RE: Mazda MX-5 (NC): PH Buying Guide

[Ninja59]

Not very accurate on the coolant powertrain front - changing every two years load of rubbish it is every 11 years or 125,000 miles - Mazda specific coolant being FL22 premixed at 55% coolant to 45% water (5 litre containers only available), MX5 parts sell it for naff all unlike the dealers where it is a rip off.

Overall I love mine but they really do still need a lot of attention underneath alongside cavities to stop the rust spreading.

Overall for anyone looking beyond spec and trim:
1) Check all the body panels for any signs of rust developing - boot lid welds underneath next to the number plate lights, behind indicators, the 1/4 window trim are some of the favourites
2)Get it fully rust proofed by a professional - it needs cleaning down, any severe rust attending to and then a proper coating put on
3) Wheel refurb - typical Mazda wheels last 5 minutes.
4) Geo (and if you want lowering on springs only, shocks and springs (for those on basic suspension they do not come with Bilstein's) or coilovers.

[heebeegeetee]

SteveSteveson said:

stevenandalex said:

I found the scuttle shake and poor chassis a real disappointment and having so little power the tail unless it was wet would not freely move...If you are going to buy one of these mainly driven by women cars - yes the image is also a problem for men

Sounds like you drove one that was badly set up. I have no issue with scuttle shake on mine and it will wag it's tail, when asked, in any conditions. They do need the right tyres, tyre pressure and the geo aligning properly (not getting the geo done by a specialist, which will help, but just getting it aligned.) but then if your going to start worrying about it being a "woman's car" it was probably the wrong car from the start.

I do get the idea that nobody seems to realise that no two cars are the same. Brand new cars might be and should be but might not always be, but once the car is more than 2-3 years old, forget it.

Thus, people shouldn't pronounce upon a model of car based on just their one example.

Steveandalex, you've pronounced that the MX5 has a poor chassis - so do you honestly think that all the global reviews of the past 25 years are wrong?

What is far more likely to be the case is that your geometry was out and £1-200 would have sorted it, unless there was still something wrong with the car.

I do know that with a Mk1 if something is wrong the scuttle will shake (mine was god-awful) but when the geo is as it should be then there is no scuttle shake - and I don't ever recall a road test complaining of scuttle shake - not to any serious degree, anyway. I'd be surprised if the Mk3 has a softer chassis than the earlier cars, as cars are developed through time the shell normally gets stiffer, not softer.

I agree about the comment re being bothered if women like the car - which must rule out every 4x4 methinks , but guys - if your MX5 doesn't really handle, then there's something wrong with it, so please try not to give the idea that that's how they all are, 'cos they certainly aren't.

[Goofnik]

cirian75 said:

whats the rust situation on the NC ?

My NB was a rot box

Drove one for 8 years in New England, which means 1.5 - 2m of yearly snow with lots of salt on the roads during the winter months. With a quick hose down at least once a week (especially the undercarriage), and kept with a roof over its head, not a bit. If I had not moved on to a Porsche Cayman GTS I'd probably start undercoating it at this point to ensure it kept that way forever.

[Gandahar]

mizx said:

he auto doesn't have the LSD, they mentioned it in the article. The OEM can be retrofitted, so I'm thinking about sourcing one for mine.

It's probably worth pointing out about the paddle shift auto; I wouldn't recommend it unless for medical reasons like me, there's no real point. It is by no means a bad gearbox, it's the best I've used besides clutchless-manuals.

I'd recommend Racing Beat exhausts. Mine took 2 weeks to arrive from the US but it is well worth it, fantastic quality and cheaper than some of the common options over here, it sounds far better in my opinion too. I don't have any major mods as yet beyond the excellent TEIN coilovers, wheels, and tyres up to 235/40s (everyone on Miata.net running those or wider can't be too far wrong, it's great with them not overtyred as it might sound at all).

Edited by mizx on Tuesday 30th December 20:46

I have the automatic ( I refuse to use the word powershift ) too due to broken back and therefore bad left leg control. Mazda really hates us, compared to the normal 2.0 it has

1. More weight
2. 6700 v 7100 redline
3. Far longer gearing in 5th and 6th ( 200mph or so ..hmm)
4. No LSD or Bilsteins.

So it's even slower than the manual which people complain is slow.

Having said that, without the LSD it doesn't seem to spin one wheel up, both seem to go at the same time in the wet. Perhaps lack of LSD also reduces understeer too? Also the automatic gearbox is quite snappy too, it is pretty good. With the paddles though through the gears it strangely changes from 2nd to 3rd without asking. Doesn't in auto mode. Strange.

I've been driving FWD for years, so it is nice to feel the car pivot around you on power at that point of balance. It doesn't bite too hard either, although last week I managed to end up looking at the middle of the mini roundabout rather than the exit unexpectedly after some ham fisted gas pedal control and failure to judge the amount of opposite lock

Also it can be rev'd out without the scare factor on B roads. Having said that I will probably get a turbo to flesh out the power and assist the long gearing.

They are reliable too. Only thing gone wrong with mine is the seatbelt warning going off for the imaginary passenger. So just plug the seatbelt in and will wait the next service.

I don't mind the NC being seen as a womans car by some. My boss calls it the hairdressers car. He drives a Vauxhall Zafira or something. Would panic if he got understeer.

Edited by Gandahar on Wednesday 31st December 06:57

[zygalski]

Had my 2.0l 06 plate for a year & I have to say I was totally underwhelmed. Yes it handles well, blah blah blah. This doesn't alter the fact that driving these things enthusiastically they feel like they've been deliberately de-tuned. Not much torque & power delivery was shall we say on the gentle side. It was however a decent Summer pose-mobile but should really have had 180 bhp out of the box.
You shouldn't have to spend £1000's extra on mods to make a modern 2-seater sports go like it should.

[s m]

zygalski said:

Had my 2.0l 06 plate for a year & I have to say I was totally underwhelmed. Yes it handles well, blah blah blah. This doesn't alter the fact that driving these things enthusiastically they feel like they've been deliberately de-tuned. Not much torque & power delivery was shall we say on the gentle side. It was however a decent Summer pose-mobile but should really have had 180 bhp out of the box.
You shouldn't have to spend £1000's extra on mods to make a modern 2-seater sports go like it should.

Still got your GTE?

[zygalski]

s m said:

Still got your GTE?

Yes. In fact it was the replacement for the MX-5.

[Gandahar]

I hope modern tyres have transformed the Astra GTE. Back when they were new the engine was fantastic but the handling was, challenging, to say the least.

It is rather chalk and cheese to the MX5. Great shape the mk2 had also.

[s m]

zygalski said:

s m said:

Still got your GTE?

Yes. In fact it was the replacement for the MX-5.

Good stuff - wished I'd had the space to keep mine - it's still going and went on to have a successful road rallying career.
All that waxoyling paid off

[cirian75]

Gandahar said:

I hope modern tyres have transformed the Astra GTE. Back when they were new the engine was fantastic but the handling was, challenging, to say the least.

It is rather chalk and cheese to the MX5. Great shape the mk2 had also.

I had the mk3 GSi, great engine, but man it was a sloppy sack o crap

[lufbramatt]

My FiL has a 1.8 one of these, I think they look great especially in the dark metallic red colour. He's not really a car person but enjoys driving and bought it thinking that because it was a 2 seater sports car it was lightweight and therefore fast. However, he was not impressed when he realised my 24 year old 2 litre Passat estate weighed the same and was faster.

I don't fit in it though at 6'2" as otherwise I would quite fancy a tweaked one of these.

Every time I look under the bonnet of one of these and see the massive gap at the front of the engine I wonder what one would be like with 2 extra cylinders. A nice revvy smallish capacity (2.2-2.5l) N/A straight 6 would work well I think.

Edited by lufbramatt on Wednesday 31st December 10:03

[browno]

Just a couple of added points from me to add to the quote Alisdair added about alignment and springs - here is a larger extract of my comments about mine, which was bought following a 1991 MX5 NA and a 2000 Boxster S:

I have done a few modifications to the car, which started almost immediately after buying. Within a couple of weeks I had lowering springs fitted and the alignment set up (something very important with these cars - most come badly set up from the factory, and this really can dramatically affect the feel of the car) this was done at Wheels in Motion in Chesham and cost me around 350. The springs really did improve the feel of the car, and I was a happy customer - if the car is for road use, and you're on a budget, then a set of springs and an alignment from a specialist should be the first thing on your list.

I then drove the car for a while, adding a set of 17" wheels with Michelin exaltos from the sport to replace the 16" 5-spokes that were originally fitted and had slightly dubious tyres. In March 2013 I fancied doing some trackdays, so fitted new discs all round, matched to EBC yellowstuff pads and ATE superblue fluid, and went to join Mazda on Track for a day at Blyton Park. There I had great fun and met a group of people with modified mk3's including Paul Roddison. Having been taken out in Paul's race car, I realised that despite the lowering, mine was very under-damped and was rolling and wallowing a lot. This meant that shortly after I went up to Sheffield for Paul to install a set of Meister R coilovers, followed by full corner weighting and more aggressive alignment. This really changed the car - now it is better damped on the road, and no longer grounds on speed bumps under compression, but is still compliant. Best of all, I can then stiffen the dampers with a twist of the adjuster and it is much more planted on track. As i said, the car felt good with the springs on, and certainly better than standard - the meisters just take the control to a higher level.

