RE: Mazda MX-5 BBR Super 200: Review
Discussion
rscott said:
Like this coupe? - http://www.automobilemag.com/auto_shows/03sema_mia... and http://www.miataforumz.com/nb-1998-2005-7/nb-miata... - Japanese market only sadly.
Wow. Whilst it's a nice car this is very blatantly a Japanese copy/design theft in the classic sense of the genre. It's remarkably like a smaller, uglier copy of a DB7...even down to the grill shape. http://www.miataforumz.com/attachments/nb-1998-200...chungasarnies said:
So when an MX5 has 200bhp and costs 27 grand everyone loves it, but a GT86 has 200 from the factory and costs 25k its too slow?
Not at all...I'm sure the same people that don't understand how a GT86 can be fun with a "mere" 200bhp would also dismiss a 200bhp n/a MX5 in favour of whatever boring German car out accelerates it and has nicer interior plastics
Horses for courses innit. Personally if I needed a sensible car and had to have something modern, this or a GT86 would be top of my list.
Edited by T0MMY on Monday 11th August 17:24
I actually rolled a car on Rota wheels, when it landed it was so hard the rear suspension broke but the wheels were fine. I think there was a picture of a fractured wheel ( from the US of A of course ) about 2002 that still puts people off. Also they are not Italian/German.
It would be nice Dan if you could ask Neil to have the car again and actually time it against his manic stage 1 turbo and also a stock car, especially in gear.
I don't want to be a "magazine" critic but actual numbers are getting less and less nowadays, only Autocar seems to give a full set of performance figures compared to the old days when all did. I remember a test of old Elises Evo did which showed which after market upgrade was the best using timing. How can you actually get a feel for it unless you can see how they do? I recall one Elise was best 0-100 but useless in gear.
I really wish people would give more performance timings in the UK. The equipment to do so is a lot less hassle nowadays with Racelogic around so you just have to stick something on the windscreen and wait for it to find a Sat. No excuse. They still do it in the USA.
Pet gripe over.
It would be nice Dan if you could ask Neil to have the car again and actually time it against his manic stage 1 turbo and also a stock car, especially in gear.
I don't want to be a "magazine" critic but actual numbers are getting less and less nowadays, only Autocar seems to give a full set of performance figures compared to the old days when all did. I remember a test of old Elises Evo did which showed which after market upgrade was the best using timing. How can you actually get a feel for it unless you can see how they do? I recall one Elise was best 0-100 but useless in gear.
I really wish people would give more performance timings in the UK. The equipment to do so is a lot less hassle nowadays with Racelogic around so you just have to stick something on the windscreen and wait for it to find a Sat. No excuse. They still do it in the USA.
Pet gripe over.
Edited by Gandahar on Monday 11th August 17:28
Gandahar said:
I really wish people would give more performance timings in the UK.
Pet gripe over.
Yes I totally agree,especially with the remap tuning industry so easily accessible. It would be great to know how much bang you get for your buck.Pet gripe over.
Edited by Gandahar on Monday 11th August 17:28
As a spotty 15 yr old, I knew every performance figure Autocar quoted.
If only they did o levels in this,instead of english lit
eglin said:
I really like the look of that, especially with the different wheels and lowered suspension. The only issue I'd have is if I was looking to buy one second hand for around £6k and get the kit installed bringing the price up to over £8k, I'd struggle to justify it over an S2000 or a Z4 3.0.
Basically hit the nail on the head here.I had 2007 mk3 MX-5 2.0 Sport and at the time there was only the BBR supercharger upgrade for £5k to bring it up to 235bhp, and Rodders was testing his kit which was going to be roughly 200bhp. But I just couldn't justify the cost gap between the car and picking up an S2000.
The cost to upgrade the engine, brakes, suspension to be on the same level as the S2000 just wasn't worth it, so I chopped it in and bought an S2000 - and was glad I did, it just does everything so much better and actually feels better quality and better screwed together, despite being 2 or 3 years older.
Not knocking the kit at all, I'm sure if you like the car and want it to be a keeper it's a good idea.
kambites said:
Yes I think that's EU. The actual wet vehicle weight seems to be about 1100-1150kg depending on spec.
Still, it's only about 100kg lighter than a GT86, which isn't a huge amount when you consider that the GT86 has two more seats.
The rear seats in the GT86/BRZ/FR-S are only for legless dwarves. However, it does have a decent sized boot (trunk), and the rear seat back does fold, making it a more practical daily driver than an MX5. Also much more spacious than an MX5.Still, it's only about 100kg lighter than a GT86, which isn't a huge amount when you consider that the GT86 has two more seats.
Both are great cars though. I like the numbers on this one. As another contributor noted, a 3 year old low mileage donor car plus 2 grand sounds like a great way to go.
Because I'm a bit sad....
Measured fully fuelled on a scales
Toyota GT86 kerb mass 1248kg (55.9% / 44.1%) source:sportauto.de
Mazda MX5 soft top convertible 1153kg (52.6% / 47.4%) source:sportauto.de
Mazda MX5 hard top convertible 1177kg source:automotorundsport.de (they also mentioned that the hard top adds 35kg to the weight).
So a good job by Mazda on limiting the mass increase with the hard top to a respectable amount.
Measured fully fuelled on a scales
Toyota GT86 kerb mass 1248kg (55.9% / 44.1%) source:sportauto.de
Mazda MX5 soft top convertible 1153kg (52.6% / 47.4%) source:sportauto.de
Mazda MX5 hard top convertible 1177kg source:automotorundsport.de (they also mentioned that the hard top adds 35kg to the weight).
So a good job by Mazda on limiting the mass increase with the hard top to a respectable amount.
For me it's still unclear what the weight penalty is for the roadster vs coupe. Even Mazda's brochures conflicts each other.
If you look at the first screenshot, it does indeed look like just 37kg. However, if you then look at the difference of the 1.8 roadster vs coupe, the weight difference is actually 80kg, which is a substantial gain.
I also prefer the look of the roadster, plus you can us a bike rack with it.
If you look at the first screenshot, it does indeed look like just 37kg. However, if you then look at the difference of the 1.8 roadster vs coupe, the weight difference is actually 80kg, which is a substantial gain.
I also prefer the look of the roadster, plus you can us a bike rack with it.
Edited by scz4 on Tuesday 12th August 08:59
T0MMY said:
Not at all...I'm sure the same people that don't understand how a GT86 can be fun with a "mere" 200bhp would also dismiss a 200bhp n/a MX5 in favour of whatever boring German car out accelerates it and has nicer interior plastics
Horses for courses innit. Personally if I needed a sensible car and had to have something modern, this or a GT86 would be top of my list.
Summed up perfectly in my opinion.Horses for courses innit. Personally if I needed a sensible car and had to have something modern, this or a GT86 would be top of my list.
Edited by T0MMY on Monday 11th August 17:24
It's amazing what people are happy to spend on interior plastics and upping their driveway status. Most people seem to value these things over fun.
I'm not knocking it, I currently own Jap(EvoX) and German (525d M Sport Touring).
I'm test driving a GT86, MX-5 and Z4 this week.
This kit would be a nice option if I choose the Mazda.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff