RE: Mazda MX-5 vs Toyota GT86
Discussion
ORD said:
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.
Thing is, most cars can get past a dawdler. I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
Enjoyed the article. 
I was sorely tempted to chop in my GT86 for the new MX-5 when they were first touted. I've still not driven the new Mazda yet, despite two invitations - maybe just as well as I'm quite tall sat down so maybe I won't fit comfortably.
Having said that, I really don't want to lose the GT86 - it's a great car for me. There is nothing I'd rather have at the moment (unless we're talking high days/weekend cars).
Unless it's as a track car or serious weekend blatter, those who think they need to 'improve' the factory car, be careful what you wish for. It's very easy to spoil the (compromised maybe) setup. After trying stiffer/lower springs and thicker ARBs I found it too harsh for daily use, though great fun on the rare occasions I'm able to take a few hours out for a 'serious drive'.
I've returned to stock springs but retained the stiffer ARBs, which is still maybe a little harsh for some but not the jarring ride I had before.
Having driven Dave's turbocharged GT86 it's plain that the chassis can handle the extra power and still be fun, but I'm not sure it's what I want. Revving the nuts off and flicking through the gears on the standard car is fun and addictive - not sure I'd enjoy the 'effortless performance' of the FI cars.
I was sorely tempted to chop in my GT86 for the new MX-5 when they were first touted. I've still not driven the new Mazda yet, despite two invitations - maybe just as well as I'm quite tall sat down so maybe I won't fit comfortably.
Having said that, I really don't want to lose the GT86 - it's a great car for me. There is nothing I'd rather have at the moment (unless we're talking high days/weekend cars).
Unless it's as a track car or serious weekend blatter, those who think they need to 'improve' the factory car, be careful what you wish for. It's very easy to spoil the (compromised maybe) setup. After trying stiffer/lower springs and thicker ARBs I found it too harsh for daily use, though great fun on the rare occasions I'm able to take a few hours out for a 'serious drive'.
I've returned to stock springs but retained the stiffer ARBs, which is still maybe a little harsh for some but not the jarring ride I had before.
Having driven Dave's turbocharged GT86 it's plain that the chassis can handle the extra power and still be fun, but I'm not sure it's what I want. Revving the nuts off and flicking through the gears on the standard car is fun and addictive - not sure I'd enjoy the 'effortless performance' of the FI cars.
diluculophile said:
200hp - Fine
normally aspirated engine - Yes please
manual gearbox - definitely
rear-wheel drive - probably, but not necessarily
Light weight - paramount
Lack of silly electronics, driver aids, effing parking sensors and other assorted gimmicks - of course
Skinny tyres - WTF? I want to go around corners, not have 'fun' wondering whether I'll get around them or not.
Maybe I'm missing the point...
Edit: What size tyres does a G40R run?
These cars still have more than enough grip for anything. If you are moaning the tyres are too narrow, then sadly you are only showing a complete ignorance.normally aspirated engine - Yes please
manual gearbox - definitely
rear-wheel drive - probably, but not necessarily
Light weight - paramount
Lack of silly electronics, driver aids, effing parking sensors and other assorted gimmicks - of course
Skinny tyres - WTF? I want to go around corners, not have 'fun' wondering whether I'll get around them or not.
Maybe I'm missing the point...
Edit: What size tyres does a G40R run?
Edited by diluculophile on Sunday 23 August 21:49
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.
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".
For me the GT86 I see an alternative to a 3 door fwd hatchback. The reality is, if you have a 3 door hatch, especially one of the smaller ones. Then you don't need regular use of the rear seats and not for long distances. If you did, then such a car wouldn't be an option.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
The GT86 has similar rear passenger space to these hatches and similar or better boot space. In return you something that not only looks nicer than any fwd hatch, but something that is balanced and likely to drive a lot better.
I'm not sure the pricing is correct though, as the GT86 is often quite a bit more money than hatchbacks. But that's still how I see it.
I'd take the GT86. But only because I have a Eunos, and that's staying.
I was reading an interview with Gordon Murray recently, and he was talking about how much he is enjoying driving his recently acquired Frogeye Sprite. "It's amazing how much fun you can get out of so little car." Or words to that effect.
After he's helped out TVR, I wonder if he's going to design a new sprite/midget. Caterham could build it - their UK sales last year were apparently pretty slow.
I was reading an interview with Gordon Murray recently, and he was talking about how much he is enjoying driving his recently acquired Frogeye Sprite. "It's amazing how much fun you can get out of so little car." Or words to that effect.
After he's helped out TVR, I wonder if he's going to design a new sprite/midget. Caterham could build it - their UK sales last year were apparently pretty slow.
Robert Elise said:
Thing is, most cars can get past a dawdler.
I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
I dont agree with that. I think these cars are at about the borderline for easy overtaking on typical A and B roads. There are plenty of dawdlers that will speed up to 50 or 60 on the best overtaking stretches, and a car that cannot get quickly from 40 to 70 will miss a lot of otherwise perfectly good overtaking opportunities for lack of acceleration. I regularly drive the same journey in fast cars, middling cars and slow cars. The fast cars make much better progress because they can get past dawdlers on even the short straights; the middling cars make OK progress because they take most decent opportunities; the slow cars make the journey very slow and dull because they can only overtake on the 2 or 3 best opportunities (which are sometimes then blocked by oncoming traffic). I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
I think cars that do 0-60 in about 7-8 seconds are usually just about fast enough for the roads that I drive. I wouldnt want to go slower than that for a fun car, that's for sure, simply for the problems it creates for overtaking. And I have never once played the traffic light GP in any car (because I am a grown up). I also dont think I have ever had someone pushing me on a B road - almost nobody drives very fast on technically challenging roads. Much more likely to be overtaken by a nutter on an easy A road.
ORD said:
Robert Elise said:
Thing is, most cars can get past a dawdler.
I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
I dont agree with that. I think these cars are at about the borderline for easy overtaking on typical A and B roads. There are plenty of dawdlers that will speed up to 50 or 60 on the best overtaking stretches, and a car that cannot get quickly from 40 to 70 will miss a lot of otherwise perfectly good overtaking opportunities for lack of acceleration. I regularly drive the same journey in fast cars, middling cars and slow cars. The fast cars make much better progress because they can get past dawdlers on even the short straights; the middling cars make OK progress because they take most decent opportunities; the slow cars make the journey very slow and dull because they can only overtake on the 2 or 3 best opportunities (which are sometimes then blocked by oncoming traffic). I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
I think cars that do 0-60 in about 7-8 seconds are usually just about fast enough for the roads that I drive. I wouldnt want to go slower than that for a fun car, that's for sure, simply for the problems it creates for overtaking. And I have never once played the traffic light GP in any car (because I am a grown up). I also dont think I have ever had someone pushing me on a B road - almost nobody drives very fast on technically challenging roads. Much more likely to be overtaken by a nutter on an easy A road.
As unless you are happy to sit in 2nd @ maybe 6000rpm waiting to overtake, so as to be in the right part of the powerband. Cars with very peaky power outputs might be ok quick 0-60mph, but hard work to suddenly access that power at short notice.
300bhp/ton said:
I agree with this. But as an addition, I think gearing and power band also come into this.
As unless you are happy to sit in 2nd @ maybe 6000rpm waiting to overtake, so as to be in the right part of the powerband. Cars with very peaky power outputs might be ok quick 0-60mph, but hard work to suddenly access that power at short notice.
True. A big advantage for automatics, in my view, is that a good one removes the second of delay between seeing the opportunity and getting on the throttle in an appropriate gear. As unless you are happy to sit in 2nd @ maybe 6000rpm waiting to overtake, so as to be in the right part of the powerband. Cars with very peaky power outputs might be ok quick 0-60mph, but hard work to suddenly access that power at short notice.
In my wife's 320i (which I think is borderline for speed), I am quite conscious of my wife looking at me and thinking 'Why are we in 2nd gear' when I am planning an overtake
To be fair, it's not much faster in 2nd than 3rd but every little helps.300bhp/ton said:
ORD said:
Robert Elise said:
Thing is, most cars can get past a dawdler.
I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
I dont agree with that. I think these cars are at about the borderline for easy overtaking on typical A and B roads. There are plenty of dawdlers that will speed up to 50 or 60 on the best overtaking stretches, and a car that cannot get quickly from 40 to 70 will miss a lot of otherwise perfectly good overtaking opportunities for lack of acceleration. I regularly drive the same journey in fast cars, middling cars and slow cars. The fast cars make much better progress because they can get past dawdlers on even the short straights; the middling cars make OK progress because they take most decent opportunities; the slow cars make the journey very slow and dull because they can only overtake on the 2 or 3 best opportunities (which are sometimes then blocked by oncoming traffic). I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
I think cars that do 0-60 in about 7-8 seconds are usually just about fast enough for the roads that I drive. I wouldnt want to go slower than that for a fun car, that's for sure, simply for the problems it creates for overtaking. And I have never once played the traffic light GP in any car (because I am a grown up). I also dont think I have ever had someone pushing me on a B road - almost nobody drives very fast on technically challenging roads. Much more likely to be overtaken by a nutter on an easy A road.
As unless you are happy to sit in 2nd @ maybe 6000rpm waiting to overtake, so as to be in the right part of the powerband. Cars with very peaky power outputs might be ok quick 0-60mph, but hard work to suddenly access that power at short notice.
I do recall having very enjoyable amnd quick driving on a regular basis either down to the West Country or East Anglian coast. Able and capable of sitting in the show off lane with all the white goods at speed. Roof down as well. No problem even at **mph.
All i saying is, if you have the itch go for it
300bhp/ton said:
As unless you are happy to sit in 2nd @ maybe 6000rpm waiting to overtake, so as to be in the right part of the powerband. Cars with very peaky power outputs might be ok quick 0-60mph, but hard work to suddenly access that power at short notice.
I wouldn't sit at 6k (or even 4k) RPM in the vague hope that an overtaking opportunity will show up but in my experience there is never a situation where you can't anticipate a potential overtaking opportunity at least long enough before-hand to change gear to be ready for it. Yes, sometimes it wont materialise so you'll just end up changing up again, but I enjoy changing gear so that's no hardship. kambites said:
I wouldn't sit at 6k (or even 4k) RPM in the vague hope that an overtaking opportunity will show up but in my experience there is never a situation where you can't anticipate a potential overtaking opportunity at least long enough before-hand to change gear to be ready for it. Yes, sometimes it wont materialise so you'll just end up changing up again, but I enjoy changing gear so that's no hardship.
Yep - into 2nd before that tightish corner, for example, so that you can overtake on exit. It's actually a bit of an art to work out how many revs you will need and balance that against the possibility of needing a mid-overtake gear change, which isnt ideal.ORD said:
I dont agree with that. I think these cars are at about the borderline for easy overtaking on typical A and B roads. There are plenty of dawdlers that will speed up to 50 or 60 on the best overtaking stretches, and a car that cannot get quickly from 40 to 70 will miss a lot of otherwise perfectly good overtaking opportunities for lack of acceleration. I regularly drive the same journey in fast cars, middling cars and slow cars. The fast cars make much better progress because they can get past dawdlers on even the short straights; the middling cars make OK progress because they take most decent opportunities; the slow cars make the journey very slow and dull because they can only overtake on the 2 or 3 best opportunities (which are sometimes then blocked by oncoming traffic).
I think cars that do 0-60 in about 7-8 seconds are usually just about fast enough for the roads that I drive. I wouldnt want to go slower than that for a fun car, that's for sure, simply for the problems it creates for overtaking. And I have never once played the traffic light GP in any car (because I am a grown up). I also dont think I have ever had someone pushing me on a B road - almost nobody drives very fast on technically challenging roads. Much more likely to be overtaken by a nutter on an easy A road.
Clearly a fast car is easier, and I too would sometimes yearn for a little boost. My point is that many on here suggest that you need huge power to make safe legal progress, I think that's often boy racer speak. There are few occasions where a 2l MX5 is inadequate, not enough to make me not choose it as a sports car. I think cars that do 0-60 in about 7-8 seconds are usually just about fast enough for the roads that I drive. I wouldnt want to go slower than that for a fun car, that's for sure, simply for the problems it creates for overtaking. And I have never once played the traffic light GP in any car (because I am a grown up). I also dont think I have ever had someone pushing me on a B road - almost nobody drives very fast on technically challenging roads. Much more likely to be overtaken by a nutter on an easy A road.
Triumph Man said:
I seem to manage safe overtakes with 150bhp in a considerably heavier 5 series, so 160bhp should be plenty, especially in something (relatively) light!
There is an extent to which you only see the overtakes that you expect to be able to make. So, if you are used to a 150bhp 5 series, you wont be annoyed at the missed opportunities because you wouldnt have seen them as opportunities. If you drive around in a 991 Turbo S, you will be expecting to overtake every dawdler immediately and be irked that you cant in the Mazda.As I have said, I am pretty sure that the Mazda is fast enough, given its ptw ratio and gearing
killingjoker said:
I tend to drive it at up to around 4,000 rpm for normal, maybe up to 5,000 rpm, seems to be quick enough. I am an old git now (my days as a hooligan traffic racing are a way back but i still seem to be getting away from them quick smart), and i don't ever recall overtaking in 2nd at 6,000 rpm...
I do recall having very enjoyable amnd quick driving on a regular basis either down to the West Country or East Anglian coast. Able and capable of sitting in the show off lane with all the white goods at speed. Roof down as well. No problem even at **mph.
All i saying is, if you have the itch go for it
Depends on the car and gearing and power delivery.I do recall having very enjoyable amnd quick driving on a regular basis either down to the West Country or East Anglian coast. Able and capable of sitting in the show off lane with all the white goods at speed. Roof down as well. No problem even at **mph.
All i saying is, if you have the itch go for it
Slow car = my 100NX. Although not any slower than anything else of similar ilk.
Was peppy enough, but you really needed to ring it out to the red line to get it to move. So this would often mean dropping to 2nd or 3rd, but often 2nd if you where starting at say 30-35mph roll. Trouble is, if you weren't overtaking you'd be in 5th. Which makes 5th -> 2nd a clunky gearchange.
So you where forever changing up and down, or you end up sitting and holding it at high revs, as you know there is an overtaking opportunity coming up, but you've got to be ready to take it.
My Subaru Impreza, despite being turbo charged is a little like it too. It really doesn't make power until 3500-4000rpm+, but you don't want to sit at those revs all the time. Good thing is, it goes well once in it's powerband.
The GT86 (and RX-8) suffer this, they are all high revs. So for fast, safe overtakes, getting them in the right gear is critical. A 328i or even a V8 TVR it's a different story, you still need the right gear, but chances are you can be gear or so out and they'll still pull fine.
ORD said:
There is an extent to which you only see the overtakes that you expect to be able to make. So, if you are used to a 150bhp 5 series, you wont be annoyed at the missed opportunities because you wouldnt have seen them as opportunities. If you drive around in a 991 Turbo S, you will be expecting to overtake every dawdler immediately and be irked that you cant in the Mazda.
As I have said, I am pretty sure that the Mazda is fast enough, given its ptw ratio and gearing
This and Ash's point are both valid. As I have said, I am pretty sure that the Mazda is fast enough, given its ptw ratio and gearing
I think track days and age have moderated my public road speed. I don't hang about and love a twisty section, but sometimes I just let traffic wash over me and go with the flow. Wait until the next stretch. A 911 Turbo will be constantly overtaking. 😀
I actually think too much power would be bad for me, too tempting. It seems to corrupt a lot of others too.
Robert Elise said:
I actually think too much power would be bad for me, too tempting. It seems to corrupt a lot of others too.
It’s for this very reason I don’t miss the overtaking power of my old 350Z. It seems to peeve people off when you use all the power of a high performance car as they don’t realise how quick you'll be (obv meaning a shorter overtaking time) and jump straight on the assumption you’re doing a dangerous thing. So they’re straight on the offensive as a result and even though they might realise it was safe afterwards, their heckles are already up so you’re not getting out of their bad books.I can’t be doing with the agro anymore so I’m quite happy making do with something peppy just to get past the dawdlers whom are oblivious to everything anyway. However when I’m on the bike it’s a different story and having lots of power is way more desirable. Drivers seem to know you’ll be quick and aren’t bothered. They don’t even mind bikes leap frogging traffic, whereas try that in a car and the wrath is unbelievable. I like to think it’s because drivers recognise the fact that they’re taking up the entire lane and are humble about it. Whereas in reality I know most won’t be this insightful however, so I’m at a loss as to the psychology of how this works..
Edited by VeeFource on Monday 24th August 13:56
Robert Elise said:
ORD said:
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.
Thing is, most cars can get past a dawdler. I think what most people are really saying is "would i be humbled at the lights or on the B road by someone pushing me",
That's not the same as a spirited drive or making decent progress.
Of course, that's always the issue with a light, quick car, getting held up by diesel rep-mobiles. There is a really easy answer - pull over, or turn around, and wait for some space. If you're just out having a drive, rather than trying to get somewhere in a hurry, does it really matter if you overtake them?
I've also driven the BRZ, and I agree. To drive, the BRZ is better. But to have fun, and enjoy driving, the MX-5 wins, and not just because you can drop the roof. Also I noticed, as a 6ft 1 person, I had headroom in the ND - I'm hopeful I can fit with a helmet with the roof up. Can't say the same about earlier versions - for once I'm looking through the windscreen, and not at the header rail.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff