Mx-5 1.6 or 1.8
Author
Discussion

torqueofthedevil

Original Poster:

2,088 posts

206 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
I am going to be buying an mx-5 soon. Had been looking at mk1 or mk2's but just the 1.6 model. I may got for the 1.8 now, just wanted to know how the two compare in terms of performance, reliability and mpg.

Insurance costs is making me lean towards 1.6 bit if 1.8 is better then I will go for that.

Lastly how do the two different mk's affect the above? E.g 1.8 definitely the one to go for but only if mk2 or mk.1 1.8 performance is great but not much difference between mk2 1.6 and 1.8.

AndyCowman

359 posts

279 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
Got a mk1 1.8 (uk spec) and I got about 32mpg when I was using it daily during last year, I opted for it as it didn't appear to do much worse MPG than the 1.6 and decided that even a little extra power would help!

I was more interested in getting one with out any rust underneath it and which was a genuine UK car - this was due to the fact it appeared a bit cheaper to insure a UK model than import on the quotes I was running.

Insurance was very cheap, about £250 for two of us fully comp. I was 27 when I had the policy on the car.

Have a look over on MX5 Nutz for a lot more MX5 information. If you are interested I am planning to sell mine (red, mk1, 1.8i, just had cambelt, new tyres etc) soon to fund getting my old Porsche out.

Cheers

Andy

sday12

5,067 posts

240 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
AndyCowman said:
Got a mk1 1.8 (uk spec) and I got about 32mpg when I was using it daily during last year, I opted for it as it didn't appear to do much worse MPG than the 1.6 and decided that even a little extra power would help!

I was more interested in getting one with out any rust underneath it and which was a genuine UK car - this was due to the fact it appeared a bit cheaper to insure a UK model than import on the quotes I was running.

Insurance was very cheap, about £250 for two of us fully comp. I was 27 when I had the policy on the car.

Have a look over on MX5 Nutz for a lot more MX5 information. If you are interested I am planning to sell mine (red, mk1, 1.8i, just had cambelt, new tyres etc) soon to fund getting my old Porsche out.

Cheers

Andy
You have a pm.

edo

16,699 posts

294 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
Dont mix two very different engines - the early 1.6 which shipped until around 1994ish - 115bhp (good), and the later 90bhp version (bad).

crofty1984

17,064 posts

233 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
1.6 UK version had 90bhp after 1994. I believe the Eunos kept the 115bhp throughout its life.

PumpkinSteve

4,250 posts

185 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
I've heard that the 1.6 is more free-revving than the 1.8 and some people say that makes it more fun to drive.

clarkmagpie

3,701 posts

224 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
I use to have mk1 1.6 early UK spec, fantastic little car.
Spent a fair bit of time driving my mums mk1 1.6 later car, not as good fun.
They now have a mk2 1.8 which again, I've spent a fair bit of time in.
I remember mine being more fun...


torqueofthedevil

Original Poster:

2,088 posts

206 months

Wednesday 18th January 2012
quotequote all
I've seen a nice 1.8 mk2. So are eunos's all imports? And mx5's uk?

edo

16,699 posts

294 months

Thursday 19th January 2012
quotequote all
torqueofthedevil said:
I've seen a nice 1.8 mk2. So are eunos's all imports? And mx5's uk?
Eunos is Japanese.

Miata (LHD) USA

Liokault

2,837 posts

243 months

Thursday 19th January 2012
quotequote all
1.6 (114 bhp) and the 1.8 MX5's are so close its not worth worrying about. Look for the car with the best condition body.

jimslops

6,419 posts

183 months

Sunday 12th February 2012
quotequote all
I believe the 1.8 eunos mk1 mx5 has an improved differential. Not much in it speed wise, but it has more grunt.

J4CKO

46,836 posts

229 months

Sunday 12th February 2012
quotequote all
I went for the 3.0 version, a 944 S2 Cab biggrin

jimslops

6,419 posts

183 months

Sunday 12th February 2012
quotequote all
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Not noticeable difference between mk1 1.6 and mk1 1.8. Noticeable difference with mk1's and a mk2 1.8.

The Moose

23,677 posts

238 months

Sunday 12th February 2012
quotequote all
To be honest, forget the 1.6 vs 1.8 thing - just buy the best example you can find and within your budget.

Take into account the rust (or lack there of), roof condition, interior condition, mechanical condition etc etc etc and only look at the engine size towards the end of the list (along with the colour of the car etc)

Matt UK

18,084 posts

229 months

Sunday 12th February 2012
quotequote all
The Moose said:
To be honest, forget the 1.6 vs 1.8 thing - just buy the best example you can find and within your budget.

Take into account the rust (or lack there of), roof condition, interior condition, mechanical condition etc etc etc and only look at the engine size towards the end of the list (along with the colour of the car etc)
Agreed. Having spent time in both, I would say the 1.8 had bigger lungs in the mid-range, but the 1.6 felt more eager at the top end.

Both good engines and not really enough in it to matter. Getting a good clean car would be higher up my priority list.

jimslops

6,419 posts

183 months

Sunday 12th February 2012
quotequote all
The Moose said:
To be honest, forget the 1.6 vs 1.8 thing - just buy the best example you can find and within your budget.

Take into account the rust (or lack there of), roof condition, interior condition, mechanical condition etc etc etc and only look at the engine size towards the end of the list (along with the colour of the car etc)
I agree if it is MK1 you are referring to.