I then did more days at Donington and Blyton, before adding a set of thicker anti-roll bars from a mazda RX8 (which bolt straight on) over winter. Since that I've done a further day at Blyton with Mazda on track, and saw further improvement in the composure and predictability of the car (either that, or my driving is also getting a bit better!). Over the course of this time with this track use, I've needed one additional set of front brake pads, but the tyres have shown very little wear (compared to the boxster, in which I took about 3mm from a new, and expensive set of continentals during a single trackday at Bedford autodrome). I am very happy with the car, and actually find it more fun than the Boxster (for road use, you hardly taxed the composure of the boxster, or you would be endangering either your licence or yourself) - it's fast enough for me to learn the ropes on track, entertaining to drive, relatively cheap to run (insurance for me, at 37 is under 250 on an admiral multi-car policy, and it's averaged high 20's mpg -more a reflection of how it's driven, mid to high 30s is easy to achieve with some restraint, dipping to 14mpg on track), and practical enough that I use it to go to work and do the school run most days in it - usually to be greeted with either of my sons (aged 3 & 5) gleefully requesting the roof down, whatever the weather!

Since then I have further added a Cobra backbox to add a little more noise (which crackles nicely on the overrun!), and a set of Federal 595 RS-R tyres - which feel good so far, but I haven't yet tried out on track - although I'm looking forward to doing so soon...

[s m]

cirian75 said:

I had the mk3 GSi, great engine, but man it was a sloppy sack o crap

I tried a mk3 Gsi too but it wasn't the car my Mk2 was - which got some very good reviews in the mags of the time

[iloveboost]

Ninja59 said:

Not very accurate on the coolant powertrain front - changing every two years load of rubbish it is every 11 years or 125,000 miles - Mazda specific coolant being FL22 premixed at 55% coolant to 45% water (5 litre containers only available), MX5 parts sell it for naff all unlike the dealers where it is a rip off.

Overall I love mine but they really do still need a lot of attention underneath alongside cavities to stop the rust spreading.

Overall for anyone looking beyond spec and trim:
1) Check all the body panels for any signs of rust developing - boot lid welds underneath next to the number plate lights, behind indicators, the 1/4 window trim are some of the favourites
2)Get it fully rust proofed by a professional - it needs cleaning down, any severe rust attending to and then a proper coating put on
3) Wheel refurb - typical Mazda wheels last 5 minutes.
4) Geo (and if you want lowering on springs only, shocks and springs (for those on basic suspension they do not come with Bilstein's) or coilovers.

I am surprised that some owners have had rust problems on the NC. Most cars I see don't have bodywork rust until they're over about ten years old, and even then most of it seems to be caused by stone chips that went down to the metal.

Even brand new cars will have parts underneath that have started to rust before they are even sold. Rust looks bad on bodywork, but all old cars look awful underneath, with rust and dirt covering everything. If everything is still strong enough to be safe it's fine. I'm sure the NC has better rust protection than the NA and NB.

[Ninja59]

iloveboost said:

I am surprised that some owners have had rust problems on the NC. Most cars I see don't have bodywork rust until they're over about ten years old, and even then most of it seems to be caused by stone chips that went down to the metal.

Even brand new cars will have parts underneath that have started to rust before they are even sold. Rust looks bad on bodywork, but all old cars look awful underneath, with rust and dirt covering everything. If everything is still strong enough to be safe it's fine. I'm sure the NC has better rust protection than the NA and NB.

Most of the time the boot issue appears around the welds that are exposed when the boot is shut hence it appearing where it does. The indicator is where the light rubs against (or can be caused by clumsy removal and refitting) the soft paint so it is quite easy to actually get this one. Additionally just to highlight one point that the body is not galvanised like many think.

Hahahahaha! oh my lord I will agree better rust protection than an NA or NB, but still classified by modern standards as shockingly poor.

The main piece of underseal provided by Mazda on an NC is literally in the centre of the car and even then around the drain holes there is no protection at all (additionally Mazda provide no cavity protection at all from factory). Ever wonder why the likes of Chassis Clean (and other rust prevention companies) have so many MX5's...well there is your answer (not just NA or NB but plenty of NC to).

Additionally to those suffering any water leaks at the front next to the glovebox or drivers footwell then it is unlikely to be the roof drains but the windscreen cowling which screws in at either side into two grommets the foam gasket fails. Ideally replace the grommets and then put some sealant under them before putting the new ones in.

Edited by Ninja59 on Wednesday 31st December 20:42

[T4NG0]

I wonder if those who mention scuttle shake were driving early 2.0 sports. When they first came out I was ready to buy one. However a quick test drive over some country roads had the steering wheel shaking about alarmingly as the suspension struggled to cope with the bumps. Had the same experience with a hire RAV sport where they used uprated shocks.

