Discussion
JulesV said:
Yes, she has chosen a 1.5 Sport Nav.
Awesome, hope you get it soon. Good luck!300bhp/ton said:
Not convinced it'll save much weight tbh. Maybe more cost.
Personally I think this is going to be something I won't like about it. I'm short, so need the seat forward, but I don't want it raised!!!! I want it the height it is further back, else you hit your knees on the dash/steering column cowl.
I'm 5'7" and found it ok. I was more worried about not being able to adjust the wheel much but it all seemed ok in the end.Personally I think this is going to be something I won't like about it. I'm short, so need the seat forward, but I don't want it raised!!!! I want it the height it is further back, else you hit your knees on the dash/steering column cowl.
elvismiggell said:
JulesV said:
Yes, she has chosen a 1.5 Sport Nav.
Awesome, hope you get it soon. Good luck!300bhp/ton said:
Not convinced it'll save much weight tbh. Maybe more cost.
Personally I think this is going to be something I won't like about it. I'm short, so need the seat forward, but I don't want it raised!!!! I want it the height it is further back, else you hit your knees on the dash/steering column cowl.
I'm 5'7" and found it ok. I was more worried about not being able to adjust the wheel much but it all seemed ok in the end.Personally I think this is going to be something I won't like about it. I'm short, so need the seat forward, but I don't want it raised!!!! I want it the height it is further back, else you hit your knees on the dash/steering column cowl.
MX-5 designed for Asians by Asians
Glad to see people like it so much and it's not a raspberry. I think the new look is great, will be good to see it in the flesh. Interior is a step up too. I still wish they stuck with the hydraulic steering though from what I have read,even though new is pretty good it seems. The mpg definitely seems to be better than the NC.
Chris harris will be reviewing it soon, will be interesting to watch what he says, he seems to have been corrupted with power. Hopefully he will test the 1.5 and the 16 inch wheels will win him over.
Chris harris will be reviewing it soon, will be interesting to watch what he says, he seems to have been corrupted with power. Hopefully he will test the 1.5 and the 16 inch wheels will win him over.
Looks like the Fiat 124 version will be offered with more power:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motor-shows-gene...
Might make it an interesting proposition....
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/motor-shows-gene...
Might make it an interesting proposition....
Drove the 1.5 and 2.0 back to back today. Spent a couple of hours in the 2.0 and then a short blast in the 1.5 to compare...
Sweet spot for both me and my co-driver was the 2.0 without the bilsteins. The 1.5 did rev a lot more easily and clearly had to be worked a lot harder to make pace, but torque of the 2.0 is what sold that engine to me, even if that car didn't really become too 'alive' until high speeds. And too easy to hit the rev limit at about 7.5k in the 2.0.
The bilsteins were rather hard and my co-driver found that they made the car wander, with active steering input required to keep it going where it was pointing. Personally, I didn't find this, but I'm coming from a mk1 with the original Tiens on it, so I'd always considered the fidgety nature of the car its essential characteristic. The chassis was *a lot* stiffer than my mk1, with no noticeable scuttle shake.
One disappointment was the lack of exhaust volume and the lack of exhaust note on the 1.5. Even though the 2.0 is supposed to have the sound pipe (forgot to open the bonnet to have a look...), it had a really nice burble at idle that's missing from the 1.5
A big issue (for some) will be the pedal placement. I didn't notice this when driving, but my co-driver who's taller than me pointed it out - basically, the pedals are offset to the right by quite a large amount. The clutch pedal - not the brake - is in the centreline of the seat and the wheel (which are perfectly aligned). Like I say, I didn't notice, but she found it really unpleasant. I did find myself pressing the rather large dead pedal instead of the clutch, which this would explain. I think I would be fine with this, but she didn't share that opinion.
Another disappointment was the 'stitched leather' lower dash which I expected to be soft touch plastic, but every inch of the dashboard was hard, cheap plastic, even the stuff pretending to the leather. The door cards were, but their fake leather were at least vinyl over scrim foam to give some 'squish'. My co-driver found the heating controls cheap and nasty although I thought they were fine. The steering wheel and the lever arm switchgear were fantastic.
An annoyances:
- when lowering or raising the roof, the side windows drop half way, but then stay there. You've got to manually wind them back up.
- the 'whisker' drl lights in the lower bumper switch off at low speeds, so no way to photograph them.
- cup holders get in the way
- the navigation is rather dumb, repeatedly declaring tight bends to be junctions and, at one point, trying to direct us to take a turn off a dual carriageway that didn't exist.
- the lane departure system is really annoying and when you turn it off, you're stuck with an orange light on the dash to remind you that it's off. Flip side is the traction control turns off immediately, with none of this holding down for X seconds nonsense.
But, in short, a 2.0 without the bisteins (and, unfortunately, that will mean coming without the lsd) is my choice. All the representatives point blank refused to acknowledge the possibility of a hard top (even when the light on the dash was pointed out to them), but I still think I'll wait a bit to see what gets revealed to make an informed decision.
Overall, a few niggles, but a great car. Don't see the need for anything more powerful than the 2.0 (i.e. the Fiat proposal) in that chassis.
Will add photos and more thoughts as they come to me. Happy to answer questions.
Sweet spot for both me and my co-driver was the 2.0 without the bilsteins. The 1.5 did rev a lot more easily and clearly had to be worked a lot harder to make pace, but torque of the 2.0 is what sold that engine to me, even if that car didn't really become too 'alive' until high speeds. And too easy to hit the rev limit at about 7.5k in the 2.0.
The bilsteins were rather hard and my co-driver found that they made the car wander, with active steering input required to keep it going where it was pointing. Personally, I didn't find this, but I'm coming from a mk1 with the original Tiens on it, so I'd always considered the fidgety nature of the car its essential characteristic. The chassis was *a lot* stiffer than my mk1, with no noticeable scuttle shake.
One disappointment was the lack of exhaust volume and the lack of exhaust note on the 1.5. Even though the 2.0 is supposed to have the sound pipe (forgot to open the bonnet to have a look...), it had a really nice burble at idle that's missing from the 1.5
A big issue (for some) will be the pedal placement. I didn't notice this when driving, but my co-driver who's taller than me pointed it out - basically, the pedals are offset to the right by quite a large amount. The clutch pedal - not the brake - is in the centreline of the seat and the wheel (which are perfectly aligned). Like I say, I didn't notice, but she found it really unpleasant. I did find myself pressing the rather large dead pedal instead of the clutch, which this would explain. I think I would be fine with this, but she didn't share that opinion.
Another disappointment was the 'stitched leather' lower dash which I expected to be soft touch plastic, but every inch of the dashboard was hard, cheap plastic, even the stuff pretending to the leather. The door cards were, but their fake leather were at least vinyl over scrim foam to give some 'squish'. My co-driver found the heating controls cheap and nasty although I thought they were fine. The steering wheel and the lever arm switchgear were fantastic.
An annoyances:
- when lowering or raising the roof, the side windows drop half way, but then stay there. You've got to manually wind them back up.
- the 'whisker' drl lights in the lower bumper switch off at low speeds, so no way to photograph them.
- cup holders get in the way
- the navigation is rather dumb, repeatedly declaring tight bends to be junctions and, at one point, trying to direct us to take a turn off a dual carriageway that didn't exist.
- the lane departure system is really annoying and when you turn it off, you're stuck with an orange light on the dash to remind you that it's off. Flip side is the traction control turns off immediately, with none of this holding down for X seconds nonsense.
But, in short, a 2.0 without the bisteins (and, unfortunately, that will mean coming without the lsd) is my choice. All the representatives point blank refused to acknowledge the possibility of a hard top (even when the light on the dash was pointed out to them), but I still think I'll wait a bit to see what gets revealed to make an informed decision.
Overall, a few niggles, but a great car. Don't see the need for anything more powerful than the 2.0 (i.e. the Fiat proposal) in that chassis.
Will add photos and more thoughts as they come to me. Happy to answer questions.
I think the issue with the suspension might be because my co-driver normally drives a huge 4x4. I was happy enough with it - it lacks the bounce of the oversprung, worn out coil-overs on my mk1 and I didn't notice the need for input. With the 1.5 you could (briefly!) take your hands off the wheel and it would track true, but with the 2.0 that wasn't the case. The 2 litre we drove had 780 miles on it and, according to the staff, had been driven hard by everyone so far...
DeaconFrost said:
The brochure I had from Mazda suggests the 2.0 non sport does come with the lsd?
Never spotted the roof light on the dashboard when I drove it - nice spot!
There was a blank button to the left of the passenger airbag, seatbelt etc. lights under the a/c controls - the light (or the stencil for it) - is to the far left of that panel, just to the right of the blank switch. Never spotted the roof light on the dashboard when I drove it - nice spot!
I also thought the non sport 2 litre was without LSD and that was what the event staff implied (or at least they didn't contradict me). I now see that the website says otherwise...
Me and a mate took 2.0 Sport Nav and a 1.5 Sport out for extended drive at Bowcliffe Saturday.
Frame of reference - Owned Mk1, Mk2, now own Mk1 turbo. Driven Mk3 2.0 Sport a fair bit but a few years back. Recently had a go in my Parents 1,8 Mk3.
Inside - the biggest improvement. The Tan/Sand interior is really lovely, especially on our black car. Its snug, but fits great. Odd floorline means you might feel your calf resting on the floor, but not a problem. Steering wheel adjusts from way too low, to only just high enough. Seat could be a touch lower but I found a happy medium (I'm 5ft 10 and sit closer to the wheel than most my height). Lots of kit (none of which I would actually want, but thats modern cars for you). Did notice a few marks though, which is unfortunate on cars that had done less than 1000 miles. The gloss door cappings that flow into the front wings are fantastic. Interior mirror is way too big, but cleverly dims when the hood is down. Steering wheel buttons too fiddly. Sunvisors are hard plastic and a bit naff.
Speedo suffers same as nearly all modern cars - scaled wrong. goes to 140mph, completely pointless. The bit your actually interested in is too small, legal to a 3 point fine is a needles width. My only proper complaint. Tacho is great though, nice and big.
Love the nice big floor mounted throttle.
Lane departure system is a pain in the ass, and turning it off means an orange light on the dash.
Nav system was average, neither not sure I'd bother.
Bose, with headrest speakersm, absolutely bangs, if you like your music pumping.
Seats perfect for a road car IMO.
Hood is great, improves further on the Mk3 - forward panel is rigid and has a soft trimmed liner. Very snug when up but quiet and refined, decent size glass window and good visibility.
Outside - looks great, limited colours but you can guarantee in a few years there'll be more choice. Black with tan is the way to go IMO. Black shrinks it and makes it even more aggressive. The alloy wheel designs are all superb and beautifully finished, this has been a Mazda problem before, hope they last well.
Driving - The 1.5 is too slow. Yes its 'revvy', but its not got enough poke. 2.0 is markedly faster - in fact, its surprisingly quick. Good torque, will chirp the tyres into 3rd. Lights the wheels up out of T junctions, revs to redline cleanly, rev limiter is soft at 7 something. Traction system is good and allows a fair amount of wheelspin before acting, and when it does its not too aggressive.
Yes, we drove them hard (as you should).
Rolls a touch in corners, but settles and is typically, beautifully balanced. Steering is light, like a Mk1, but good feel. Not that horrid artifical heavy 'sporty' steering some companies insist on.
On the 17's and Bilsteins its firm but befitting a sports car IMO - its nothing like the awful crashy ride of German cars, so 'firm' is relative. The non Bilstein car on 16's has a very, very good ride - too soft....?
Interesting that 16" wheels get Yoko, 17s get Bridgestone - not sure how much of the extra firmness came from the Bilsteins, or the usually stiff sidewalled Bridgestones.
Big plus for me - the 2.0 is properly rorty. There's an actual, mechanical engine under there, and they've not hidden it. It starts up from cold with a great rasp, surprisingly loud. It sounds fab, they've done a great job there.
With maybe a few subtle mods the 2.0 cars will be an absolute weapon on the track - I can see a very good race car under there!
I reckon a 2.0 SE-L - which gets you the engine, and the LSD, but not the Bilsteins and none of the extraneous gadgets, a fair chunk cheaper than the sport nav.
Definitely get the tan interior though, lovely!
Also to note - it was interesting to talk with others and get their reactions - some found the 1.5 fast enough and the firmer cars too hard - so at least we get choice. For reference I got 28 mpg in a 90 min drive.
Frame of reference - Owned Mk1, Mk2, now own Mk1 turbo. Driven Mk3 2.0 Sport a fair bit but a few years back. Recently had a go in my Parents 1,8 Mk3.
Inside - the biggest improvement. The Tan/Sand interior is really lovely, especially on our black car. Its snug, but fits great. Odd floorline means you might feel your calf resting on the floor, but not a problem. Steering wheel adjusts from way too low, to only just high enough. Seat could be a touch lower but I found a happy medium (I'm 5ft 10 and sit closer to the wheel than most my height). Lots of kit (none of which I would actually want, but thats modern cars for you). Did notice a few marks though, which is unfortunate on cars that had done less than 1000 miles. The gloss door cappings that flow into the front wings are fantastic. Interior mirror is way too big, but cleverly dims when the hood is down. Steering wheel buttons too fiddly. Sunvisors are hard plastic and a bit naff.
Speedo suffers same as nearly all modern cars - scaled wrong. goes to 140mph, completely pointless. The bit your actually interested in is too small, legal to a 3 point fine is a needles width. My only proper complaint. Tacho is great though, nice and big.
Love the nice big floor mounted throttle.
Lane departure system is a pain in the ass, and turning it off means an orange light on the dash.
Nav system was average, neither not sure I'd bother.
Bose, with headrest speakersm, absolutely bangs, if you like your music pumping.
Seats perfect for a road car IMO.
Hood is great, improves further on the Mk3 - forward panel is rigid and has a soft trimmed liner. Very snug when up but quiet and refined, decent size glass window and good visibility.
Outside - looks great, limited colours but you can guarantee in a few years there'll be more choice. Black with tan is the way to go IMO. Black shrinks it and makes it even more aggressive. The alloy wheel designs are all superb and beautifully finished, this has been a Mazda problem before, hope they last well.
Driving - The 1.5 is too slow. Yes its 'revvy', but its not got enough poke. 2.0 is markedly faster - in fact, its surprisingly quick. Good torque, will chirp the tyres into 3rd. Lights the wheels up out of T junctions, revs to redline cleanly, rev limiter is soft at 7 something. Traction system is good and allows a fair amount of wheelspin before acting, and when it does its not too aggressive.
Yes, we drove them hard (as you should).
Rolls a touch in corners, but settles and is typically, beautifully balanced. Steering is light, like a Mk1, but good feel. Not that horrid artifical heavy 'sporty' steering some companies insist on.
On the 17's and Bilsteins its firm but befitting a sports car IMO - its nothing like the awful crashy ride of German cars, so 'firm' is relative. The non Bilstein car on 16's has a very, very good ride - too soft....?
Interesting that 16" wheels get Yoko, 17s get Bridgestone - not sure how much of the extra firmness came from the Bilsteins, or the usually stiff sidewalled Bridgestones.
Big plus for me - the 2.0 is properly rorty. There's an actual, mechanical engine under there, and they've not hidden it. It starts up from cold with a great rasp, surprisingly loud. It sounds fab, they've done a great job there.
With maybe a few subtle mods the 2.0 cars will be an absolute weapon on the track - I can see a very good race car under there!
I reckon a 2.0 SE-L - which gets you the engine, and the LSD, but not the Bilsteins and none of the extraneous gadgets, a fair chunk cheaper than the sport nav.
Definitely get the tan interior though, lovely!
Also to note - it was interesting to talk with others and get their reactions - some found the 1.5 fast enough and the firmer cars too hard - so at least we get choice. For reference I got 28 mpg in a 90 min drive.
Edited by snotrag on Sunday 23 August 20:14
Same conclusion as me, then!
Although I am now torn between that and a 1.5 with an exhaust.
I felt the 2 litre was too fast for the tighter roads at Saturday's Edinburgh event and engine was too good (the car did the work for you). Although I wasn't pushing either car as hard as you.
Completely agree with your comments on noise being the 2 litre's highlight and ride being the non-bilsteined 1.5's, suggesting that the 2 litre without coilovers would be the sweetspot. If only I could reconcile the need for shear speed to get to the fun with that engine. This morning I was thinking that a 1.5 with an aftermarket exhaust would be the way forward.
We did do quite a few standing starts and only the 2 litre gave a real shove in the back. But the 1.5 felt more flowing...
Gah!
Although I am now torn between that and a 1.5 with an exhaust.
I felt the 2 litre was too fast for the tighter roads at Saturday's Edinburgh event and engine was too good (the car did the work for you). Although I wasn't pushing either car as hard as you.
Completely agree with your comments on noise being the 2 litre's highlight and ride being the non-bilsteined 1.5's, suggesting that the 2 litre without coilovers would be the sweetspot. If only I could reconcile the need for shear speed to get to the fun with that engine. This morning I was thinking that a 1.5 with an aftermarket exhaust would be the way forward.
We did do quite a few standing starts and only the 2 litre gave a real shove in the back. But the 1.5 felt more flowing...
Gah!
Edited by dxg on Sunday 23 August 21:02
snotrag said:
Love the nice big floor mounted throttle.
That is the first thing I've read that has put me off the car so far. I hate floor mounted throttles with a passion. Absolutely hated it in the Mini Cooper. Everything else was good but floor mounted throttles just feel wrong.Other than that, I like the sound of the cars from the reviews I've heard so far.
dxg said:
All the representatives point blank refused to acknowledge the possibility of a hard top (even when the light on the dash was pointed out to them), but I still think I'll wait a bit to see what gets revealed to make an informed decision.
Having checked both the 1.5 and 2.0 instrument binnacles and the owners manual, there is NO warning light for a potential hard top. There is a warning light for the Active Bonnet Airbag which looks quite a lot like the MK3 warning light for hood issues, so it might be that both you and the representatives were mistaken. Interesting when I was there that lots of the, er, older generation, appeared to be asking about the likelihood of a hardtop.
Whereas I cannot think of anything worse - the car does not need it. The softtop is tiny, it is fully lined and has a rigid top section anyway, incredibly easy to work (the best yet) and looks great. Very good quality Mohair, and a big, heated glass window.
Whereas I cannot think of anything worse - the car does not need it. The softtop is tiny, it is fully lined and has a rigid top section anyway, incredibly easy to work (the best yet) and looks great. Very good quality Mohair, and a big, heated glass window.
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff