Just drove my first MX5....

Just drove my first MX5....

Author
Discussion

CaptainSlow

Original Poster:

13,179 posts

218 months

Wednesday 12th August 2009
quotequote all

and I love it. Demo'ing a current model 2.0 Sport. It's absolutely great. I'm not sure of the performance figures but how do they compare to the earlier models?

franv8

2,212 posts

244 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
I'll give you an unqualified view (only from what I've heard or read, having not driven a Mk3, but having a Mk 1)

Performance figure wise, the Mk 3 is significantly quicker, Mk 1's certainly tend to be 8-9 second range (think mines more like 10 in real world terms)

In terms of driving, I think the earlier cars are a bit more accessible on the limit.

johnnyboy666

98 posts

184 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
Haha the old performance issue always pops up. I can tell you that the mk3 isn't really any quicker than the mk2. The mk1 1.8 did 0-60 in 8.3, the mk2 1.8 added Varable valve timing and cut the time to 7.9 and the mk3 2.0 is the same 7.9 seconds. Earlier cars tend be regarded as better handling, the mk3 regarded as not as good and suffer from some geo' and suspension issues. The new mk3.5 is meant to be a return to form though with all mk3 issues being sorted so should be a a great car again.

PS just don't tell any mk3 owners that there cars aren't as good as mk1/2s, They don't like it

CaptainSlow

Original Poster:

13,179 posts

218 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
ok doing some research and it looks like the 1.8i from 98-01 has that 0-60 time with the 2.5 a little heavier and slower. I'm thinking about getting one early next year probably a Y or 51 plate 1.8i Sport BRG.

johnnyboy666

98 posts

184 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
Good call. BRG now that's a great colour! You know what they say about great minds and all that...

Howard-

4,958 posts

208 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
I managed a 0-60 of 8.25s (properly measured, flat road) in my mk1 1.6 smile

franv8

2,212 posts

244 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
Not wishing to doubt you - more interested:

How did you do the measurement? That sounds 'quick' - mainly based on you need to get into third to get to 60 (at least you do on mine, without wanting 4 dents in the bonnet!) Or is it modded? (Or perhaps a v strong engine)

One other thing, I'd take the car out and drive it - the normal benchmark figures don't reflect how quick an MX5 can get from A to B - often it's possible to carry some good speed through corners. You don't buy an MX5 for straight line speed!

Howard-

4,958 posts

208 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
I agree that the 0-60 isn't something you compare an MX-5 with, I just fancied giving it a go biggrin I consider it a reasonably quick car up to about 60-70mph smile But then I haven't driven any 400bhp supercars hehe

I used a G-Tech performance accelerometer thing - rather accurate bit of kit.

My engine also dyno'd at 118bhp so yeah I'd say it's a fairly strong example smile Timing is at 14degBTDC etc for a bit more lower torque, I guess all of this plus getting a good launch and gear changes contributed smile

Podie

46,643 posts

281 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
You're all missing the point.

The MX5 isn't about how quick, it's about how good the chassis is...

Herman Toothrot

6,702 posts

204 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
I think mines about 5 seconds if your brutal with the gearbox smile

OnlyMX5ives

1,142 posts

198 months

Thursday 13th August 2009
quotequote all
Though I hate to admit it...

In Autocross the Mk3's tend to beat the Mk1 & 2.

Herman Toothrot

6,702 posts

204 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
OnlyMX5ives said:
Though I hate to admit it...

In Autocross the Mk3's tend to beat the Mk1 & 2.
yep, once lowered to correct height & geometry done they are supposed to be better than the older cars.

tuttle

3,427 posts

243 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
OnlyMX5ives said:
Though I hate to admit it...

In Autocross the Mk3's tend to beat the Mk1 & 2.
Afraid it may be true. I seem to remember seeing 5th gear eons ago, where VBH did a head to head with a Mk1 vs Mk3 around Anglesea. The Mk3 won by over 1 sec.
She did "prefer" the Mk1 though said she felt "much more connected to it".

Gizmo!

18,150 posts

215 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
tuttle said:
OnlyMX5ives said:
Though I hate to admit it...

In Autocross the Mk3's tend to beat the Mk1 & 2.
Afraid it may be true. I seem to remember seeing 5th gear eons ago, where VBH did a head to head with a Mk1 vs Mk3 around Anglesea. The Mk3 won by over 1 sec.
She did "prefer" the Mk1 though said she felt "much more connected to it".
She also spun the Mk3 a couple of times.
And whinged a lot about the Mk1 not having PAS. hehe

MX-5 Lazza

7,952 posts

225 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
Grip & handling are very different things. MX5's have never been about grip levels just as they've never been about performance.

Each iteration of the MX5 has tweaked the suspension and given the car more grip - A Mk2 has more grip than a Mk1, Mk2.5 more than a Mk2 and now the Mk3 being a completely new car has more grip than the lot.

Handling is about more than just grip though. A Mk1 gives far more feedback than any later versions. Mk2/2.5 is easier to drive on the limits as the softer suspension allows more control when you are running out of grip. Mk3 has less feedback than previous versions but also has a much better ride.

So if you just want to compare lap times each new version should cut a bit of the time of the previous one. But on the road you'll be having more fun in a Mk1 because you'll be able to feel exactly how much grip there is at each wheel.

MX-5 Lazza

7,952 posts

225 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
tuttle said:
OnlyMX5ives said:
Though I hate to admit it...

In Autocross the Mk3's tend to beat the Mk1 & 2.
Afraid it may be true. I seem to remember seeing 5th gear eons ago, where VBH did a head to head with a Mk1 vs Mk3 around Anglesea. The Mk3 won by over 1 sec.
She did "prefer" the Mk1 though said she felt "much more connected to it".
The Mk1 was a '96 1.6 so would have been a poverty spec with the 88bhp engine wink

Gizmo!

18,150 posts

215 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
MX-5 Lazza said:
tuttle said:
OnlyMX5ives said:
Though I hate to admit it...

In Autocross the Mk3's tend to beat the Mk1 & 2.
Afraid it may be true. I seem to remember seeing 5th gear eons ago, where VBH did a head to head with a Mk1 vs Mk3 around Anglesea. The Mk3 won by over 1 sec.
She did "prefer" the Mk1 though said she felt "much more connected to it".
The Mk1 was a '96 1.6 so would have been a poverty spec with the 88bhp engine wink
Are you sure?
I only saw it the other day on Dave, and I'm pretty certain it was a 1.8 base model like mine... it has the brace bar behind the front seats.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eZNnVrVUAQ

MX-5 Lazza

7,952 posts

225 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
I'm not sure why I thought it was a 1.6. I seem to remember a discussion about it on the OC forum at the time but can't remember much about it.

CaptainSlow

Original Poster:

13,179 posts

218 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
I'm thinking about getting a mark 2 Sport version, they seem to be priced about £500 more than 1.8 s models...is it worth the extra?

Evangelion

7,911 posts

184 months

Friday 14th August 2009
quotequote all
Gizmo! said:
... it has the brace bar behind the front seats ...
Can you talk about 'front seats' in an MX-5? confused