RE: Rocketeer Mazda MX-5 V6 | PH Review

[CarlosFandango11]

biggbn said:

Bbr conversion is 4950 for 262hp and 60 in 5 secs.

£6k when you include VAT.

[biggbn]

CarlosFandango11 said:

biggbn said:

Bbr conversion is 4950 for 262hp and 60 in 5 secs.

£6k when you include VAT.

Still a damn sight cheaper, no? Proven, tuneable for more power also? I get it, many wod prefer the bigger na engine, thats cool. I'd take a turbo.

[Sandpit Steve]

Dammit, dammit, dammit PH.

Spent the last two days watching Car Throttle’s build videos, reading two linked blogs and a number of Readers’ Cars threads, am now scouring the classifieds for an old not-rusty MX-5 and a Jag with a mechanically sound engine.

What on Earth am I going to end up doing to myself in 2021?

[WarnieV6GT]

Sandpit Steve said:

Dammit, dammit, dammit PH.

Spent the last two days watching Car Throttle’s build videos, reading two linked blogs and a number of Readers’ Cars threads, am now scouring the classifieds for an old not-rusty MX-5 and a Jag with a mechanically sound engine.

What on Earth am I going to end up doing to myself in 2021?

Looks like we were both doing the same. Damm snow !

I have the NA mx5, 98 Berkeley which I've not long bought. But the car has just 76k on its 1.8 engine and I love the fun you can have within the speed limits.

This conversion would change the character of the mx5 a lot. In an ideal world I'd have one of each, but for now I will hold back this year possibly sourcing an engine and rebuilding it myself ready for the conversion kit. I'd then look to gradually upgrade everything suspension and brake wise taking my time and enjoying each different upgrade with the final engine swap being the end goal.

[CDP]

biggbn said:

CarlosFandango11 said:

biggbn said:

Bbr conversion is 4950 for 262hp and 60 in 5 secs.

£6k when you include VAT.

Still a damn sight cheaper, no? Proven, tuneable for more power also? I get it, many wod prefer the bigger na engine, thats cool. I'd take a turbo.

Yes, this seems to be 6.5k plus vat plus engine. So the thick end of 9 if you get a decent second hand engine and do the work yourself. To me this looks a reasonable option, especially as this should weigh less than the turbo car and the shorter v6 might even improve weight distribution.

[big_rob_sydney]

LordHaveMurci said:

hairykrishna said:

Is it really 15 grand for a turnkey one? Because it doesn't say on the website. The subframe and conversion bits are 5k+VAT, they want 4k+VAT for the engine then another £1.5k+VAT for the ECU+loom. So you're in for 12.6 straight away. I suspect that once you've bought a half decent MX5, refreshed the suspension and added in all the other bits and pieces you'll need you'll be way over 15 on a DIY build.

I like MX5's. I've had a couple. But this seems a fair bit of money to me. 15 grand will get you into a 996 911, a 987 Cayman, an Elise, a well sorted Chimaera, a vx220 turbo, an S2000 and a bunch of change. Any number of Boxsters. Many other options.

I get your point but as a long term 996 owner there is still a huge part of me that wants one of these!

Pretty much exactly what I was thinking (@Hairy). It would be good to compare across the cars you mentioned, to see the pros and cons of each. The MX5 looks to be almost the complete package; handling, along with decent grunt (what's the power/weight ratio? Something like 250-275 bhp per tonne or something?), and being low weight, it would stop in a short distance too, I would have thought. ETA: It's also tiny, which makes it easy to position on the road, and practicalities like actually parking it are made easier, too.

I'd be very curious to see how the others mentioned stack up, although the 911 has rear seats, so for starters, is more usable right there.

[griffdude]

Since having my MX5, the Griffith that I have had for 18 years has done approx 600 miles/year.
Have just done a DIY turbo conversion on it for less than £2000 (reused the ECU & intercooler from the Supercharger).

[DippedHeadlights]

SpeedWeasel said:

I'm just coming to the end of my own Rocketeer build. ...

Blog here if anyone is interested - sixintofive.wordpress.com

"If anyone is interested" FFS. THIS IS BRILLIANT READ !
Your writing skills are if anything even better than your obviously excellent engineering skills.

I've had an NA for a few years now and really love it, only modifications made are so I can fit in it as I'm well over 6 feet tall - and I've moved the wipers to the left stalk as that annoyed me- but I can totally understand the V6 appeal if/as it doesn't add weight which is which is so much the essence of the NA.

Very well done on the project AND the write-up.

[CarlosFandango11]

biggbn said:

CarlosFandango11 said:

biggbn said:

Bbr conversion is 4950 for 262hp and 60 in 5 secs.

£6k when you include VAT.

Still a damn sight cheaper, no? Proven, tuneable for more power also? I get it, many wod prefer the bigger na engine, thats cool. I'd take a turbo.

I was just correcting the price - BBR’s pricing on their website is very misleading.

It’s worth noting that BBR’s turbos aren’t suitable for track use.

Personally, considering price, performance and reliability, I would go for a Corten-Miller supercharger.

[R8FUN]

Another vote her for the CM Supercharger kit.
I ran one for two faultless years & regret selling the car.

[jason61c]

its properly expensive for what is essentially a 'kit car' build.

As I pointed out previously, people have been putting engines in mx5's for ages on the locost builders forum. For about 2-3k all in. Not the 13k you end up with here.

[TheJimi]

jason61c said:

its properly expensive for what is essentially a 'kit car' build.

I don't think you're aware of how easily you can reach pretty healthy (or not!) cost numbers on a decent spec kit car build.

[jason61c]

TheJimi said:

I don't think you're aware of how easily you can reach pretty healthy (or not!) cost numbers on a decent spec kit car build.

I'm completely aware! i've done a fair few.

[biggbn]

CarlosFandango11 said:

biggbn said:

CarlosFandango11 said:

biggbn said:

Bbr conversion is 4950 for 262hp and 60 in 5 secs.

£6k when you include VAT.

Still a damn sight cheaper, no? Proven, tuneable for more power also? I get it, many wod prefer the bigger na engine, thats cool. I'd take a turbo.

I was just correcting the price - BBR’s pricing on their website is very misleading.

It’s worth noting that BBR’s turbos aren’t suitable for track use.

Personally, considering price, performance and reliability, I would go for a Corten-Miller supercharger.

My initial post stated a turbo or supercharger, I only used the bbr example as just that, an example. It would do fine for me, I have no interest in track days...and would track days not invalidate most manufacturers warranties anyway?

[TheJimi]

jason61c said:

TheJimi said:

I don't think you're aware of how easily you can reach pretty healthy (or not!) cost numbers on a decent spec kit car build.

I'm completely aware! i've done a fair few.

In that case, this statement -

jason61c said:

its properly expensive for what is essentially a 'kit car' build.

Makes even less sense, since you should be well aware that the cost spectrum of kit car builds is very wide indeed.

[CarlosFandango11]

biggbn said:

My initial post stated a turbo or supercharger, I only used the bbr example as just that, an example. It would do fine for me, I have no interest in track days...and would track days not invalidate most manufacturers warranties anyway?

Corten-Miller warranty their supercharger for track use, BBR don’t offer a warranty for track use. You might not have interest in track days, but others will.

Edited by CarlosFandango11 on Sunday 3rd January 12:04

[biggbn]

CarlosFandango11 said:

biggbn said:

My initial post stated a turbo or supercharger, I only used the bbr example as just that, an example. It would do fine for me, I have no interest in track days...and would track days not invalidate most manufacturers warranties anyway?

Corten-Miller warranty their supercharger for track use, BBR don’t offer a warranty for track use. You might not have interest in track days, but others will.

Edited by CarlosFandango11 on Sunday 3rd January 12:04

Hence why I said it would do fine for me. Do mainstream manufacturers warranty their oily bits for track days, or does partaking invalidate the warranty?

[TheJimi]

I'm surprised at you here, Big G.

There's more to the Rocketeer conversion than simply performance. If all you want is performance, then yeah, forced induction is the way to go.

As it is, I don't think it's fair to compare force inducted standard engines with the V6.

[hairykrishna]

big_rob_sydney said:

Pretty much exactly what I was thinking (@Hairy). It would be good to compare across the cars you mentioned, to see the pros and cons of each. The MX5 looks to be almost the complete package; handling, along with decent grunt (what's the power/weight ratio? Something like 250-275 bhp per tonne or something?), and being low weight, it would stop in a short distance too, I would have thought. ETA: It's also tiny, which makes it easy to position on the road, and practicalities like actually parking it are made easier, too.

I'd be very curious to see how the others mentioned stack up, although the 911 has rear seats, so for starters, is more usable right there.

If I was in the market for something like this I'd have a V6 converted MK3 MR2. Sub 15 grand will easily get a very nice 2GR-FE conversion from Rogue Motorsport. 300 ish bhp and a better drive than an MX5 (in my opinion).

The truth is that the choice at the 15-20 grand mark is huge though. If it was an out and out toy some kind of seven would be perfect.

[biggbn]

TheJimi said:

I'm surprised at you here, Big G.

There's more to the Rocketeer conversion than simply performance. If all you want is performance, then yeah, forced induction is the way to go.

As it is, I don't think it's fair to compare force inducted standard engines with the V6.

Hey man, each to their own, I wouldn't even bother messing about with a standard mk2.5 mx5 sport as it would suit me fine out the box. I get that people like to mod cars, and was merely offering the opinion that a proven turbo or supercharger is probably cheaper, more reliable and more efficient than an engine conversion from another manufacturer. I'm not saying I am right, just that's my opinion.