RE: Mazda MX-5: PH Heroes

[Agent Orange]

This isn't a dig - because I do like the MX5 and can see they are fun just personally felt they need more power and the engine sound does nothing for the soul.

So why is it I'm wrong yet so many MX-5 owners are saying they've turbo or super charged their MX-5? Why would you do that if you thought it had enough power? Don't worry I'm not someone who doesn't get modifying having thrown ££££s at the engine of my Corrado VR6 15 years ago and stuck a GSX-R 750 engine in an old 70's Suzuki and attached ZXR-400 USD forks, converted to single swing arm and so on.

But surely this proves the point. MX-5's are great fun cars - but they are lacking in grunt which is why so many turbo them. Or is it those that turbo are missing the point of a MX-5?

Seems to me I'd be one of the guys slapping a turbo on to make it right for me.

[HorneyMX5]

Agent Orange said:

This isn't a dig - because I do like the MX5 and can see they are fun just personally felt they need more power and the engine sound does nothing for the soul.

So why is it I'm wrong yet so many MX-5 owners are saying they've turbo or super charged their MX-5? Why would you do that if you thought it had enough power? Don't worry I'm not someone who doesn't get modifying having thrown ££££s at the engine of my Corrado VR6 15 years ago and stuck a GSX-R 750 engine in an old 70's Suzuki and attached ZXR-400 USD forks, converted to single swing arm and so on.

But surely this proves the point. MX-5's are great fun cars - but they are lacking in grunt which is why so many turbo them. Or is it those that turbo are missing the point of a MX-5?

Seems to me I'd be one of the guys slapping a turbo on to make it right for me.

I'm supercharging mine on Thursday so I can answer this pretty well.

For me the 1.6 MKI has the right amount of power to have fun on the UK's B roads. Sure it'll never win a traffic light drag race with a diesel Astra but once rolling it's plenty pokey enough and you can throw it about with a grin.

Mine however is now seeing more and more track and competition action and for this it needs a bit mor eget up and go for the straight bits. Trackdays in it have been great fun but slightly spoiled by being the slowest thing through the speed traps and therefore spending a lot of time letting cars past. With the added oompphhh of the charger I will no longer be a rolling chicane onthe longer straights. In respect fo sprinting and SOlos then clearly more power, faster car = better times.

[V8RX7]

Agent Orange said:

This isn't a dig - because I do like the MX5 and can see they are fun just personally felt they need more power and the engine sound does nothing for the soul.

So why is it I'm wrong yet so many MX-5 owners are saying they've turbo or super charged their MX-5? Why would you do that if you thought it had enough power?

I came to MX5s from Sierra Cosworths and Integrales.

I ran mine as fairly standard (filter, exhaust, decat) for 2 years BUT I live in the country and overtaking opportunities are few with 130bhp.

With 200+ there are many more.

On a clear open road a std car is actually more fun as you have to wring it's neck and get the changes right to make progress but for sideways fun and to make the most of the few overtaking opportunities then a supercharged car is superb.

My mate who now drives a Porsche Spyder still says that his best ever drive was in a std MX5 chasing me in my supercharged MX5 across Wales.

[browno]

snotrag said:

Exactly this, and its this which is why some people are getting worked up. I

I am a rabid MX5 fan, I'm on my third. I'll sing its praises all day long.

But If I had the money to by an S2000 or an Elise, would I still have my MX-5 (even with its turbo) ? Not a chance.

This is an interesting point - I had a 1991 NA for 2 years, which was my first "toy" car, and during that time, I did loads of work on it and really made it feel great, but I got the itch, and after a search of the classifieds and some man-maths decided to upgrade to a 986 Boxster S. The porsche was a great car - the sound alone was a great change, but the overall picture wasn't so rosy (for me, at least). I had it for a year, during which I needed a full set of tyres (£700), front discs and pads (£250), a radiator (£200), suspension arms all round (£120 per corner) as well as normal servicing. I bought it knowing I would need to do some stuff to keep it good, and wanted to sort the suspension (which did make a big improvement to the feel). I got to the point where I felt it was missing something though, and I still had a list of things that I thought needed improvement (and I bought one that I thought was a good 'un!).

When compared to the MX5, the Boxster feels as though it's set up for safe high-speed stability, and so on the road (without risking your licence), you don't feel as though you are challenging it all. I did a trackday in it, and within a day, I'd got shot brakes (they were fading within 15 minute sessions on decent OE pads and new fluid) and had taken about 3mm off those expensive tyres - I also felt that with my limited capabilities that if I'd tried to take liberties, it would have bitten me.

So I decided it was time to change again and took a relatively big hit on the Boxster and bought a 2006 NC unseen, having not driven one. As soon as I picked it up, I could feel the essence of MX5 in it - it is different, and feels like a newer design, but it is still nimble in a way that (to me, at least), the Boxster never did. I've since improved things further - a first step was a trip to WIM to get it lowered and aligned, which improved the feel a lot.

However, after doing a first trackday in it, I decided that I needed more, and it's had a set of Meister R coilovers fitted and aligned by Paul Rodisson, which really has turned it into what I needed. By varying the damping, it can be firm but comfortable on the road (and is safe and practical enough to use for work and dropping kids off to nursery 3-4 times a week), but adjust it up and it feels great on track. Add in the fact that tyres are cheap (next buy is a set of Federal RSRs for £90ish each), brakes (admittely with uprated pads) have never shown signs of fade, and it's needed nothing other than oil and fuel so far - even with 3 trackdays last year, I couldn't discern any appreciable extra wear on the tyres.

I think for my purposes at the moment, I'd love a caterham, but it is compromised on the road (I doubt I'd get a child seat in, for example?), and the Boxster didn't quite hit the spot either. This is, I think where the balance comes - for outright fun, a caterham or similar would definitely be quicker and likely more fun, for purely road use (or track use with potentially higher bills) then a TVR or porsche would be great, but for something that can do both and that suits my (limited!) abilities, with low running costs, then the mazda is the right tool for the job!

Since everyone else is doing so - here's a shameless pic of mine on track at Blyton:

Edited by browno on Monday 24th February 13:52

[Robert Elise]

snotrag said:

Captain Muppet said:

I've met loads of other MX5 drivers who think it's the best car ever, and it isn't. It's huge fun for tiny money and has no downsides at all, but other cars can be more capable or more fun (although usually for more money).

Exactly this, and its this which is why some people are getting worked up. I

I am a rabid MX5 fan, I'm on my third. I'll sing its praises all day long.

But If I had the money to by an S2000 or an Elise, would I still have my MX-5 (even with its turbo) ? Not a chance.

i have an Elise and MX5 and consider myself lucky to enjoy both. mx5 is front engined and easy to play with, and while any Elise is phenomenal, the mx5 still holds appeal for me. The low budget for the mx5 goes a long way to making it a 'hero', but it is also a great handling car (when sorted). If it had power, noise and a TVR-like interior it would be completely unbeatable, but it doesn't, i agree. TVRs are a fantastic 'event' but they don't handle like a Mazda.

[Agent Orange]

browno said:

I think for my purposes at the moment, I'd love a caterham, but it is compromised on the road (I doubt I'd get a child seat in, for example?)

Yes you can.

http://www.volvopartswebstore.com/products/Booster...

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Caterham-7-Child-Seat-Bo...

[Robert Elise]

browno said:

When compared to the MX5, the Boxster feels as though it's set up for safe high-speed stability, and so on the road (without risking your licence), you don't feel as though you are challenging it all. I did a trackday in it, and within a day, I'd got shot brakes (they were fading within 15 minute sessions on decent OE pads and new fluid) and had taken about 3mm off those expensive tyres - I also felt that with my limited capabilities that if I'd tried to take liberties, it would have bitten me.

I think for my purposes at the moment, I'd love a caterham, but it is compromised on the road (I doubt I'd get a child seat in, for example?), and the Boxster didn't quite hit the spot either. This is, I think where the balance comes - for outright fun, a caterham or similar would definitely be quicker and likely more fun, for purely road use (or track use with potentially higher bills) then a TVR or porsche would be great, but for something that can do both and that suits my (limited!) abilities, with low running costs, then the mazda is the right tool for the job!

Edited by browno on Monday 24th February 13:52

Yes. modern Porsches ARE fantastic engineering, but they don't offer so much fun on the road, or track for that matter.
Caterham is a true hero car too, and given they don't depreciate much or cost much to run they should be the benchmark car on PH.

[the_hood]

redsq01 said:

the_hood said:

Troll?

Eh? I have reviewed my comment and have yet to divine that which is offensive let alone gratuitously so?

Please elaborate

Nothing offensive, gratuitous or otherwise.
In a discussion about an MX5 and possible alternatives you bring up a Ford Focus!?!
It seemed as if that was there to provoke a reaction since it had nothing to do with the thread, hence the 'troll?' comment.

[GTIAlex]

Would a Mk1/Mk2 MX5 be a good way to go after a 205 CTI?

Thinking of selling up when its got 12 months ticket and been trying to think of a suitable replacement.

Pro's of the CTI being,

the engine is a right peach, revs revs and more revs, I love revs.
the looks, I love a good boxy car (the mx5 looks have never reeeally appealed, unless slightly modified)

Con's being

Theres always something wrong with it.
Heavy on the fuel
I always feel like something is about to break.

Decisions decisions.

Iv previously driven and still own a classic mini, so the overall speed isnt a major problem. The 205 is down on a few horses anyway.

[Munter]

GTIAlex said:

Heavy on the fuel

Define heavy. A typical MK1/2 MX5 will do about 30 mpg. I got ever so slightly better MPG out of a 325i.

[GTIAlex]

Munter said:

GTIAlex said:

Heavy on the fuel

Define heavy. A typical MK1/2 MX5 will do about 30 mpg. I got ever so slightly better MPG out of a 325i.

Heavy as in, when commuting in cold weather, can drop to the very low 20's and even high teens. On a dull run it might get 30 if im lucky.

[MG CHRIS]

GTIAlex said:

Munter said:

GTIAlex said:

Heavy on the fuel

Define heavy. A typical MK1/2 MX5 will do about 30 mpg. I got ever so slightly better MPG out of a 325i.

Heavy as in, when commuting in cold weather, can drop to the very low 20's and even high teens. On a dull run it might get 30 if im lucky.

The only time when I saw less than 25 mpg in my 1.6 import was on track even with a tubular manifold/ decat and twin exit back box.

[iloveboost]

Quote:
Priced at a bargain £14,250 in the UK, press reaction in particular was overwhelmingly positive

Really?! That's over £27,000 in 2014 money! All eighties and nineties cars seem to be so overpriced I guess as other countries have becomes richer global volumes have gone up and prices have gone down. Anyway £27k, to me, is a massive amount of money.

Quote:
Spot-on first time around, Mazda has stuck with its successful formula for quarter of a century.

I think it's not surprising that the Mx-5 wasn't changed much and did really well as it never had a real competitor. It's always been the only affordable RWD sportscar/convertible and in this way it's like the 911 out there in it's own market. Even now there's no direct competitor as every German equivalent is heavier and far more expensive. The BRZ/GT86/FRS are close but more expensive coupe only sportscars and if they bring out a convertible, which is unlikely, it will be even more expensive.
Sometimes the Mx-5 seems to be the most popular car no manufacturer wants to build and I hope Kia and Nissan build the road going RWD equivalent of their GT4 Stinger and IDX concept cars. We will see I guess.

[GravelBen]

Agent Orange said:

But surely this proves the point. MX-5's are great fun cars - but they are lacking in grunt which is why so many turbo them. Or is it those that turbo are missing the point of a MX-5?

Seems to me I'd be one of the guys slapping a turbo on to make it right for me.

IMO its not that they need the extra power to be fun, its that its easily available if you want it. Everyone driver/owner has their own preference, and if you're the sort of owner that wants more power then you can get it.

Rather than saying they aren't that great because many people modify them, you could say one of the things that makes them great is how easy they are to modify and set up to suit your taste. Even with no modification at allyou can make some big changes to the handling feel and balance with suspension adjustments.

Having had a standard Mk1 and a fairly hardcore turbo Mk1, I'd probably go closer to standard again next time as my turbo one lost a bit of useability, and I missed being able to chuck the keys to practically anyone and let them see what a sportscar felt like. But I've always been a bit disappointed that they never dropped the 200bhp 2.5 V6 in at the factory!

Edited by GravelBen on Tuesday 25th February 03:29

[Captain Muppet]

Agent Orange said:

This isn't a dig - because I do like the MX5 and can see they are fun just personally felt they need more power and the engine sound does nothing for the soul.

So why is it I'm wrong yet so many MX-5 owners are saying they've turbo or super charged their MX-5? Why would you do that if you thought it had enough power? Don't worry I'm not someone who doesn't get modifying having thrown ££££s at the engine of my Corrado VR6 15 years ago and stuck a GSX-R 750 engine in an old 70's Suzuki and attached ZXR-400 USD forks, converted to single swing arm and so on.

But surely this proves the point. MX-5's are great fun cars - but they are lacking in grunt which is why so many turbo them. Or is it those that turbo are missing the point of a MX-5?

Seems to me I'd be one of the guys slapping a turbo on to make it right for me.

I put a turbo on mine because after a year of competition drifting I needed more power to hold longer slides at higher speeds. I might not have bothered if it cost more than £500 for the turbo.

I found the extra power made it less fun for road driving. Handy for overtaking, but I used to overtake all the time in my 2CV and that was properly slow. I started doing the lazy driving torque lets you get away with, like wafting along in 5th all the time because it's still faster than you need to keep up with traffic.

The fun bit was thrashing it without having to worry about speeding, or the power overcoming the rear wheels. With the turbo it'd occasionally spin the rears in third gear in a straight line, which is fun, but a different kind of fun.

Having had a turbo MX5 I'm not sure whether I'd need a turbo on a replacement for it - I have other things for going fast in. Going fast really wasn't the best thing about the MX5.

[Furyblade_Lee]

I love them. End of.

Have a few quick mad cars, But always enjoy a blat in an MX5 , even a bog standard one.

I have found that if I have to explain what the attraction of driving one is to someone, they probably won't get it anyway, so I don't! When people decide the car is no good just because it has little straight line speed and shove in the back, they are normally in that category.

There is a very simple and basic pleasure to be had by driving any car flat out 100%. Total extraction of every ounce of performance available, not metering out what you can away with on our dodgy roads. Factor in the fact that you would struggle to spend more than £2k on one of the best condition cars in the country, what's not to like?

[redsq01]

the_hood said:

redsq01 said:

the_hood said:

Troll?

Eh? I have reviewed my comment and have yet to divine that which is offensive let alone gratuitously so?

Please elaborate

Nothing offensive, gratuitous or otherwise.
In a discussion about an MX5 and possible alternatives you bring up a Ford Focus!?!
It seemed as if that was there to provoke a reaction since it had nothing to do with the thread, hence the 'troll?' comment.

Not at all - my comment was perfectly genuine - having driven a Mk1 and an Elise for a goodly period I was very disappointed with the Mk2 - it lacked grunt and charm despite some excellent things gearchange etc. On the other hand as Richard Porter of EVO will tell you the early Ford Focus is a very pleasant surprise and in that sense "has character". Driving my Volvo 940 turbo is to be honest more "fun" in the sense that to do so is such a silly nonsense.

[Sosick]

Owned allsorts over the years, mk2 golf, 106 gti, sti, evo and many more... Yes some of them have been wilder and in some ways better.

But as of now I'm on a 'Normal' wage circa 20k and I can afford to run, tinker, track day everything with my little 5. I have no fear of it costing me the earth should it go wrong, I spent more on back diffs in the evo than I have messing with this.

It does the commute of 80miles a day, I can get my 3 year old in, I can do the shop (single man spec), Its done track days and not died and proved to be fun. I get as much enjoyment out of it as my dad does his seven except im not scared of a thunderstorm. His remarks on its practicality are making him want one.

It comes with that grin factor that if the weathers nice I can chuck the top down and enjoy a good old rag home without much risk of my liscence. It harks back to the days of good old sports cars or working mans warriors and doesn't seem to have much of a stigma that I got from general people in some of my jap turbos, other than the hairdresser notion, which I can deal with being fat and balding.

The strangest thing I have with mine is its seeming attraction to pensioners who always pass comment or have a nosey at it.

[jtopps]

Sosick said:

The strangest thing I have with mine is its seeming attraction to pensioners who always pass comment or have a nosey at it.

This is so true! Mines Neo Green (British racing green essentially) with tan leather interior and a lovely 70 something year old chap stopped and stared and even said "What a beauty!" he was convinced it was some kind of classic sports car.

[V8RX7]

jtopps said:

a lovely 70 something year old chap stopped and stared and even said "What a beauty!"


he was convinced it was some kind of classic sports car.

That's because it is !

Early Mk1s are now 25 yrs old