhp.
Completely agree, however (and not meaning to upset anyone) this is the second time I've seen the 1.6 being referred to as a cheaper tax??? Surely anything over 1500cc is the higher tax bracket. Whilst I agree its cheaper insurance and possibly petrol (depending on how you drive) I can't agree with the 1.6 being cheaper on tax. Not trying to be anal, but just wanted to clear this up..... The 114bhp 1.6 was available until 93/94 when it was replaced with the 130bhp 1.8 in all markets. There is no 116bhp 1.6 after that date. The 88bhp 1.6 was introduced in some markets in 94 as a low insurance option.
There is a difference in performance between 1.6 & 1.8, not a big difference but it is there. The "official" 0-60 figures were something like 9.1 for the 1.6 and 8.4 for the 1.8 but that's a pointless stat as nobody ever gets near any manufacturer quoted figures on the road. In real driving the 1.8 is a fair bit quicker due to having more torque where it's really needed.
The best Mk1s are the very early 93/94 1.8s as they were pretty much the same weight as the 1.6. It wasn't until later (95?) that additional bracing and safety features were added such as door-bars which raised the weight of the car. Of course you could look at this the other way - that later cars were safer and had a stiffer chassis so better handling & ride as a consequence...
However. If I was buying a Mk1 I'd go for a 1.6. The lack of performance wouldn't bother me as the fun would be in keeping the little 1.6 engine buzzing and trying to hold on to speed rather than just blatting out of corners. The cheaper insurance, tax & fuel costs are a bonus. That might sound a bit odd coming from someone with a 230bhp supercharged Mk2.5 but just because I have all that power it doesn't mean I actually use it all on the road every day. Most of the time I'd be quite happy with 114bhp.
205gtinut said:
Completely agree, however (and not meaning to upset anyone) this is the second time I've seen the 1.6 being referred to as a cheaper tax??? Surely anything over 1500cc is the higher tax bracket. Whilst I agree its cheaper insurance and possibly petrol (depending on how you drive) I can't agree with the 1.6 being cheaper on tax. Not trying to be anal, but just wanted to clear this up.....
Was about to mention this myself. All cars registered before 2001 are taxed on engine size , i.e. £120 for =< 1.5L and £185 for >1.5L, so the 1.6 and 1.8 mk1 cost the same to taxEdited by hcanning on Wednesday 29th October 14:01
hcanning said:
205gtinut said:
Completely agree, however (and not meaning to upset anyone) this is the second time I've seen the 1.6 being referred to as a cheaper tax??? Surely anything over 1500cc is the higher tax bracket. Whilst I agree its cheaper insurance and possibly petrol (depending on how you drive) I can't agree with the 1.6 being cheaper on tax. Not trying to be anal, but just wanted to clear this up.....
Was about to mention this myself. All cars registered before 2001 are taxed on engine size , i.e. £120 for =< 1.5L and £185 for >1.5L, so the 1.6 and 1.8 mk1 cost the same to taxEdited by hcanning on Wednesday 29th October 14:01
Whoa !
Snotrag - sorry - prob got a bit too sensitive about your first post!
As for 0-60 times, I can get book times on my other car, but then it's an auto! Way out on the 5, but I'll blame in part a pensionable clutch that doesn't like hard starts.
I don't think there would be all that much difference in running costs, the 1.6 is not a 1.6 in terms of fuel consumption, whenever the question gets asked on here most seem to average (significantly) under 30mpg. Even driving mine with extreme economy measures I can't better 33mpg (may get better now the whole ignition and valve timing is not 8 degrees out, but that's another story about early 1.6 crank keyways...)
Also, beware you will pay a lot more for insuring an import, so a 1.6 import vs a UK 1.8 may be something that decides itself financially the other way than what you'd expect.
Snotrag - sorry - prob got a bit too sensitive about your first post!
As for 0-60 times, I can get book times on my other car, but then it's an auto! Way out on the 5, but I'll blame in part a pensionable clutch that doesn't like hard starts.
I don't think there would be all that much difference in running costs, the 1.6 is not a 1.6 in terms of fuel consumption, whenever the question gets asked on here most seem to average (significantly) under 30mpg. Even driving mine with extreme economy measures I can't better 33mpg (may get better now the whole ignition and valve timing is not 8 degrees out, but that's another story about early 1.6 crank keyways...)
Also, beware you will pay a lot more for insuring an import, so a 1.6 import vs a UK 1.8 may be something that decides itself financially the other way than what you'd expect.
I've driven both and own a Jap 1.6 Mk1. IMO the 1.8 feels torqier (sp?) and more relaxed, some might even say unhurried. By contrast, the 1.6 is not noticeably slower if you are going for it, just a little less tractable at low revs, however it seems to have a more frenetic, rev happy character which again, IMO, suits the little MX5 very well. The 1.8 feels a little too sedate and anodyne to me but heh, drive both and make your own mind up. There's very little in it really.
nakedninja said:
So I'm now officially shopping for a '5, yay!
Just a quick question, which you can probably guess from the title. I'm looking at getting a mk1 and to spend £1600 maximum!
For that money I can get a fair few 1.6s but not many 1.8s. Coming from a motorbike I'm worried I'd miss the grunt with a 1.6 (even with a 1.8, but still), is it worth holding out for a 1.8 or will I not notice the difference from 200cc missing/added? You can of course point in the direction of good examples but don't think I haven't lived in the MX-5 section of the PH classifieds for the last few weeks, eek!
Over to you guys.
I moved over from bikein too, I have to say I have the 1800 & still think it lacks grunt, my 1800 Dodge is as quick, but it's not just about grunt, mx5 s have a feel, a feed back like nothing else iv'e driven.Just a quick question, which you can probably guess from the title. I'm looking at getting a mk1 and to spend £1600 maximum!
For that money I can get a fair few 1.6s but not many 1.8s. Coming from a motorbike I'm worried I'd miss the grunt with a 1.6 (even with a 1.8, but still), is it worth holding out for a 1.8 or will I not notice the difference from 200cc missing/added? You can of course point in the direction of good examples
but don't think I haven't lived in the MX-5 section of the PH classifieds for the last few weeks, eek!Over to you guys.
I was glad I bought an 1800, but I rekon the 1600s are worth havin, so don't let size put you off, you will still love it.
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff