1.5 v 2.0 Used RF Road Use
Discussion
Hi. I am pretty new to forums. I daily a Tesla M3 Performance and so am used to acceleration and instant torque. Over the last two years I have been able to buy sports cars. I had a 987 Gen 2 Cayman and then a GR Yaris. Both were great in different ways but I found them too quick for UK roads. I want a car which is fun at legal speeds. I am thinking MX5, GR86 or Alpine but the MX5 has the open air element to make it more special. I fear the Alpine would too quick. I am choosing between a post 2018 RF 2.0 with the reworked engine and the LSD/ Bilsteins etc and maybe an older 1.5. We are looking at a £6k difference in price . I have ruled out the pre 2018 2l. This is a weekend car or one to use for a nice work trip where the journey would be fun. I want it to be reliable and involving. Does the 1.5 do the job? I can afford a recent. 2.0 but would prefer to save the cash. Thoughts please. Anyone had both?
I've driven both, multiple times as when I had my 2013 NC the dealer was always trying to get me to upgrade. My takeaway was that the 2.0 was ridiculously fast and almost too much for the chassis.
Fast forward to earlier this year and I decided to get an ND. Looked at both engines but in the end went for a 1.5 Sport Nav. The thing I love most about it is that I can feel like I'm thrashing it without going too fast for the roads or conditions. So I'd recommend the 1.5 , as my usage mirrors what you say you'll use the car for. Like you, if I'd gone for a 2.0 I'd have wanted a later one and I think I'd have resented having the additional money needed to get one tied up in a car I'm using only occasionally.
Fast forward to earlier this year and I decided to get an ND. Looked at both engines but in the end went for a 1.5 Sport Nav. The thing I love most about it is that I can feel like I'm thrashing it without going too fast for the roads or conditions. So I'd recommend the 1.5 , as my usage mirrors what you say you'll use the car for. Like you, if I'd gone for a 2.0 I'd have wanted a later one and I think I'd have resented having the additional money needed to get one tied up in a car I'm using only occasionally.
I bought a 2019 2.0 RF.
I haven't tried a 1.5 but the 2.0 is still slightly soft so I imagine the 1.5 would be largely inferior in every way.
The ND2 also has useful things like reach-adjustable steering and two-stage opening doors so it's easier to get out.
I read a fair few tests and in head to heads, they always chose the 2.0 even if the compression ration makes it sound a bit gruff.
However, I still find the 2.0 a little underpowered even with 182hp and while the higher redline sounds good in theory, it can take a while to wring it out, due to the lack of power.
If the steering adjustment and doors aren't critical, the 160hp ND2 may be a good compromise. Plenty of low mile mint cars about.
All that said, I have seen ND MX5s for under £9000. I think the main issue is blocked drain holes, leading to leaks and the window regulators like to let go. Always check the underside as the paint is lamentably thin and the discs like to corrode but are cheap and easy enough to replace.
I haven't tried a 1.5 but the 2.0 is still slightly soft so I imagine the 1.5 would be largely inferior in every way.
The ND2 also has useful things like reach-adjustable steering and two-stage opening doors so it's easier to get out.
I read a fair few tests and in head to heads, they always chose the 2.0 even if the compression ration makes it sound a bit gruff.
However, I still find the 2.0 a little underpowered even with 182hp and while the higher redline sounds good in theory, it can take a while to wring it out, due to the lack of power.
If the steering adjustment and doors aren't critical, the 160hp ND2 may be a good compromise. Plenty of low mile mint cars about.
All that said, I have seen ND MX5s for under £9000. I think the main issue is blocked drain holes, leading to leaks and the window regulators like to let go. Always check the underside as the paint is lamentably thin and the discs like to corrode but are cheap and easy enough to replace.
Edited by LuS1fer on Monday 2nd December 15:21
LuS1fer said:
I bought a 2019 2.0 RF.
I haven't tried a 1.5 but the 2.0 is still slightly soft so I imagine the 1.5 would be largely inferior in every way.
The ND2 also has useful things like reach-adjustable steering and two-stage opening doors so it's easier to get out.
I read a fair few tests and in head to heads, they always chose the 2.0 even if the compression ration makes it sound a bit gruff.
However, I still find the 2.0 a little underpowered even with 182hp and while the higher redline sounds good on theory, it can take a while to wring it out.
If the steering adjustment and doors aren't critical, the 160hp ND2 may be a good compromise. Plenty of low mile mint cars about.
I would say get either the later 182 bhp 2.0 or a 1.5, the 160 bhp 2.0 is characterless and worth avoiding imo.I haven't tried a 1.5 but the 2.0 is still slightly soft so I imagine the 1.5 would be largely inferior in every way.
The ND2 also has useful things like reach-adjustable steering and two-stage opening doors so it's easier to get out.
I read a fair few tests and in head to heads, they always chose the 2.0 even if the compression ration makes it sound a bit gruff.
However, I still find the 2.0 a little underpowered even with 182hp and while the higher redline sounds good on theory, it can take a while to wring it out.
If the steering adjustment and doors aren't critical, the 160hp ND2 may be a good compromise. Plenty of low mile mint cars about.
I had the ND 1.5, nice car, and there is a certain pleasure to be had from working a small engine hard in a lightweight bodyshell. The handling was poor close to the limit, as I found out to my cost, therefore if going down the MX-5 route I would suggest investing in a suspension upgrade. Of the other options, the base Alpine model appeals, though personally I would miss a manual gearbox. The GR86 is supposed to be sorted in every way.
I've owned both. An early 1.5 and currently a 2020 2.0. Both soft tops though.
The 1.5 was commendable for its purity and I preferred the even smaller 16 inch wheels it came on. It's was extremely soft suspension wise though. The 1.5 didn't come with Bilstein suspension or an LSD, not sure if that may have changed at some point? The steering was also downright odd in that there was very little self-centering, yet also very little feel. I think that was possibly a "feature" of it being a very early ND.
The 2.0 is much better but not perfect, especially out of the box. I've upgraded the suspension to Eibachs springs which has improved things massively but I'd still like less body roll so am looking into stiffer roll bars now. The steering now self-centers like a normal car but it's still lacking in ultimate feel. The engine is a real highlight, basically the only high revving non-turbo engine still in production.
In summary, I'd definitely go for the 2.0. The 1.5 is nice in theory but a little too compromised, ironically more so in the suspension department than the engine which is fine.
The 1.5 was commendable for its purity and I preferred the even smaller 16 inch wheels it came on. It's was extremely soft suspension wise though. The 1.5 didn't come with Bilstein suspension or an LSD, not sure if that may have changed at some point? The steering was also downright odd in that there was very little self-centering, yet also very little feel. I think that was possibly a "feature" of it being a very early ND.
The 2.0 is much better but not perfect, especially out of the box. I've upgraded the suspension to Eibachs springs which has improved things massively but I'd still like less body roll so am looking into stiffer roll bars now. The steering now self-centers like a normal car but it's still lacking in ultimate feel. The engine is a real highlight, basically the only high revving non-turbo engine still in production.
In summary, I'd definitely go for the 2.0. The 1.5 is nice in theory but a little too compromised, ironically more so in the suspension department than the engine which is fine.
ZesPak said:
On a sidenote, the UK is the only place in Europe now that still offers the 2L new. Second hand prices are already starting to stagnate on it on the continent.
If you want a 2L, get the later 184hp ones.
Not too sure about that If you want a 2L, get the later 184hp ones.
RF:
Soft top:
Edited by Earthdweller on Monday 30th December 12:27
I stand corrected.
Not available in Germany, Netherlands, Belgium or France though.
I know they stopped the 2.0L in Europe as it's 155g CO2 and it's a relatively popular car for Mazda, hence it would weigh on them.
Maybe something to do with production and logistics of RHD cars? Not bothering with LHD cars in Europe anymore and Ireland just being a "logistical" part of the UK region for Mazda, with sales numbers not weighing that much on their total?
Iirc the US and Canada has never had anything but the 2L?
Not available in Germany, Netherlands, Belgium or France though.
I know they stopped the 2.0L in Europe as it's 155g CO2 and it's a relatively popular car for Mazda, hence it would weigh on them.
Maybe something to do with production and logistics of RHD cars? Not bothering with LHD cars in Europe anymore and Ireland just being a "logistical" part of the UK region for Mazda, with sales numbers not weighing that much on their total?
Iirc the US and Canada has never had anything but the 2L?
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff