RE: Mazda MX-5 (NC) | PH Used Review

[R400TVR]

buccal said:

Good thread.

I bought my NC 3 months ago after being knocked off my bike.

I needed a daily at short notice and decided I wanted a facelift sport so went for the cheapest reasonable mileage car I could find. Had planned to run it over summer and then move it on.

However, I really like it. I had an NA way back and then a NB new in 2001 (which I didn’t really get on with). Although I agree the engine isn’t particularly charismatic ( I have a V8 for the weekends) it’s way better than the NA or NC.
I fit better, it’s has a little bit more oomph and as a daily heated seats and a decent boot etc make it perfect.

I was at the MX5 restorer at the weekend and they were telling me that the MK3 is much better than the NA/NB rust wise (albeit it’s a younger car) so I’m booked for the usual under-seal.

The man maths are starting to kick in particularly when everyone keeps saying how much difference the manifold etc make. So I’m in two minds whether to keep it standard or to upgrade as each component starts to wear out.
My springs are a bit crusty so there’s the first excuse to upgrade.....

Any recommendations for most cost effective mods in terms of character/drivability?

I’m assuming 30mm springs and maybe the base BBR180/ roddisons upgrade?

However, I keep flirting with just getting Boxster if I’m spending another 3-4 on the NC. But as a daily a Boxster is probably overkill and I don’t want unnecessary bills.

Really interested in the comparisons with an Elise. It’s been on my bucket list for a while but I’m not sure it’s ideal for me as a daily and am certainly not going to get one for 6-10k.

Edited by buccal on Wednesday 25th September 10:14

If not an Elise, have you considered a Europa or VX220? Both, especially the Europa, are more civilised than an Elise, but more focused than an MX5 or the boring Boxter.

[Llandudno]

E85 Z4 is an alternative at the £3k mark too. 6 cylinder engines and more refinement. Perhaps not as sharp handling, but then we're talking decade old suspension parts anyway...
After owning several MX5s its nice not to have to worry about rust.

[R400TVR]

Jimmy Recard said:

I'm a similar size to you and fit comfortably in my NC. Not so much in an NA or NB

You guys think you have trouble? I'm 6'8" and not far off 24st,and the only 'sports cars' I've been really comfortable in were my Chimaera, MX-3, and FTO.

[Jimmy Recard]

R400TVR said:

You guys think you have trouble? I'm 6'8" and not far off 24st,and the only 'sports cars' I've been really comfortable in were my Chimaera, MX-3, and FTO.

I imagine that you are limited!

The only annoyance in my NC is that wearing some shoes, my toe brushes the bonnet release cable as I go between the brake and throttle. It doesn't release the bonnet or anything and it's only a tiny brush, but I do notice it.

I spent a while yesterday afternoon checking mine underneath for rust and all looks OK, so I'm looking forward to the MOT now. Then I can put it to bed for winter. The plan for next season is coilovers (probably GAZ) and mounting the driver's seat a little lower.

That's another tip for taller drivers who want an NC - I believe that the earlier cars (before the 3.5 facelift) have the driver's seat mounted lower as they don't have a height adjustment mechanism under the seat. Apart from being cheaper and preferring the styling, that's another reason I wanted an earlier car.

[Jimmy Recard]

[coppice]

R400TVR said:

You guys think you have trouble? I'm 6'8" and not far off 24st,and the only 'sports cars' I've been really comfortable in were my Chimaera, MX-3, and FTO.

Cripes - so a Caterham might be a bit of a squeeze ? I think an 420R might become more of a 375R if you fitted ...Having said that, I found the odd SV I've tried much roomier than my current ND

[Evoluzione]

The rust is nowhere near as bad as earlier models and is often easily dealt with. The usual spot is the base of the inner wheel arch where it meets the cill and that area of the cill itself. The reason it's easily dealt with is cutting out and replacement is very simple and doesn't involve any body coloured metalwork so no respraying is required. Never ever buy one with the arches bubbling unless it's for a grand or something.
For me it was the one to have and to specialise in as I can actually fit into it and it's got the Duratec engine. As with any MX5 the tuning possibilities are endless, yet even more so due to the engine, its popularity and the sheer numbers they were produced in.
A 250 bhp N/A makes a fantastic track car.





The engine thing gets quite exciting when you discover they made Duratecs in 2.3 and 2.5 litres so swaps for more CCs are easily possible by the right people.

Edited by Evoluzione on Monday 14th October 17:20

[J4CKO]

Evoluzione said:

The rust is nowhere near as bad as earlier models and is often easily dealt with.
For me it was the one to have and to specialise in as I can actually fit into it and it's got the Duratec engine. As with any MX5 the tuning possibilities are endless, yet even more so due to the engine, its popularity and the sheer numbers they were produced in.
A 250 bhp N/A makes a fantastic track car.





The engine thing gets quite exciting when you discover they made Duratecs in 2.3 and 2.5 litres so swaps for more CCs are easily possible.

Edited by Evoluzione on Monday 14th October 15:39

Amazing how a few mods can turn these into something that looks as good as that, its not a bad looking car as standard for an off roader... and it looks a bit less girly than the MK2, but with the right wheels, ride height etc it puts me in mind of an S2000 and looks properly purposeful.

[buccal]

buccal said:

Also interested in this, esp as there is a bit of a jump cost wise between the 185 and the 200.

(Thanks for all the replies re Boxster advice, lots to think about).

Well for once I can answer my own question.

By chance a super 200 came up for sale with the suspension and brakes also done. I jumped at it so for a few weeks I’ve had both the standard 2.0 sport and the super 200 at the same time.

I am absolutely loving the Super 200. Cams are perfectly fine and make it a rorty little thing but easy to drive in traffic. The whole package gives the car much more character.

Suspension has been a revelation for me. Corners really flat but rides just as well as the standard car and speed bumps are still fine.

Often when I read reviews from people about mods I’m a bit sceptical that they are obviously going to say their car is “better”.

In this case it really is true.

If you have a standard car then go for it!

[Blayney]

buccal said:

Well for once I can answer my own question.

By chance a super 200 came up for sale with the suspension and brakes also done. I jumped at it so for a few weeks I’ve had both the standard 2.0 sport and the super 200 at the same time.

I am absolutely loving the Super 200. Cams are perfectly fine and make it a rorty little thing but easy to drive in traffic. The whole package gives the car much more character.

Suspension has been a revelation for me. Corners really flat but rides just as well as the standard car and speed bumps are still fine.

Often when I read reviews from people about mods I’m a bit sceptical that they are obviously going to say their car is “better”.

In this case it really is true.

If you have a standard car then go for it!

As mine is a daily... difference in fuel economy?

I have aggressive speed bumps all over my commute and have to be careful in a standard Sport Tech so I'll still avoid lowering.

What does the super 200 have exhaust system wise? 4-1, centre and back box?

How loud in comparison? Especially on cold start? (I leave for work at 6:20am and don't want pissed off neighbours!)

[buccal]

Hard to say re fuel yet as I’ve only been commuting for a week. Iirc maybe 1mpg worse but speculating. Will confirm over next few weeks.

Mine has 4.1, centre but original back box. Only V slightly louder. Mainly a change in timbre.

I’m thinking about getting the GT back box but will probably go up to BBR to hear one first as I don’t want any resonance.

5:30 am start here and don’t feel self conscious re the neighbours. Nothing mentioned either.

[anonymous-user]

A BBR 220bhp upgrade is very much on the agenda for my ND once it's out of warranty. I've never heard a journalist or owner say anything particularly negative about their work, that I recall.

[fido]

buccal said:

I’m thinking about getting the GT back box but will probably go up to BBR to hear one first as I don’t want any resonance.

I had a full BBR exhaust system with GT backbox and it was fine at all speeds - almost right I think for day-to-day driving. Only complaint I ever got was from a group of cyclists waving their fists at me when I dropped it from 4rd to 2nd gear going past at 30mph! The Sports version is too loud without a turbo, IMO. I'm past the NC now - my next MX-5 with be a 220bhp ND(!)

[Blayney]

buccal said:

Hard to say re fuel yet as I’ve only been commuting for a week. Iirc maybe 1mpg worse but speculating. Will confirm over next few weeks.

Mine has 4.1, centre but original back box. Only V slightly louder. Mainly a change in timbre.

I’m thinking about getting the GT back box but will probably go up to BBR to hear one first as I don’t want any resonance.

5:30 am start here and don’t feel self conscious re the neighbours. Nothing mentioned either.

Thank you for answering my questions.

Even more food for thought. I was just going to go for the 4-1 with map and maybe centre section.... my poor wallet.

Do you have a video comparison of standard and the super 200 set up for sound?

[buccal]

Blayney said:

Thank you for answering my questions.

Even more food for thought. I was just going to go for the 4-1 with map and maybe centre section.... my poor wallet.

Do you have a video comparison of standard and the super 200 set up for sound?

Afraid not, the sport was collected by its new owner on sunday

[buccal]

Blayney said:

As mine is a daily... difference in fuel economy?

)

So it’s looking like the super 200 is 1mpg worse than the standard car for my almost entirely urban commute.

[Blayney]

buccal said:

So it’s looking like the super 200 is 1mpg worse than the standard car for my almost entirely urban commute.

Negligible then! I've lost half that just by changing tyres recently.

[Speedway Rocket]

I had a Mazda mk1 for 10 yrs, didn't like the mk2 as it lost the mk1 appeal in much the same way as the Midget which followed the Frogeye Sprite which I also owned. As soon as the mk3 was launched I liked it and now own one, as I am retired and wanted to run a sports car as my main car with a small hatch as a runaround I have owned many and my problems were always caused by too little use so the mk3 is big enough and comfortable on the motorway even with the top down. The electric roof is ideal I can leave the car and not worry about it plus it is out in all weathers. Nothing beats the drive of a mk1 and I imagine the new model is great but my son can't get in one his legs are too long whereas he was fine in the mk1 both to drive and as a passenger

[J4CKO]

R400TVR said:

Petrolsmasher said:

Whats the difference in sound between a mx5 and a fiesta st, both 4 pots but ones turboed, did the mx5 or st sound better.

Did I really just read this on PH? If you are questioning which will be more fun between a front drove shopping trolley and a rwd sports car, please delete your membership now.

Late reply but he asked whats the difference in sound, not fun.

And the Fiesta ST is really good fun, have you ever driven one ? not sure why people have to call it a "shopping trolley", dont think a standard MX5 NC would see which one went and some folk prefer turbos for that reason.

I like both and quite fancy an NC but I dont subscribe to the tired old RWD vs FWD thing, some folk really dont like MX5's and say they dont like up to the hype.