Currently have an 07 2.0 car which for the money s great value, but I think a lot of people would find them very under powered. I did look at some options for mods, but the cost in relation to the value of the car didn't make it worthwhile imho.

Oh and re original article re storage, there are also storage bins behind the seats.

[stevenandalex]

[quote=heebeegeetee]

I do get the idea that nobody seems to realise that no two cars are the same. Brand new cars might be and should be but might not always be, but once the car is more than 2-3 years old, forget it.

Thus, people shouldn't pronounce upon a model of car based on just their one example.

Steveandalex, you've pronounced that the MX5 has a poor chassis - so do you honestly think that all the global reviews of the past 25 years are wrong?

What is far more likely to be the case is that your geometry was out and £1-200 would have sorted it, unless there was still something wrong with the car.

I do know that with a Mk1 if something is wrong the scuttle will shake (mine was god-awful) but when the geo is as it should be then there is no scuttle shake - and I don't ever recall a road test complaining of scuttle shake - not to any serious degree, anyway. I'd be surprised if the Mk3 has a softer chassis than the earlier cars, as cars are developed through time the shell normally gets stiffer, not softer.

I agree about the comment re being bothered if women like the car - which must rule out every 4x4 methinks , but guys - if your MX5 doesn't really handle, then there's something wrong with it, so please try not to give the idea that that's how they all are, 'cos they certainly aren't.

I had a geo done at wheels in motion at the same time having lowering springs. The car still was not to my liking and the rebound on the suspension was worse than ever. As far as the chassis is concerned, not everybody thinks it's fantastic, search for some of monkey Harris's comments. You obviously love the car, as I hated it, I like others are allowed an opinion!

Steve

[s m]

stevenandalex said:

heebeegeetee said:

I do get the idea that nobody seems to realise that no two cars are the same Brand new cars might be and should be but might not always be, but once the car is more than 2-3 years old, forget it Thus, people shouldn't pronounce upon a model of car based on just their one example

Steveandalex, you've pronounced that the MX5 has a poor chassis - so do you honestly think that all the global reviews of the past 25 years are wrong?

What is far more likely to be the case is that your geometry was out and £1-200 would have sorted it, unless there was still something wrong with the car.

I do know that with a Mk1 if something is wrong the scuttle will shake (mine was god-awful) but when the geo is as it should be then there is no scuttle shake - and I don't ever recall a road test complaining of scuttle shake - not to any serious degree, anyway. I'd be surprised if the Mk3 has a softer chassis than the earlier cars, as cars are developed through time the shell normally gets stiffer, not softer.

I agree about the comment re being bothered if women like the car - which must rule out every 4x4 methinks , but guys - if your MX5 doesn't really handle, then there's something wrong with it, so please try not to give the idea that that's how they all are, 'cos they certainly aren't.

I had a geo done at wheels in motion at the same time having lowering springs. The car still was not to my liking and the rebound on the suspension was worse than ever. As far as the chassis is concerned, not everybody thinks it's fantastic, search for some of monkey Harris's comments. You obviously love the car, as I hated it, I like others are allowed an opinion!

Steve

That would put paid to the validity of 99% of opinions on any car on here if they had to base it on a multi-car sample

[Housey]

SteveSteveson said:

stevenandalex said:

I found the scuttle shake and poor chassis a real disappointment and having so little power the tail unless it was wet would not freely move...If you are going to buy one of these mainly driven by women cars - yes the image is also a problem for men

Sounds like you drove one that was badly set up. I have no issue with scuttle shake on mine and it will wag it's tail, when asked, in any conditions. They do need the right tyres, tyre pressure and the geo aligning properly (not getting the geo done by a specialist, which will help, but just getting it aligned.) but then if your going to start worrying about it being a "woman's car" it was probably the wrong car from the start.

See this...

Housey said:

I agree on the scuttle shake, it seems to be an unmentioned aspect of the Mk3 MX5 but when the roof is down and on a bumpy road the steering shake is bloody awful and for me needs work. The steering feel is hugely improved through geo however and the feel difference was significantly improved on my wife's after purchase from new after Centre Gravity did their stuff. The handling however was only subtly enhanced through the geo changes and not night and day as some people seem to wrongly indicate.

I don't agree it has a bad chassis as it quite obviously doesn't and I certainly find people who are concerned about the image of a car are odd, but they are not perfect and the Mk3.5 we had from new, sorted 2 weeks from the factory at Centre Gravity, does have scuttle shake as do all of the other ones I have driven. I also have a race Mk1 I used in the Ma5da series and that is superbly tight, but then it is a race car but shows that the fundamentals are superb.

[clarki]

My 2.0 Roadster's about to turn 5 years old and 30k miles.

No issues, just smiles, smiles, smiles...