Affordable (cheap) RWD for b-road fun
Discussion
AM7 said:
The only thing I can think of that hasn't already been mentioned is an E36 318is, but to be honest an MX5 is probably better in every way for your needs. However an MGTF or MK2 MR2 is what I'd be looking at, very balanced, I'd say better value for money than an MX5 and you can spend the rest of your budget on small modifications to make it exactly how you want.
Owned an E36 318is. £695 for a mechanically sound, rust free car with a year MOT. Wonderfully chuckable, bulletproof little 1.9 4 cyl engine. Your budget would buy a minter with plenty of money to improve/ maintain it.Also owned 2 mk1 MX5s. It's the 'thread-ruiner' answer, but they really are the answer. Entertainment on a budget, utterly reliable, virtually impossible to beat. Taught me how to properly chuck a RWD car.
Mk2 MR2 has to be up there. Mid engined too. Budget might be stretched for a facelift (03/04> I believe), which is what you want as the 1ZZ engines' borkiness was sorted by then.
BMW Z3? Utterly unloved, but really very good. The budget would buy a well-looked after 6 cylinder- great sound with the top down, lots of parts commonality with 3 series. Few have been owned by undesirables, so good chance of getting one that's been loved. Look great in the metal in post facelift guise.
Saw 944 mentioned- if they are in budget then do it. A pretty well-regarded Porsche at this price point has to make sense. Sod the maintenance costs, Im sure it would pay for itself in smiles.
BricktopST205 said:
MK2 MR2. 170BHP in a light car.
They aren't particularly light for a small two seater at around 1250kg. In fact weight was one of the main criticisms they attracted when the Mk2 replaced the Mk1. They also aren't the kind of car that lends itself to benign and easily held/correctable oversteer on demand.A Mk1 MX5 is significantly lighter and lends itself more that style of driving. However:
Gooly said:
Cant go wrong with a MK1 MX5.
This isn't really true. There are many ways you could go wrong, the worst of which is ending up with a very rotten shell that some bodger has hidden with copious amount of body filler.yonex said:
I had six years in the Integra and it wasn't just faster than the S2K over a bumpy back road it destroyed it.
The S2000 I used to own was so much fun that I really don't care if it covered ground slower than an Integra. I would choose the S2000 every time; it's such an occasion to drive one of them on some good roads.e21Mark said:
I know someone with a silver Z3 2.8 for £1 100 that could be just the ticket.
^This.Crazy how overlooked these are. Relatively light and small, big 6 cyl engines, sweet RWD chassis, easy to maintain.
Sound great with the top down, properly cheap wind in the hair motoring.
Go and see a post facelift (2000>), as they have the wider rear arches and nicer lights. You don't see many of them about, so most people's mental image of them is the early narrow-bodied cars which do look rather effete.
Post 2000 manual, with the 2.2 (or bigger) straight six, nice paint/ leather colour combo, full history- easily achievable sub £3K.
I thought Z3s were overlooked because they didn't have particularly sharp handling, more of an Audi TT type thing where they look like a sportscar but drive like the medium saloon in the range. I haven't actually driven one though and would like to hear if that reputation is wrong as they are good value.
T0MMY said:
I thought Z3s were overlooked because they didn't have particularly sharp handling, more of an Audi TT type thing where they look like a sportscar but drive like the medium saloon in the range. I haven't actually driven one though and would like to hear if that reputation is wrong as they are good value.
I've tried one with the rear body brace on ( I think a few owners have fitted these now ) and thought it was Ok. A 2-Seater is no good for me so I've tended to have the 328/325/330 engines in 4-seater format ( 2 or 4 door cars ) but the handling seemed perfectly acceptable. The one I tried was my friends who also has an E36 325 saloon - he prefers the Z3 as you get to hear the engine more and says it has a "sportier feel".On bumpy old Castle Combe back in 97 before it was smoothed out, the 2.8 version was just as quick as the ITR on a hot lap and although the Z3 is heavier it only has the same power. My point being, the Z3 must be able to at least use some of the grip from it's slightly wider ( than A DC2 ) tyres even if the bumps do unsettle them. A 118bhp 97 Elise was no quicker either so I guess it depends on what sort of car you enjoy. Worth a look for the money
RenOHH said:
yonex said:
I had six years in the Integra and it wasn't just faster than the S2K over a bumpy back road it destroyed it.
The S2000 I used to own was so much fun that I really don't care if it covered ground slower than an Integra. I would choose the S2000 every time; it's such an occasion to drive one of them on some good roads.RenOHH said:
yonex said:
I had six years in the Integra and it wasn't just faster than the S2K over a bumpy back road it destroyed it.
The S2000 I used to own was so much fun that I really don't care if it covered ground slower than an Integra. I would choose the S2000 every time; it's such an occasion to drive one of them on some good roads.Mr2Mike said:
One of the reasons they are overlooked is because they don't have a particularly sweet RWD chassis.
OP wanted to know about B-road fun, and admittedly I may have gone off topic somewhat. They are not top of my list in this respect either.Having come from 2 mk1 MX5s into a Z3, I can say that they aren't nearly as far off the mark as most people think. Maybe not truly 'sweet', but far more capable than given credit for.
Availability of 6 cylinder lumps gives them power and sound that the usual suspects don't have. They are more refined cruisers also.
Trying to defend the Z3 on most interweb forums is a lost cause. I'll put my bizarre affection for them to one side and let normal service resume.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff