RE: Mazda MX-5: Review

[celicawrc]

Woefully underpowered for a 2.0L

[Kawasicki]

well done Mazda....it's an impressive project.

This car should be fun at sensible speeds, like 100mph down back roads.

[wemorgan]

celicawrc said:

Woefully underpowered for a 2.0L

41mpg / C02 161g/km for a n/a engine

are the figure that need to be considered when looking at the 160bhp

The days of Honda's 240bhp 2.0L n/a (28mpg 235g/km) are sadly long gone.

[defblade]

I might be getting old, but didn't they just do a new one a couple of months or so ago?

[wemorgan]

swerni said:

Why?
It's meant to be a sports car not a bloody prius

emission / fuel economy. I imagine that the target customer wants an affordable car with a balance of performance and economy. There's plenty of second-hand RX8 for those who like performance without economy.

[MG CHRIS]

defblade said:

I might be getting old, but didn't they just do a new one a couple of months or so ago?

Its the same car. Its the first batches of nd to come to the uk though all the other test have been done in spain ie the last series of top gear.

[MG CHRIS]

swerni said:

wemorgan said:

celicawrc said:

Woefully underpowered for a 2.0L

41mpg / C02 161g/km for a n/a engine

are the figure that need to be considered when looking at the 160bhp

The days of Honda's 240bhp 2.0L n/a (28mpg 235g/km) are sadly long gone.

Why?
It's meant to be a sports car not a bloody prius

Oh look someone that doesn't understand the points of the mx5 what a surprise on this forum. More power doesn't mean more fun.

[NDNDNDND]

swerni said:

What £30k does it look like?

£20k for a car that slllowwwww, no thanks

Fast cars are for slow drivers, mate - and it sounds like you need diving lessons!

[defblade]

MG CHRIS said:

defblade said:

I might be getting old, but didn't they just do a new one a couple of months or so ago?

Its the same car. Its the first batches of nd to come to the uk though all the other test have been done in spain ie the last series of top gear.

Phew, don't feel so bad now, I'll cancel the order for a Zimmer to replace my Bimmer

[otolith]

swerni said:

Oh look someone that drives an MX5 and gets all precious because someone doesn't appreciate their little toy, what a surprise on this forum

Trolling mx-5 threads again? I suppose everyone needs a hobby.

[OleVix]

never got these cars... and I dont get why someone would buy a new MX5 instead of a used TVR

[Jonstar]

OleVix said:

never got these cars... and I dont get why someone would buy a new MX5 instead of a used TVR

The fail is too strong on this one.

[otolith]

[Axionknight]

T0MMY said:

otolith said:

If you can't overtake with 160 bhp/ton, I recommend a pair of these.

You took the words right out of my mouth. When exactly did overtaking become so difficult that 160bhp/tonne was insufficient? Don't recall reading reviews of, oh I don't know, a 205 Gti (or almost any Gti prior to the year 2000) and seeing "handles well but you'll struggle to overtake anything in it".

Welcome to the age of turbo diesel laziness.

[NDNDNDND]

swerni said:

NDNDNDND said:

swerni said:

What £30k does it look like?

£20k for a car that slllowwwww, no thanks

Fast cars are for slow drivers, mate - and it sounds like you need diving lessons!

If that's how you justify your slow car to yourself, that works for me

If that's how you compensate for being a slow driver, that works for me!

[otolith]

OleVix said:

never got these cars... and I dont get why someone would buy a new MX5 instead of a used TVR

I'd probably buy the Trevor, but although she wouldn't have another MX-5 now (too slow, apparently) my attempts to persuade my wife that she wants a ten year old V8 powered canoe, lashed up in a shed, are similarly unsuccessful. An MX-5 is as painless to own and run as any other modern car. You can have one brand new, with a warranty. It won't break down, guzzle petrol, need an engine rebuild or land you with other horrendous costs. And it's more interesting than most other things you can buy new for that sort of money.

Edited by otolith on Tuesday 23 June 21:35

[tr7v8]

Superhoop said:

tr7v8 said:

Mazda HQ is Tunbridge Wells so could have been around from there.

It was 14 years ago, they moved to Dartford in 2001....

D'oh should have remembered that, we had a TR Register member who was someone high up in Mazda at the time. I had forgotten they moved.

[thecremeegg]

It's hardly slow is it let's be honest. So it doesn't do 60 in 5 seconds, is that a problem?

[MG CHRIS]

swerni said:

NDNDNDND said:

swerni said:

NDNDNDND said:

swerni said:

What £30k does it look like?

£20k for a car that slllowwwww, no thanks

Fast cars are for slow drivers, mate - and it sounds like you need diving lessons!

If that's how you justify your slow car to yourself, that works for me

If that's how you compensate for being a slow driver, that works for me!

I don't have anything to prove, nor do I find the need to justify what I drive...........

Nor the need to troll threads for the sake of it but ypu do that anyway.

[Paul_M3]

T0MMY said:

otolith said:

If you can't overtake with 160 bhp/ton, I recommend a pair of these.

You took the words right out of my mouth. When exactly did overtaking become so difficult that 160bhp/tonne was insufficient? Don't recall reading reviews of, oh I don't know, a 205 Gti (or almost any Gti prior to the year 2000) and seeing "handles well but you'll struggle to overtake anything in it".

Exactly.

The guy that I car share with has a VW Up!, and he still manages to overtake things. (Although not quite as easily as when it's my week to drive. )

As far as I know the VW is nearer to 80 bhp/ton than 160.

I imagine people have got so used to lots of mid-range torque, that they forget about the idea of dropping a couple of gears and taking it to the rev limiter.