RE: VW Up GTI v Mazda 2 GT Sport v Suzuki Swift Sport
Discussion
FoxtrotOscar1 said:
JMF894 said:
Astounding amount of options / tech in that little car!These cars are good for trying to attract young folk to do driving, they seem to be turning away from cars to public transport so they can stare lovingly into their latest smartphone screen while being transported to work by British Rail and their pork pies.
The problem is here the Germans have it down pat with the UP! Bean counter car, glossy interior and funky wheels and Germanic fairy dust powdered all over it so dad stumps up the wonga.
It would have been nice for the Mazda to have a small 1.8 litre V6
That would have made it stand out. 7500rpm in a V6 
Looking in the classifieds
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...
And it looks a lot better to boot. Where have we gone wrong with little cars over the years? Fecking bean counters and governmental jobsworth , that's where.
The problem is here the Germans have it down pat with the UP! Bean counter car, glossy interior and funky wheels and Germanic fairy dust powdered all over it so dad stumps up the wonga.
It would have been nice for the Mazda to have a small 1.8 litre V6
That would have made it stand out. 7500rpm in a V6 Looking in the classifieds
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...
And it looks a lot better to boot. Where have we gone wrong with little cars over the years? Fecking bean counters and governmental jobsworth , that's where.
Edited by Gandahar on Saturday 13th October 11:04
Gandahar said:
These cars are good for trying to attract young folk to do driving, they seem to be turning away from cars to public transport so they can stare lovingly into their latest smartphone screen while being transported to work by British Rail and their pork pies.
The problem is here the Germans have it down pat with the UP! Bean counter car, glossy interior and funky wheels and Germanic fairy dust powdered all over it so dad stumps up the wonga. I am a Japanese car bloke apologist but not even heard of the Mazda 2 GT.
It would have been nice for the Mazda to have a small 1.8 litre V6 That would have made it stand out. 7500rpm in a V6
Looking in the classifieds
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...
And it looks a lot better to boot. Where have we gone wrong with little cars over the years? Fecking bean counters and governmental jobsworth , that's where.
That looks hideous!The problem is here the Germans have it down pat with the UP! Bean counter car, glossy interior and funky wheels and Germanic fairy dust powdered all over it so dad stumps up the wonga. I am a Japanese car bloke apologist but not even heard of the Mazda 2 GT.
It would have been nice for the Mazda to have a small 1.8 litre V6
That would have made it stand out. 7500rpm in a V6 Looking in the classifieds
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...
And it looks a lot better to boot. Where have we gone wrong with little cars over the years? Fecking bean counters and governmental jobsworth , that's where.
Edited by Gandahar on Saturday 13th October 11:03
Gandahar said:
These cars are good for trying to attract young folk to do driving, they seem to be turning away from cars to public transport so they can stare lovingly into their latest smartphone screen while being transported to work by British Rail and their pork pies.
The problem is here the Germans have it down pat with the UP! Bean counter car, glossy interior and funky wheels and Germanic fairy dust powdered all over it so dad stumps up the wonga.
It would have been nice for the Mazda to have a small 1.8 litre V6 That would have made it stand out. 7500rpm in a V6
Looking in the classifieds
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...
And it looks a lot better to boot. Where have we gone wrong with little cars over the years? Fecking bean counters and governmental jobsworth , that's where.
Do you realise what you sound like with your “young people these days” tripe? Fewer young people driving these days is probably down the cost of insurance, parking etc than their need to “lovingly stare into smartphones”. Except apparently young people are driving because “Dad stumps up the wonga”. Eh? The problem is here the Germans have it down pat with the UP! Bean counter car, glossy interior and funky wheels and Germanic fairy dust powdered all over it so dad stumps up the wonga.
It would have been nice for the Mazda to have a small 1.8 litre V6
That would have made it stand out. 7500rpm in a V6 Looking in the classifieds
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...
And it looks a lot better to boot. Where have we gone wrong with little cars over the years? Fecking bean counters and governmental jobsworth , that's where.
Edited by Gandahar on Saturday 13th October 11:04
jm28 said:
Do you realise what you sound like with your “young people these days” tripe? Fewer young people driving these days is probably down the cost of insurance, parking etc
And the small matter of the roads being an awful place to spend time on these days.Besides, the Audi A1 seems to be the most desirable car for the youth of today, with many happy to spend a few thousand quid on one that’s gone to the moon and back, then the same again on insurance.
greenarrow said:
Stuff about Mazda
You're right about Mazda - they don't get much mention in the motoring press.I'll admit to being a fan though, I've had loads of Mazdas and they have always been very well built (no rattles of squeaks) and drive very well.
Reliability has been excellent.
The Mazda 3 has been the best handling car in its class for years (previous models were essentially a Focus underneath) but with Japanese build quality.
Mazda are also bucking the trend for low capacity engines with a turbo bolted on and are sticking with relatively large n/a engines (even if bhp seems quite low for cc) which is a good thing in my book.
Low stress engines are better in the long term (see Ford problems with overheating, anyone want a 1.0 turbocharged Mondeo ?).
Edited by Red 4 on Saturday 13th October 12:43
The Mazda wasn't on my radar either. Looks like quite a nice interior.
Suzuki have made a real mess of the Swift's styling.
I would have the GTI though... It's just cooler isn't it? I hear there is a long wait on them, and residual values will probably be better than the others.
Iwouldnt discount the Abarth due to age, but it is a bit more hardcore to be grouped in with these milder little hatches. A Mini Cooper could be comparable though?
Suzuki have made a real mess of the Swift's styling.
I would have the GTI though... It's just cooler isn't it? I hear there is a long wait on them, and residual values will probably be better than the others.
Iwouldnt discount the Abarth due to age, but it is a bit more hardcore to be grouped in with these milder little hatches. A Mini Cooper could be comparable though?
I’ve always had a soft spot the Mazda 2 GT Sport and this feature further strengthens that spot. In many ways it really does remind me strongly of the R53/56 Mini Coopers. Little revvy-ish N/A, chunky tires, taught yet supple suspension and good control weights and ability to flow down a bumpy b-road without any drama.
Edited by Mike1990 on Saturday 13th October 15:10
ecsrobin said:
The Suzuki swift sport is 13 years old. To consider the abarth 500 from 10 years ago as the same car that the current series 4 595 is ridiculous and pretty poor journalism from PH.
And you’ve discounted the Adam as it’s £800 more than the others on test??
From a pure driving pov there's nothing necessarily wrong with a truly 10 or 13 yrd old design (your series 4 point noted). So yes, the warm hatch options are much greater.And you’ve discounted the Adam as it’s £800 more than the others on test??
Suzuki have most definitely not 'dropped the ball' with the new car. It's better in pretty much every way compared to the old car.
I should know as I have the previous Sport and the brand new Sport both sat next to each other on my drive way.
I felt I had to join the forum to voice my opinion. I've driven both cars back to back - hard. Pistonheads reviewers have it round the wrong way. The new car is more agile than the old one. Drive both cars one after the other, and it's immediately obvious that turn-in is much sharper in the new car. It feels lighter in the nose.
I've drove the old car for a solid two years (a 2016 model)... I agree it is a brilliant little car to drive. But, it took less than 2 months to realise that the new car is even better. The reviewers mention a lack of confidence when driving the new car. For me, it's again - round the other way. The new car is much more confident than the old car. Where the old car would have you backing off during high speed cornering, the new car inspires much more confidence. Within a month or so, I was taking high speed corners at a much higher speed than the old car.
What I will say though, is that the new car is more refined than the old one. That gives the impression that the car is softer than the old car. It isn't. Again, I've driven both cars down familiar roads. You definitely get more thrown around in the new car. Even if the more refined ride is at odds with that.
Besides, don't take my word for it. Suzuki have stated themselves that the car is stiffer than the outgoing Sport... And roll stiffness is up 5% on the old car. So even if the car 'feels' softer (because of new refinements), it actually isn't.
Some reviews have suggested that the new car is not as much fun as the old car as well. Claiming that the rear end resolutely cannot be budged. That's rubbish too. I can confirm that both cars can be managed through a slide in exactly the same fashion. The only difference is grip. Suzuki did a lot of work to the suspension in the new car, to maintain 'wheel geometry' during high load / compression of the suspension. So despite having the exact same size wheels and tyres. The new car maintains a better contact patch with the tarmac. That extra grip means that the car hangs on that little bit more before allowing you to manage the slide through a turn. The result then, on some of my favourite bends, is that both cars can manage a slide between front and rear axles by modulating throttle, etc. But the new car needs more speed to get to that point. That's the only difference.
I guess, some might say the old cars abilities are a little more easily accessible. So more 'easy to access' fun for the average driver. But for those of us with better than average driving ability, the new car is just as much fun, it's an altogether more accomplished driving tool compared to the old car. It's much more precise and stable at speed as well.
I can understand the comments about the new car being more 'grown up' though. The old car feels 'scrappy' all the time. Whereas the 'scrappy' character of the new car is hidden under a layer of refinement. The new car is a great every day car, comfortable enough to use all the time. Even if you're not in the mood. But, the moment you press the go pedal, and grab it by the scruff of the neck... 'scrappy' immediately comes out to play. It's more Jeckyll and Hyde than the old car.
So there you have it. The thoughts of a 40-something old school hot hatch admirer. I got into Swift Sports because I wanted to relive the lightweight, back to basics hot hatch thrills of the 80's and 90's. I can safely say that both cars well and truly deliver. Plus, if the new turbo variant wasn't up to par. I would have felt like I had lost something when moving from the old car. I feel that nothing has been lost, and in fact I've gained quite a bit. The new car is a brilliant drivers car, and offers a considerable amount of extra performance over the old car. In both power delivery and the chassis dynamic.
So there must be something that I don't like in the new car right? Well, yes... It's the steering wheel itself. The new car has one of those currently popular 'D' shaped wheels. I'm not keen on it. Give me a round steering wheel please - like the old car.
Last few comments then. Yes, that engine is a gem. I'm a big fan of a good NA powerplant. But the new turbo Swift Sports engine is a cracking little engine. Like you mentioned. It pulls everywhere. It makes more power than Suzuki claim as well.
Price. For me, I think it's worth the money. A similarly specified Fiesta ST is quite a few thousand more. The Up! GTI may well be cheaper, but compared to the Swift Sport it's spec sheet is barren. Besides, I only paid £16,499 for mine.
Talking of the Up! GTI. Some VW fans would have you believe that its the best thing since sliced bread. But I consider the old Swift Sport to be better than the Up! GTI ever was. It was cheaper, and still better equipped... And it's got a better chassis. Yet the Up! GTI will sell in greater numbers because of the GTI badge - despite Suzuki having better reliability.
I should know as I have the previous Sport and the brand new Sport both sat next to each other on my drive way.
I felt I had to join the forum to voice my opinion. I've driven both cars back to back - hard. Pistonheads reviewers have it round the wrong way. The new car is more agile than the old one. Drive both cars one after the other, and it's immediately obvious that turn-in is much sharper in the new car. It feels lighter in the nose.
I've drove the old car for a solid two years (a 2016 model)... I agree it is a brilliant little car to drive. But, it took less than 2 months to realise that the new car is even better. The reviewers mention a lack of confidence when driving the new car. For me, it's again - round the other way. The new car is much more confident than the old car. Where the old car would have you backing off during high speed cornering, the new car inspires much more confidence. Within a month or so, I was taking high speed corners at a much higher speed than the old car.
What I will say though, is that the new car is more refined than the old one. That gives the impression that the car is softer than the old car. It isn't. Again, I've driven both cars down familiar roads. You definitely get more thrown around in the new car. Even if the more refined ride is at odds with that.
Besides, don't take my word for it. Suzuki have stated themselves that the car is stiffer than the outgoing Sport... And roll stiffness is up 5% on the old car. So even if the car 'feels' softer (because of new refinements), it actually isn't.
Some reviews have suggested that the new car is not as much fun as the old car as well. Claiming that the rear end resolutely cannot be budged. That's rubbish too. I can confirm that both cars can be managed through a slide in exactly the same fashion. The only difference is grip. Suzuki did a lot of work to the suspension in the new car, to maintain 'wheel geometry' during high load / compression of the suspension. So despite having the exact same size wheels and tyres. The new car maintains a better contact patch with the tarmac. That extra grip means that the car hangs on that little bit more before allowing you to manage the slide through a turn. The result then, on some of my favourite bends, is that both cars can manage a slide between front and rear axles by modulating throttle, etc. But the new car needs more speed to get to that point. That's the only difference.
I guess, some might say the old cars abilities are a little more easily accessible. So more 'easy to access' fun for the average driver. But for those of us with better than average driving ability, the new car is just as much fun, it's an altogether more accomplished driving tool compared to the old car. It's much more precise and stable at speed as well.
I can understand the comments about the new car being more 'grown up' though. The old car feels 'scrappy' all the time. Whereas the 'scrappy' character of the new car is hidden under a layer of refinement. The new car is a great every day car, comfortable enough to use all the time. Even if you're not in the mood. But, the moment you press the go pedal, and grab it by the scruff of the neck... 'scrappy' immediately comes out to play. It's more Jeckyll and Hyde than the old car.
So there you have it. The thoughts of a 40-something old school hot hatch admirer. I got into Swift Sports because I wanted to relive the lightweight, back to basics hot hatch thrills of the 80's and 90's. I can safely say that both cars well and truly deliver. Plus, if the new turbo variant wasn't up to par. I would have felt like I had lost something when moving from the old car. I feel that nothing has been lost, and in fact I've gained quite a bit. The new car is a brilliant drivers car, and offers a considerable amount of extra performance over the old car. In both power delivery and the chassis dynamic.
So there must be something that I don't like in the new car right? Well, yes... It's the steering wheel itself. The new car has one of those currently popular 'D' shaped wheels. I'm not keen on it. Give me a round steering wheel please - like the old car.
Last few comments then. Yes, that engine is a gem. I'm a big fan of a good NA powerplant. But the new turbo Swift Sports engine is a cracking little engine. Like you mentioned. It pulls everywhere. It makes more power than Suzuki claim as well.
Price. For me, I think it's worth the money. A similarly specified Fiesta ST is quite a few thousand more. The Up! GTI may well be cheaper, but compared to the Swift Sport it's spec sheet is barren. Besides, I only paid £16,499 for mine.
Talking of the Up! GTI. Some VW fans would have you believe that its the best thing since sliced bread. But I consider the old Swift Sport to be better than the Up! GTI ever was. It was cheaper, and still better equipped... And it's got a better chassis. Yet the Up! GTI will sell in greater numbers because of the GTI badge - despite Suzuki having better reliability.
I am going to chip in with a mildly off topic comment. I own a 3, and rarely drive it since we had our daughter a couple of months ago (my wife has the car and I bike to work). Today I went out cross country, alone. I remembered what a cracking steer it is. My last car was an MX5, and I have had numerous examples of the Focus and we have had a last gen Fiesta. I bought all above other equivalents on the basis of handling. Handling is the most important thing to me rather than power, and always has been. Anyway, the 3 is no MX5, but the handling and the revvy, big but conservatively tuned, N/A engine are fantastic for the type of car it is, and I thoroughly enjoyed myself this morning. I know that they are still essentially white goods cars, but Mazda do make some excellent products and I'd be tempted by the 2 GT if we needed to downsize. Good to see more appreciation of their models in the press (Autocrat included) lately.
Edited by Northernlights on Saturday 13th October 14:39
DazzaSport said:
Suzuki have most definitely not 'dropped the ball' with the new car. It's better in pretty much every way compared to the old car.
I should know as I have the previous Sport and the brand new Sport both sat next to each other on my drive way.
I felt I had to join the forum to voice my opinion. I've driven both cars back to back - hard. Pistonheads reviewers have it round the wrong way. The new car is more agile than the old one. Drive both cars one after the other, and it's immediately obvious that turn-in is much sharper in the new car. It feels lighter in the nose.
I've drove the old car for a solid two years (a 2016 model)... I agree it is a brilliant little car to drive. But, it took less than 2 months to realise that the new car is even better. The reviewers mention a lack of confidence when driving the new car. For me, it's again - round the other way. The new car is much more confident than the old car. Where the old car would have you backing off during high speed cornering, the new car inspires much more confidence. Within a month or so, I was taking high speed corners at a much higher speed than the old car.
What I will say though, is that the new car is more refined than the old one. That gives the impression that the car is softer than the old car. It isn't. Again, I've driven both cars down familiar roads. You definitely get more thrown around in the new car. Even if the more refined ride is at odds with that.
Besides, don't take my word for it. Suzuki have stated themselves that the car is stiffer than the outgoing Sport... And roll stiffness is up 5% on the old car. So even if the car 'feels' softer (because of new refinements), it actually isn't.
Some reviews have suggested that the new car is not as much fun as the old car as well. Claiming that the rear end resolutely cannot be budged. That's rubbish too. I can confirm that both cars can be managed through a slide in exactly the same fashion. The only difference is grip. Suzuki did a lot of work to the suspension in the new car, to maintain 'wheel geometry' during high load / compression of the suspension. So despite having the exact same size wheels and tyres. The new car maintains a better contact patch with the tarmac. That extra grip means that the car hangs on that little bit more before allowing you to manage the slide through a turn. The result then, on some of my favourite bends, is that both cars can manage a slide between front and rear axles by modulating throttle, etc. But the new car needs more speed to get to that point. That's the only difference.
I guess, some might say the old cars abilities are a little more easily accessible. So more 'easy to access' fun for the average driver. But for those of us with better than average driving ability, the new car is just as much fun, it's an altogether more accomplished driving tool compared to the old car. It's much more precise and stable at speed as well.
I can understand the comments about the new car being more 'grown up' though. The old car feels 'scrappy' all the time. Whereas the 'scrappy' character of the new car is hidden under a layer of refinement. The new car is a great every day car, comfortable enough to use all the time. Even if you're not in the mood. But, the moment you press the go pedal, and grab it by the scruff of the neck... 'scrappy' immediately comes out to play. It's more Jeckyll and Hyde than the old car.
So there you have it. The thoughts of a 40-something old school hot hatch admirer. I got into Swift Sports because I wanted to relive the lightweight, back to basics hot hatch thrills of the 80's and 90's. I can safely say that both cars well and truly deliver. Plus, if the new turbo variant wasn't up to par. I would have felt like I had lost something when moving from the old car. I feel that nothing has been lost, and in fact I've gained quite a bit. The new car is a brilliant drivers car, and offers a considerable amount of extra performance over the old car. In both power delivery and the chassis dynamic.
So there must be something that I don't like in the new car right? Well, yes... It's the steering wheel itself. The new car has one of those currently popular 'D' shaped wheels. I'm not keen on it. Give me a round steering wheel please - like the old car.
Last few comments then. Yes, that engine is a gem. I'm a big fan of a good NA powerplant. But the new turbo Swift Sports engine is a cracking little engine. Like you mentioned. It pulls everywhere. It makes more power than Suzuki claim as well.
Price. For me, I think it's worth the money. A similarly specified Fiesta ST is quite a few thousand more. The Up! GTI may well be cheaper, but compared to the Swift Sport it's spec sheet is barren. Besides, I only paid £16,499 for mine.
Talking of the Up! GTI. Some VW fans would have you believe that its the best thing since sliced bread. But I consider the old Swift Sport to be better than the Up! GTI ever was. It was cheaper, and still better equipped... And it's got a better chassis. Yet the Up! GTI will sell in greater numbers because of the GTI badge - despite Suzuki having better reliability.
I have the 1.6 and have had it for over a year and a half. I took an extensive test drive in the new Swift and immediately I felt it was inferior to the previous car because the steering feels more vague, and the 1.4 is a cracking engine, but it just doesn't have the character of the 1.6.I should know as I have the previous Sport and the brand new Sport both sat next to each other on my drive way.
I felt I had to join the forum to voice my opinion. I've driven both cars back to back - hard. Pistonheads reviewers have it round the wrong way. The new car is more agile than the old one. Drive both cars one after the other, and it's immediately obvious that turn-in is much sharper in the new car. It feels lighter in the nose.
I've drove the old car for a solid two years (a 2016 model)... I agree it is a brilliant little car to drive. But, it took less than 2 months to realise that the new car is even better. The reviewers mention a lack of confidence when driving the new car. For me, it's again - round the other way. The new car is much more confident than the old car. Where the old car would have you backing off during high speed cornering, the new car inspires much more confidence. Within a month or so, I was taking high speed corners at a much higher speed than the old car.
What I will say though, is that the new car is more refined than the old one. That gives the impression that the car is softer than the old car. It isn't. Again, I've driven both cars down familiar roads. You definitely get more thrown around in the new car. Even if the more refined ride is at odds with that.
Besides, don't take my word for it. Suzuki have stated themselves that the car is stiffer than the outgoing Sport... And roll stiffness is up 5% on the old car. So even if the car 'feels' softer (because of new refinements), it actually isn't.
Some reviews have suggested that the new car is not as much fun as the old car as well. Claiming that the rear end resolutely cannot be budged. That's rubbish too. I can confirm that both cars can be managed through a slide in exactly the same fashion. The only difference is grip. Suzuki did a lot of work to the suspension in the new car, to maintain 'wheel geometry' during high load / compression of the suspension. So despite having the exact same size wheels and tyres. The new car maintains a better contact patch with the tarmac. That extra grip means that the car hangs on that little bit more before allowing you to manage the slide through a turn. The result then, on some of my favourite bends, is that both cars can manage a slide between front and rear axles by modulating throttle, etc. But the new car needs more speed to get to that point. That's the only difference.
I guess, some might say the old cars abilities are a little more easily accessible. So more 'easy to access' fun for the average driver. But for those of us with better than average driving ability, the new car is just as much fun, it's an altogether more accomplished driving tool compared to the old car. It's much more precise and stable at speed as well.
I can understand the comments about the new car being more 'grown up' though. The old car feels 'scrappy' all the time. Whereas the 'scrappy' character of the new car is hidden under a layer of refinement. The new car is a great every day car, comfortable enough to use all the time. Even if you're not in the mood. But, the moment you press the go pedal, and grab it by the scruff of the neck... 'scrappy' immediately comes out to play. It's more Jeckyll and Hyde than the old car.
So there you have it. The thoughts of a 40-something old school hot hatch admirer. I got into Swift Sports because I wanted to relive the lightweight, back to basics hot hatch thrills of the 80's and 90's. I can safely say that both cars well and truly deliver. Plus, if the new turbo variant wasn't up to par. I would have felt like I had lost something when moving from the old car. I feel that nothing has been lost, and in fact I've gained quite a bit. The new car is a brilliant drivers car, and offers a considerable amount of extra performance over the old car. In both power delivery and the chassis dynamic.
So there must be something that I don't like in the new car right? Well, yes... It's the steering wheel itself. The new car has one of those currently popular 'D' shaped wheels. I'm not keen on it. Give me a round steering wheel please - like the old car.
Last few comments then. Yes, that engine is a gem. I'm a big fan of a good NA powerplant. But the new turbo Swift Sports engine is a cracking little engine. Like you mentioned. It pulls everywhere. It makes more power than Suzuki claim as well.
Price. For me, I think it's worth the money. A similarly specified Fiesta ST is quite a few thousand more. The Up! GTI may well be cheaper, but compared to the Swift Sport it's spec sheet is barren. Besides, I only paid £16,499 for mine.
Talking of the Up! GTI. Some VW fans would have you believe that its the best thing since sliced bread. But I consider the old Swift Sport to be better than the Up! GTI ever was. It was cheaper, and still better equipped... And it's got a better chassis. Yet the Up! GTI will sell in greater numbers because of the GTI badge - despite Suzuki having better reliability.
The new Swift isn't a bad car it's just got very particular boots to fill and has been designed/conceived in a radically different world to it's predecessor.
It may be though that it takes more than a few hours to appreciate the nuances for the new Swift and it could well be that after two months I may well prefer the new one but after my initial impressions and seeing the 2 GT I think if I were to change in the future I'd see where the nearest Mazda garage is.
JMF894 said:
Interesting. Coast2Coast offering 16% discount on new, bringing it down to £14.6KThe Suzuki is in a different league realistically. CTC have got one with their in house exhaust and remap putting out 180BHP already. That is BHP/Tonne levels of a Biposto and you do not need to be a dwarf to fit in one. It is also fully loaded.
Edited by BricktopST205 on Saturday 13th October 17:46
I'm not much of a VAG fan at all, and generally have avoided owning anything of that marque over the years, but I did work at a VW garage for a while and, as such, drove a lot of the range.
I'm not in the market for a new car, and there are many things I'd rather spend £13k+ on, but I would have an Up GTi - if only to continue my ownership of cars that remind me of proper old school hot hatches.
I imagine it's a lot of fun to drive, as even the bog standard ones are nippy and chuckable, if sparse.
I'm not in the market for a new car, and there are many things I'd rather spend £13k+ on, but I would have an Up GTi - if only to continue my ownership of cars that remind me of proper old school hot hatches.
I imagine it's a lot of fun to drive, as even the bog standard ones are nippy and chuckable, if sparse.
Mazda lists Eibach springs in its accessories catalogue for the 2.
The wife has just got the 90 bhp 5 speed version and it is a great wee thing. Interestingly it has the exact same engine as the gt version here but the throttle mapping is different hence 25 bhp less. Both versions will give 125-130 bhp with a quantum chip. The 5 speed gearbox has super tall ratios though.
I think this gt sport with a chip, eibach springs and some wider wheels to fit 195's would be cracking! The 16 inchers from the 1.5 mx5 nd are lightweight, cheap, good looking and would bolt straight up..... Just thinking aloud 🤔
The wife has just got the 90 bhp 5 speed version and it is a great wee thing. Interestingly it has the exact same engine as the gt version here but the throttle mapping is different hence 25 bhp less. Both versions will give 125-130 bhp with a quantum chip. The 5 speed gearbox has super tall ratios though.
I think this gt sport with a chip, eibach springs and some wider wheels to fit 195's would be cracking! The 16 inchers from the 1.5 mx5 nd are lightweight, cheap, good looking and would bolt straight up..... Just thinking aloud 🤔
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff