RE: Mazda MX-5 vs Toyota GT86

[Swordman]

daemon said:

Its the same length as a 370z, and close to the same width, yet the 370z packs near 130BHP more and has a 3.7 litre v6 beneath its similarly proportioned bonnet.

It's not all about the footprint, though. Side by side, the 370Z looks bloated and much heavier. In addition, the bonnets might be similarly proportioned, but it is lower and much more svelte on the GT86.

Comparing the 370Z to a GT86 is like comparing John Prescott to Muhammad Ali.

[NDNDNDND]

Both these cars should be available in a 'hardcore' spec with unassisted steering. Numb steering is a plague in modern cars, and a triumph of perceived added value. Anyone who thinks these cars need PAS is being a wuss.

[Axionknight]

ORD said:

Good article. On this evidence, the MX5 every day. The engine gets a better review, and the rest is much for a much and can easily be changed with some cheap fettling.

Agreed, the current MX5 is an itch I am sorely tempted to scratch, I'll take mine in metallic grey, please!

[kambites]

ORD said:

Good article. On this evidence, the MX5 every day. The engine gets a better review, and the rest is much for a much and can easily be changed with some cheap fettling.

If it needs new springs and dampers to handle properly I'm not sure I'd call it "cheap" fettling, certainly cheaper than engine modifications, though.

For me, the GT86 wouldn't ever be on a shortlist unless I needed the rear seats, in which case obviously the MX5 wouldn't be a consideration. So for me the GT86 would be "competing" with much more expensive 2+2s like the Evora and 911. The MX5 would also be competing with more expensive cars, but in its case other 2-seat cabriolets such as the Elise and Boxster. Obviously in both cases it would come down to whether the more expensive "competition" was worth the extra rather than whether they were actually "better".

Edited by kambites on Monday 24th August 07:48

[ORD]

kambites said:

If it needs new springs and dampers to handle properly I'm not sure I'd call it "cheap" fettling, certainly cheaper than engine modifications, though.

True. But I am thinking of the overall cost, which is still low (purchase plus mods) compared to cars that would be a lot less fun.

[kambites]

ORD said:

kambites said:

If it needs new springs and dampers to handle properly I'm not sure I'd call it "cheap" fettling, certainly cheaper than engine modifications, though.

True. But I am thinking of the overall cost, which is still low (purchase plus mods) compared to cars that would be a lot less fun.

True, although overall cost of ownership might be higher given that you'd get next to nothing back for the mods when you came to sell it. This generation of MX5 certainly sounds like it has a fair big of potential for cheap fun second-hand in a few years' time. Especially if one can find an example where someone else has taken the hit of paying for the modifications.

I'd guess that to fit some decent quality softer springs and well matched dampers you'd be looking at about £2-3k including the labour of fitting them. What would worry me more would be sorting out the EPAS; assuming the geometry is adjustable enough I suppose it might be viable to run the Mazda without PAS but the GT86 would, for me, need a hydraulic rack which would probably cost a fortune.

Edited by kambites on Monday 24th August 07:53

[rotarymazda]

Ali_T said:

Mazda used to always have a sports handling option which was, essentially, Eibach springs +/- Bilstein dampers. Are these not available? And, screw emissions, I wish they'd put the 230 bhp Renesis rotary in the MX5.

Edited by Ali_T on Sunday 23 August 22:28

If you squeeze hard enough, it fits. Here's mine in a Mk1.



You can see the black intake at the top, the actual engine sits very low in the bay.

[GibsonSG]

Dan,

How do you feel the ND compares to your NA in pure driving terms? I know it might sound like a pointless comparison but my experience of NA's is that they can be extraordinarily reliable as a weekend car (although at 8000 miles a year mine does a lot for a weekend car) and I do wonder how much progress has been made in the area of driving fun in the last 25 years. Safety, infotainment, emissions etc - I can get that these will have improved radically but an element of the MX5 audience is looking primarily for fun driving experience.

Thanks in advance.

Edited by GibsonSG on Monday 24th August 08:05

[NJH]

As two earlier posters alluded to I would be more worried about the steering than anything else. I had forgotten but the mk3 we had, had little steering feel compared to even a PAS 968 or 944 and none at all compared to those cars or others running without PAS. I suppose it was better than most modern euroboxes but no better than my similar vintage Megane R26.

Also forget about tail out fun on the road, with little power and massive grip you had to drive the thing like a lunatic to get it to slide and then for me with ours I was always more worried about bumps and cambers etc. as they made the car much more lairy. Maybe the GT86 isn't so bad after all? I would certainly want to drive both back to back.

[lilwashu]

I am also interested to see what the Mk4 is like - I like the Mk1 and Mk2 but didn't like the Mk3/3.5 much and didn't like the GT86 at all. Hopefully going on a 1 day test drive thing in a couple of weeks.

Having recently driven a Porsche 944 Turbo for an amount of time I can also say that you can have too much steering feel on our roads.

[heebeegeetee]

NJH said:

As two earlier posters alluded to I would be more worried about the steering than anything else. I had forgotten but the mk3 we had, had little steering feel compared to even a PAS 968 or 944 and none at all compared to those cars or others running without PAS. I suppose it was better than most modern euroboxes but no better than my similar vintage Megane R26.

Also forget about tail out fun on the road, with little power and massive grip you had to drive the thing like a lunatic to get it to slide and then for me with ours I was always more worried about bumps and cambers etc. as they made the car much more lairy. Maybe the GT86 isn't so bad after all? I would certainly want to drive both back to back.

Have never driven a Mk 3, but that does sound like an exact description of an mx5 with bad alignment to me.

[s m]

NJH said:

I am sure you are right when it comes to the circuit test, there is an all too short bit in one of the vids where the MX-5 pulls more or less 1G in the slalom/handling course thing but the BRZ is only something like 0.79G which is crazy low grip in this day and age. Not sure though that grippier tyres are going to find the Toyaburu that missing 1/2 second up the strip, it just heaps more evidence on the stuff I have read saying they don't make anywhere near the claimed 200 Bhp.

GT86 managed 0.99g on the 215 Michelin Primacy tyres so it depends on the test circuit ( Autocar test figure ) - basically 1g

[SteveSteveson]

heebeegeetee said:

NJH said:

As two earlier posters alluded to I would be more worried about the steering than anything else. I had forgotten but the mk3 we had, had little steering feel compared to even a PAS 968 or 944 and none at all compared to those cars or others running without PAS. I suppose it was better than most modern euroboxes but no better than my similar vintage Megane R26.

Also forget about tail out fun on the road, with little power and massive grip you had to drive the thing like a lunatic to get it to slide and then for me with ours I was always more worried about bumps and cambers etc. as they made the car much more lairy. Maybe the GT86 isn't so bad after all? I would certainly want to drive both back to back.

Have never driven a Mk 3, but that does sound like an exact description of an mx5 with bad alignment to me.

And the wrong tyres.

The MK3 was designed to have the same levels of power to grip as the mk1&2. as is the MK4. It will happily wag its tail on a roundabout or out of a junction if you provoke it, but you do need to provoke it, which I'm not surprised about. a car that will slide without a good deal of active input from the driver is never going to be a nice day to day car. But massive grip is not something I have ever heard anyone claim of any standard MX5, but there are many which have not had the alignment done and don't have tyres that suit it.

[Matt Bird]

Conscript said:

Ed Straker said:

Can you answer the missing question here?
Is the GT86 REALLY lethal in the wet?

I survived the winter before last with the stock tyres. A bit skittish yes, but not lethal. And I think the tyres were more affected by the cold than the wet.

We have the Toyota for six months so hopefully there will be chance to find out! Anyone have experience of Yokohama decibel E70s?

[Imazagi]

666 SVT said:

If you want underpowered under tyred fun in a car that will be worth more when you come to sell it there
are still plenty of 2.8 injection Capris in the classifieds?

Ha. I own a 2.3 Capri Mk2 with ca. 130hp and a 116hp MX5 Mk1. I get cold shivers when I think about taking corners at MX5 speed with the Capri's leaf sprung live rear axle. The Ford is a nice cruiser, but an unreliable rusty mess compared to the Mazda.

[Janluke]

No wrong choice here from I can see. I've a fancy for a BRZ at some point having had a Mk3 MX5 a few years ago. TBH I never really gelled with it and it always felt a little vague but reading some of the posts here I think it may have needed some alignment attention.

Good piece BTW

[Robert Elise]

SteveSteveson said:

heebeegeetee said:

NJH said:

As two earlier posters alluded to I would be more worried about the steering than anything else. I had forgotten but the mk3 we had, had little steering feel compared to even a PAS 968 or 944 and none at all compared to those cars or others running without PAS. I suppose it was better than most modern euroboxes but no better than my similar vintage Megane R26.

Also forget about tail out fun on the road, with little power and massive grip you had to drive the thing like a lunatic to get it to slide and then for me with ours I was always more worried about bumps and cambers etc. as they made the car much more lairy. Maybe the GT86 isn't so bad after all? I would certainly want to drive both back to back.

Have never driven a Mk 3, but that does sound like an exact description of an mx5 with bad alignment to me.

And the wrong tyres.

The MK3 was designed to have the same levels of power to grip as the mk1&2. as is the MK4. It will happily wag its tail on a roundabout or out of a junction if you provoke it, but you do need to provoke it, which I'm not surprised about. a car that will slide without a good deal of active input from the driver is never going to be a nice day to day car. But massive grip is not something I have ever heard anyone claim of any standard MX5, but there are many which have not had the alignment done and don't have tyres that suit it.

NC is still a great car with track geo and better springs. It got heavier obviously but still great drivers car.
My NC was all over the road when I bought it but fixed for well under 1000.
Lesson, never trust a test drive for the whole truth. Tyres and geo are essential yet mostly overlooked.

[Dion20vt]

The mazda for me, even though the front end looks like its smiling at me... The back end looks nice!
1000kg?! that's impressive!

[killingjoker]

Axionknight said:

ORD said:

Good article. On this evidence, the MX5 every day. The engine gets a better review, and the rest is much for a much and can easily be changed with some cheap fettling.

Agreed, the current MX5 is an itch I am sorely tempted to scratch, I'll take mine in metallic grey, please!

Do it! You will not look back. I've had lots of nice cars - V6's, V8's, i6's, turbos, superchargers and so my little mk2 1.8 is the smallest and cheapest car i have ever owned. It trumps them all just for pure driving pleasure. If you buy an old MX5 you can get a corker of a roadster for under a grand. There is nothing else that comes close for smiles per pound.
I read the flimsy performance quotes with some amusement as it seems to pass a lot of bigger stuff when out for a hoon. And it snaps at the heels of lots of premium motors on the twisty bits. People just don't drive MX5's hard enough.
Proof is in the pudding and as I've had it for over 4 years and will never sell it that says a lot about what a great car the MX5 is. And i will simply put it on a classic insurance and carry on enjoying it whilst driving something else daily (if i can bare to tear myself away from it). I cannot say that about any of my previous cars. And i don't do boring white goods. I love driving.

[ORD]

I wouldnt be worried about the lack of pace except for one thing - how quickly can it get from 40-70 in 3rd? That's the stat that actually matters for road driving - can you get quickly past an NSL dawdler? Being able to do that safely and often makes all the difference on our roads.