Discussion
Sounds like the new electric steering is not too bad
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/mazda/mx-5/fir...
which is good news.
This car is looking to be a good replacement for the old one.
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/mazda/mx-5/fir...
which is good news.
This car is looking to be a good replacement for the old one.
Mr-B said:
elvismiggell said:
Mine was;
Sent on 2nd June.
For Sunday 28th.
From a Louise Symonds.
No phone number on it.
Same as mine.Sent on 2nd June.
For Sunday 28th.
From a Louise Symonds.
No phone number on it.
Anyway tickets arrived today, although according to letter there were items missing, badge and wristband, phoned them and it seems I got the wrong covering letter and I shouldn't need them. Covering letter mentions breakfast and lunch
but if it's the wrong letter does that now not apply 
Mafioso said:
Lovely pic. So how was it to drive?
Not my pic but I think I drove the same car on Sunday. I also drove my '92 NA to Goodwood and back so have a good point of comparison. It is just like an NA only with 25 years of refinement and with all the things that you'd like to see improved. Basic handling, steering feel and balance is near identical.My plus one is an NA owner too. He got one of the red 1.5s (I think they were quiet so offered him a drive too). He said the same - just like his NA, but with 25 years of refinement and all mod cons.
I got a 2.0 as that's what I've preordered. I have no real frame of reference (woeful car history thus far, this will be my first 'fun' car) but I thought it was great. Tractable, light, easy. Surprising amount of torque lower down the rev range and accelerating in higher gears was fine. 70-80 in 5th gear on the straight was dispatched with comfortably which seems a good indicator for the boring motorway commute.
Comfortable too - I was worried having heard that height adjustment was done by sliding the seat back and forth might leave me sitting uncomfortably high (I'm only 5'7") but it actually felt like a very decent driving position.
Not sure what else folks might want to know, but happy to try and answer any questions.
I got a 2.0 as that's what I've preordered. I have no real frame of reference (woeful car history thus far, this will be my first 'fun' car) but I thought it was great. Tractable, light, easy. Surprising amount of torque lower down the rev range and accelerating in higher gears was fine. 70-80 in 5th gear on the straight was dispatched with comfortably which seems a good indicator for the boring motorway commute.
Comfortable too - I was worried having heard that height adjustment was done by sliding the seat back and forth might leave me sitting uncomfortably high (I'm only 5'7") but it actually felt like a very decent driving position.
Not sure what else folks might want to know, but happy to try and answer any questions.
I drove it yesterday at the Festival Of Speed.
I've been reserving judgement on the MK4 until I had actually driven it. Maybe because the media raved about the MK3 when it was first launched yet I never got on with it. Whilst it was a great car there was just something about it that wasn't an MX-5 and I can't put my finger on exactly what that is.
When the MK4 pictures were released in September last year I must admit I wasn't impressed, the styling wasn't quite right. However over time I admit it has grown on me. Having seen it in the flesh it's looks much better than it does in pictures and is also a fair bit smaller than the MK3. From sitting in the drivers seat you can feel the Mazda gram policy in action and whilst it's very light to the touch it still feels very solid. There are some oddities like the fact it doesn't have a glovebox but then there are storage compartments behind the seats which more than make up for that. Driving position is spot on, pedal spacing is very good for heel and toe and the everything is within easy reach, even for a short-arse like me.
Driving feel is very much on the money. The gearbox has improved even more on the rifle bolt feel that MX-5's are famous for and the engine (1.5 in this case) felt every bit as revvy as the MK1 1.6. In laymans terms it dynamically felt like a MK1 and really has harnessed what made the MK1 so good.
I had absolutely zero intention of buying one yesterday morning. Then I drove it and will now be spending the next few nights diving down the back of the sofa looking for spare change.
I've been reserving judgement on the MK4 until I had actually driven it. Maybe because the media raved about the MK3 when it was first launched yet I never got on with it. Whilst it was a great car there was just something about it that wasn't an MX-5 and I can't put my finger on exactly what that is.
When the MK4 pictures were released in September last year I must admit I wasn't impressed, the styling wasn't quite right. However over time I admit it has grown on me. Having seen it in the flesh it's looks much better than it does in pictures and is also a fair bit smaller than the MK3. From sitting in the drivers seat you can feel the Mazda gram policy in action and whilst it's very light to the touch it still feels very solid. There are some oddities like the fact it doesn't have a glovebox but then there are storage compartments behind the seats which more than make up for that. Driving position is spot on, pedal spacing is very good for heel and toe and the everything is within easy reach, even for a short-arse like me.
Driving feel is very much on the money. The gearbox has improved even more on the rifle bolt feel that MX-5's are famous for and the engine (1.5 in this case) felt every bit as revvy as the MK1 1.6. In laymans terms it dynamically felt like a MK1 and really has harnessed what made the MK1 so good.
I had absolutely zero intention of buying one yesterday morning. Then I drove it and will now be spending the next few nights diving down the back of the sofa looking for spare change.
Compared to the classic Ferrari's Chris Evans is used to driving I'd say yes it probably is. But I thought it sounded great, still has the peppy classic british roadster sound track and the engine is quite revvy. I only drove the 1.5 though, perhaps the 2.0 is a little lazier? I'm working on getting my hands on a 2.0 for a few days so if that happens I will report back.
Really enjoyed my spin round the track in it quite a fun little thing. Steering seemed really light initially (seemed as light as the people carrier thing we did the first sighting laps in) how does that compare to older MX5's? Is such light steering a thing with very modern cars/electric steering? Nothing to compare it to having never driven any Mx5 before now, just curious. Still going to book a test drive with my local dealer anyway to see how it fairs on our billiard table smooth roads (joke!)
As to the looks, I really liked it when I saw it on the live streaming launch many months ago and think it's the best looking of any of the generations, looks just as good in the metal too.
As to the looks, I really liked it when I saw it on the live streaming launch many months ago and think it's the best looking of any of the generations, looks just as good in the metal too.
My thoughts so far, having not driven one but had a real good poke around at Goodwood.
- Its perfectly sized. Taller than the original, as all new cars are tall, but still lovely and compact and shrinks around you. Cabin feels brill and snug, very much 'in' not 'on'.
- Its beautifully engineered, as usual. Things like the 1 piece rear panel, the way all the surfaces meet, the trims etc.
Interesting that the windscreen frame is now covered with a 3-pc plastic panel - presumably there is a very high strength (tubular or pressed) structure under there, and its easier to put cosmetic panels over the top. Shutlines very good. Paint was very orange peely on the stand cars, just the same as nearly every mainstream modern car though. At least the (substantial) plastic body panels appear the same colour as the metal panels.
- The car is 6 sided - it has very defined cut off corners at the back (less so at the front). The boot is deep, but with a quite small opening - this no doubt helps with the stiffness of the structure, and the cut-off corners move weight towards the COG - weight outside the wheelbase at the extremes is the worst place to put it. Same at the front with the very slim headlights and lowered bonnet line.
- Hood seems even better than the Mk3 - smaller, even easier action.
- The old line about the side repeaters being the only thing that carried across to the Mk3 is a lie - they, and the new car, use the same injection moulded rubber stopper in the door jamb as my 1993 car
(nerd alert, even the promo staff on the stand looked at me funny when I was poking that).
- I really want to have a look underneath one and under the bonnet. The shape of the floor pan suggests theres some very tight packaging going on under the floor, the engine is mounted very far back and into the wide transmission tunnel.
- It looks even better in the flesh than photos.
I have a 2.5hr test drive booked in one in August, I can't wait. I've never, ever, ever considered buying a new or even nearly new car, not one bit. But this is the closest anything has ever got to swaying me so far.
- Its perfectly sized. Taller than the original, as all new cars are tall, but still lovely and compact and shrinks around you. Cabin feels brill and snug, very much 'in' not 'on'.
- Its beautifully engineered, as usual. Things like the 1 piece rear panel, the way all the surfaces meet, the trims etc.
Interesting that the windscreen frame is now covered with a 3-pc plastic panel - presumably there is a very high strength (tubular or pressed) structure under there, and its easier to put cosmetic panels over the top. Shutlines very good. Paint was very orange peely on the stand cars, just the same as nearly every mainstream modern car though. At least the (substantial) plastic body panels appear the same colour as the metal panels.
- The car is 6 sided - it has very defined cut off corners at the back (less so at the front). The boot is deep, but with a quite small opening - this no doubt helps with the stiffness of the structure, and the cut-off corners move weight towards the COG - weight outside the wheelbase at the extremes is the worst place to put it. Same at the front with the very slim headlights and lowered bonnet line.
- Hood seems even better than the Mk3 - smaller, even easier action.
- The old line about the side repeaters being the only thing that carried across to the Mk3 is a lie - they, and the new car, use the same injection moulded rubber stopper in the door jamb as my 1993 car
(nerd alert, even the promo staff on the stand looked at me funny when I was poking that). - I really want to have a look underneath one and under the bonnet. The shape of the floor pan suggests theres some very tight packaging going on under the floor, the engine is mounted very far back and into the wide transmission tunnel.
- It looks even better in the flesh than photos.
I have a 2.5hr test drive booked in one in August, I can't wait. I've never, ever, ever considered buying a new or even nearly new car, not one bit. But this is the closest anything has ever got to swaying me so far.
Saturday morning. matt1269 said:
I also got offered a place on the 'VIP' event.
All I did was give my e-mail address to the chap on the Mazda stand at Goodwood. Would like to attend, but South Wales to Yorkshire is a bit of a trek!
Would have thought South Wales to Gloucester is do-able? Or have all the Gloucester slots gone?All I did was give my e-mail address to the chap on the Mazda stand at Goodwood. Would like to attend, but South Wales to Yorkshire is a bit of a trek!
Gassing Station | Mazda MX5/Roadster/Miata | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff