RE: Mazda MX-5 vs Toyota GT86

[ORD]

RenesisEvo said:

Too many people seem hung up on minor facets. I drove a 2.0 on the Cotswold press event, had no problem overtaking when I wanted to; it was never a chore or a long-winded affair. It needed a touch more space and planning than, say, a torque-rich V8 akin to that I had been using the rest of the day, but compared to my 1.0T Fiesta, I found overtaking much less strenuous, in part because of the shorter gearing in the MX-5. Whether the 1.5 would be as good I don't yet know, I hope to find out.

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.

A lot depends on where you live and do your driving. Other than late at night or very early in the morning, the roads I drive on have too much traffic to allow the "Wait for a gap" thing to work - you have to overtake to drive at anything like a sensible speed.

[JJB69]

Great article. Enjoyed.

[Chris71]

Ed Straker said:

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

In a word, no. Even in the wet you have to try quite hard to provoke it - more so than a classic MX-5 in the same conditions, I'd say.

Another thing I don't understand are the comments you see about the GT86's soundtrack. It's a bit guttural, yes, but it sounds more interesting than all the indentikit inline fours IMHO.

[paranoid airbag]

Robert Elise said:

Both of these cars are easily modded, that's not something you can say about many cars and seems to be a very Jap thing nowadays. For 35 you'd get quite a car: 250bhp, 200lb/ft and upgraded suspension/tyres.
It's not for everybody, but you've had the AMG and describe a car ownership journey that leaves you with little choice.

This is what gets me.

If you count yourself as an enthusiast of a certain good and you're willing to spend £x, where x doesn't get you fantasy stuff - since anything you get is going to be compromised, shouldn't you be looking for the compromise that's easiest to fix?

And for cars, without question that's power output. A hatchback-based coupe with front-wheel drive, the engine level with the headlights and torsion beam/macpherson (speeling?) strut suspension will always be so.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I really struggle to see how an "enthusiast" of anything would leave a product with great potential on the table.

[liner33]

Do people really want more power to make overtaking easier ?

I want more power because I like the feeling of driving a powerful car.

[shalmaneser]

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?

How about if you want it to start in the morning and don't want a £1000 welding bill every MOT?!

[underphil]

Chris71 said:

Ed Straker said:

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

In a word, no. Even in the wet you have to try quite hard to provoke it - more so than a classic MX-5 in the same conditions, I'd say.

Another thing I don't understand are the comments you see about the GT86's soundtrack. It's a bit guttural, yes, but it sounds more interesting than all the indentikit inline fours IMHO.

+ you can always just leave on the stability control & it'll sort out any potential mischief

[VeeFource]

liner33 said:

Do people really want more power to make overtaking easier ?

I want more power because I like the feeling of driving a powerful car.

You nearly always get used to the power though. It's useful for overtaking or bragging rights, but other than that it's really only an expensive novelty.

[Kawasicki]

I'm surprised that the article says that neither car has the power to really exploit their balance.

That sounds pretty unbelievable.

It also sounds as if the Mazda is a bit lacking in steering linearity. Which is a bit of a serious fault in a sports car, at least to me.

I love the concept of the latest mx-5. The execution of the Toyota sounds better though.

[NJH]

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.

Tyres where factory original Bridgestones, we had the car from new and specced it with the lowering springs (Bilstein shocks and LSD part of the sport spec already). Alignment we had checked and was well within factory specs. I have said it many times on here but only EVO spotted the same thing with the Mk3, its setup just did not work on British roads. We took the car on a trip over through France and Germany, the drive from the Ring over to Spa probably the most enjoyable drive I have had in the dry in a road car so it could definitely work well if the road is smooth. On a smooth road it had more grip than either our 968 or 944 S2, and from memory easily as much as early boxsters. Maybe if either of you had actually owned one you might know what they are like.

[Squadrone Rosso]

NJH said:

There is a vid review comparison on Youtube comparing the new MX-5 to the BRZ. Its not a good one for Toyaburu fans as the car was comprehensively beaten both on track and on the 1/4 mile run. Really hard to square it in this day and age that a car with only 155 Bhp can get up the strip under 14 and a half seconds. 15 years ago anything under 15 seconds was considered properly quick. We had a mk3 MX-5 2.0 Sport with the lowering springs option to correct its ride height, Mazda IMHO really messed up the tyre/wheel/shocks/springs package on that car but I always felt the basic recipe was superb. Seems this car is a big improvement but perhaps suffers from some of the same chassis "tuning" issues.

That same video puts the MX5 Club Pack at 5.8 to 60. The BRZ did 6.3. The MX rolled like the General Belgrano on track.

[Roncee]

Aftermarket will be in full fledge for the mk4 nd mx-5 I guess in about 6months once most tuning houses in the States and UK have got hold of them.

BBR remap
Eibach springs
Sports exhaust
alignment

Probably cost 1k all in

That to me is cheap and will sort the car (a bit like it does for the nc)

[51mes]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I've a 2006 s2K - up here in the lakes with the small tight roads - and it's just right. After doing the SLK,Porsche (Bxoster 911, cayman and Boxster) I'm totally happy with it, even bought the house next door to give it a garage (seriously).

- I would seriously consider finding a good one and investing in it. Put the remainder of the 35K in the bank or blow it on coke and hookers (or put it down on as a deposit for a BTL house). You wont get more fun in a car on the cumbrian roads - as you say 240HP and the S2K is perfect.

The S2000's should be by now fairly depreciation proof at worst, so why not if something better comes along...

S.

[Kolbenkopp]

Thanks for the great read, Dan! Not making things easier, though . Wonder how Toyobaru will react regarding pricing, sounds like the ND will be a lot easier to shift. Almost as good as the 86 for the PH crowd, still appealing to the mainstream MX5 demographics.

suffolk009 said:

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.

Telegraph, I think?

GM: “More than [another] supercar, the one thing I'm desperate to do - and I'm really trying hard to do it with customers - is use F1-based technology to build an affordable car with beautifully balanced styling and handling. An affordable sports car; a sort of modern Healey Sprite, if you like.

“The days when Britain ruled the waves with Triumph and Austin Healey and MG and stuff: that was just fantastic. Those weren't high performance cars but they were fun cars. Now that we've got all the speed cameras and all the rest of it now, I honestly think if we could build an affordable, stiff, great handling, good looking little sports car that would be a better achievement than doing another supercar. Actually, it’s a thing I want to do most of all.”

Sounds like he thinks one size up from a Spridget? How I wish he gets a chance of doing that.

The guy basically has the pantheon of light weight sports cars in his personal garage (even my silly smart), dreamed up and made the Rocket, list goes on and on -- to say "he knows what he's doing" would be the understatement of the decade . Hope Yamaha can be tempted, or why not, Caterham. The iStream stuff might actually be a good option for many other small volume manufacturers, but can't see e.g. Lotus licensing something that close to their core engineering work.

[Kolbenkopp]

NDNDNDND said:

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.

I doubt we'll see Mazda doing anything like that for the foreseeable future, perhaps if they find out the roadster market has actually totally collapsed and they need to shift more units. Doubt things are going to be that bad though, even if small drop tops aren't exactly the height of fashion currently.

But Scion/Toyota/Subaru are missing a trick here IMVHO. Sadly looks like the initial run of enthusiasts have gotten their specimens, and sales seem to be going south worldwide. There could be a few ways to fix that, but all of them a lot more expensive than sharpening the package they already have.

E.g. I wonder how many people actually need the rear seats? The stock alloys will be replaced anyways, so why not steelies like in Japan, perhaps on a set of winters ex-factory? Deleting the EPAS would be neat, but making the calibration user customizeable would also go a long way. Less toys, lighter battery, no rear bench, less sound deadening, non adjusteable pax seat, less plush carpets, optional shorter gearing via final drive... There should be some 100kg in it, which would also help the pub numbers and street cred a bit... If they are really clever at marketing that they might even be able to pull a Porsche style 'Club Sport'.

Edit: the elefantino in the room is of course the upcoming FIAT 124. Going to be interesting to see how they will position that. Gut feeling is that they are so busy sporting up Alfa that the 124 will be a 'cruiser' type thing, appealing to the US market mostly. The Abarth version could be something though . Both will certainly be FI so that is going to be interesting. I think the main stream press will like that a lot, just a question of not botching the exterior styling.

Edited by Kolbenkopp on Tuesday 25th August 01:50

[clarki]

I see mazda have already developed a Club Edition of the MX5, looks smarter, Brembo brakes, nicer wheels, etc. I think, like previous mx5 models, special editions are inevitable.

[sege]

The MX5 has gone backwards with each new generation, and the GT86 is a missed opportunity to create a modern classic. They're both 'ok', not great, and they're probably the current high point of affordable drivers cars. That's pretty sad, and it depresses me that we should probably be thankful they exist at all.
Modern cars are rubbish.

[MadDog1962]

Chris71 said:

Ed Straker said:

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

In a word, no. Even in the wet you have to try quite hard to provoke it - more so than a classic MX-5 in the same conditions, I'd say.

Another thing I don't understand are the comments you see about the GT86's soundtrack. It's a bit guttural, yes, but it sounds more interesting than all the indentikit inline fours IMHO.

Agreed. My 13 month experience living with the GT86 was that the handling was wonderful. The previous Mazda was good too, and the new model should be even better.

You can come seriously unstuck in any car in wet weather if you decide to drive like a ham-fisted plonker.

Not sure about that flat-4 engine though. Honestly, I've never warmed to that Subaru engine note. Although the configuration definitely contributes to the GT86's/BRZ's nice handling balance, the Mazda 4 pot makes a nicer noise especially with the right exhaust. How come my 1979 Alfasud 1.5 Ti sounded so good? I sometimes wonder if Fiat could resurrect that engine and develop it a bit.

On the subject of weight. I reckon they should consider some kind of cheap "ClubSport" version, with wind-up (possibly plastic) windows and minimal trim. They could deliver it with steel wheels so you could spec your own wheels and tyres. A one-make race series would be great too.

[LordGrover]

Kolbenkopp said:

...
But Scion/Toyota/Subaru are missing a trick here IMVHO. Sadly looks like the initial run of enthusiasts have gotten their specimens, and sales seem to be going south worldwide. There could be a few ways to fix that, but all of them a lot more expensive than sharpening the package they already have.

E.g. I wonder how many people actually need the rear seats? The stock alloys will be replaced anyways, so why not steelies like in Japan, perhaps on a set of winters ex-factory? Deleting the EPAS would be neat, but making the calibration user customizeable would also go a long way. Less toys, lighter battery, no rear bench, less sound deadening, non adjusteable pax seat, less plush carpets, optional shorter gearing via final drive... There should be some 100kg in it, which would also help the pub numbers and street cred a bit... If they are really clever at marketing that they might even be able to pull a Porsche style 'Club Sport'....

Rear seat weigh a few kgs, not worth removing. Fensport offer a CF rear panel, but even they say the saving is not worthwhile.
ePAS is actually very good, I suspect far better with than without.
Toys? There aren't many unless you specify them; NAV and heated seats is about it.
Sound deadening is minimal, as are the carpets - couldn't get any thinner (cheaper ).
I doubt very much there's 30kgs let alone 100kgs to save and still have a desirable car.

[VeeFource]

Kolbenkopp said:

Deleting the EPAS would be neat, but making the calibration user customizeable would also go a long way.

Is it possible to unplug or take out the fuse for the EPAS motor in most cars? I guess it would throw an error if the same loom is used to monitor steering angle for the ESP etc.