Does the MX-5 feel underpowered?

[HaylingJag]

trackerjack said:

I am just loving the comments about the wives not liking the speedier types of car.

Thirty five years ago I had a TR4 and was courting Diane my better half and I drove it carefully so as not to frighten her, after two weeks of this she turned to me and said "Does this thing go?" at which point I accelerated and hung the tail on a few corners and asked "do you want me to slow down now?" to which she replied "no keep it up".
Ever since then she has sat alongside me for track days and mad days, plus she drives whatever I have on track days too.
She is now a driving instructor and our daughter races a Porsche and was the 2013 BRSCC production Boxster champion! So you see the females in my house know more about driving than I do..............but I can beat the missus on track easily but not my little girl.

funny thing is my Mrs drives an XKR, 370 bhp rwd etc etc, hooned her XJ-r round Goodwood and has done Bedford, Castle, and Abingdon in the standard 5, no problems, she has Witchy feelings about the Turbo'd 5..............

D

[trackerjack]

Perhaps we should have a nutty female thread to pay homage to the girls with pep!

I wont let my daughter drive my blown MX5 special on track because she is a typical racer................pedal to the metal.

[clarki]

My misses drives a 2013 pdk'd 981S - eats the MX5 alive...and the boy racers in the RS/GTiwhatevers, the look on some of their faces is often priceless - and without even breaking sweet tbh.

But remember folks, it's still only a car, no matter how much you spend on it or how fast it goes.

[Token Jock]

This is an interesting subject, I like my performance cars and have had some interesting metal & fiberglass over the years and during this time my wife has had a Mk2 1.8 MX5 for 12.5years and 3mths ago changed it for a Mk3.5 Sport tech Soft top

Yes I can see why some folk think the MX5 is under-powered, personally I do,and I wish Mazda would make a 200-220hp version because I believe it would sell.

However I really enjoy driving my wife's MX5 as I appreciate the great steering feel, gear change and biddable chassis that invites you to play. These attributes count very highly on my agenda for driving enjoyment

So in my household, the MX5 may be the lowest powered but that in no way has ever detracted from it being being fun to drive nor feeling alive beneath you.

To me the MX5 is a great car and always will be

[Flip Martian]

Which backs up what most owners say, to be fair. Not fast but fun. A sentiment I would agree with. I do wish it had a bit more "oomph" - my 2.2 diesel Mazda 3 has far more power than my 2.0 Sport - but as a drive, its such great fun. 700 miles up to the Lake District last week and back over 4 days; loved every minute.

[otolith]

The Mrs eventually traded her MX-5 in for a 350Z because she wanted more performance...

[feef]

otolith said:

The Mrs eventually traded her MX-5 in for a 350Z because she wanted more performance...

I just stuck a supercharger on mine. I could have changed up to a 'better' car, but I actually quite like the sleeperish nature of my little '5 now

The downside (if you could call it that) is that I don't see it stopping at it's current 190bhp, but equally I don't want to spoil how it drives by turning it into an unmanageable monster.

(Although I DO think a Maserati 4200 engine and drivetrain would be a nice, and so far unique engine swap)

[otolith]

I did suggest the supercharger option, but she'd had the '5 for quite a while and I think she fancied a change.

[MX-5 Lazza]

With an SC it doesn't become an unmanageable monster at any power level. Mine has over 240bhp but I still have loads of traction & grip. Being an SC the power is available all the time so that means it's easy to feather the throttle mid corner, just like driving a stock engine but with more power.

[otolith]

The power thing is an impediment to my attempts to persuade her to buy a GT86. Of course, you can get those supercharged as well...

[MLH]

I picked up a 1.8 NA a few years back and like has been said it felt nippy enough but pretty gutless at higher speeds.

This was then stripped down for an Exocet build. Once that was done it felt much quicker but still not as quick as i would have liked so i carried out a turbo conversion. It now has approx 240bhp and weighs 600kg and quite frankly scares me stless! I use, regularly, maybe 60% of the power as its quite a hand full.

My point? Sometimes more power doesnt necessarily mean more fun.

[Mandalore]

MLH said:

I picked up a 1.8 NA a few years back and like has been said it felt nippy enough but pretty gutless at higher speeds.

This was then stripped down for an Exocet build. Once that was done it felt much quicker but still not as quick as i would have liked so i carried out a turbo conversion. It now has approx 240bhp and weighs 600kg and quite frankly scares me stless! I use, regularly, maybe 60% of the power as its quite a hand full.

My point? Sometimes more power doesnt necessarily mean more fun.

That last, is a good point.

[Pit Pony]

our mk1 has JUST 90 bhp but It's not slow. It's under geared for motorways, reving it's nuts off at 70 mph, but that's were the fun starts in top, it has bags of acceleration to 100 in top. Not that I've taken it on the motorway much. It's great on a decent fast A road, or slow B road.

[sbird]

Got in my Mk2 for the first time in 2 weeks. It was even sloooooooooooower than I remembered, but fun none-the-less

~240 bhp in a Mk3 is pretty reasonable though. My guess is that 200 bhp/tonne is probably about the sweet spot for usable, fun power.

[casbar]

We bought a new 2.0 sport in 2008. Have had it since. Love the car, its quick enough, had it lowered and setup correctly, handles brilliantly. Not as quick as my Caterham (haven't got that anymore, binned it at Castle Combe) but love the 5, and it doesn't cost a fortune to insure and service. Thinking about the 2015 MX5 now, but will wait until they have been out a while before we try one

[GravelBen]

MLH said:

My point? Sometimes more power doesnt necessarily mean more fun.

Having had a fairly standard 1.6 Mk1 and a 250+bhp turbo Mk1, I'd have to agree - looking back I don't think I could honestly call either more fun than the other, just different types of fun.

[MX-5 Lazza]

GravelBen said:

MLH said:

My point? Sometimes more power doesn't necessarily mean more fun.

Having had a fairly standard 1.6 Mk1 and a 250+bhp turbo Mk1, I'd have to agree - looking back I don't think I could honestly call either more fun than the other, just different types of fun.

Agreed. My 240bhp SC Mk2.5 is great fun on road and on track. Our old 114bhp (barely) Mk1 1.6 was also great fun on track, possibly more fun on the right track (such as Silverstone Stowe or Abingdon Airfield). It was only bearable on the road but that was because we stripped out all the creature comforts making it a noisy & uncomfortable place to be.

[Buff Mchugelarge]

My old 1.8 mk1 never felt underpowered, more than quick enough!

My new mk2 1.6 did feel a little flat at first but I've just changed the HT leads and plugs after a it developed a small misfire and its transformed!? A lot more revvy and eager. Much more fun and like the 1.6 mx5 has always been described!
Happy me

[Mike22233]

Buff Mchugelarge said:

My old 1.8 mk1 never felt underpowered, more than quick enough!

My new mk2 1.6 did feel a little flat at first but I've just changed the HT leads and plugs after a it developed a small misfire and its transformed!? A lot more revvy and eager. Much more fun and like the 1.6 mx5 has always been described!
Happy me

Really, I find it gutless on overtakes, especially if you've driven something quick like supercharged exige/evo.

[Flip Martian]

Does depend a bit on what gear you're in - I find mine wakes up a bit when overtaking if I drop down first and push it. Likes being revved. But clearly next to more powerful cars it won't compare anyway.