Wednesday 27th February 2013

PH Blog: MR2 vs MX-5

Cheap'n'cheerful used roadsters, both - but which one's best?

---

I was in the fortunate position yesterday to take home a Mk3 Toyota MR2. “Here you go, Scrof,” said Dan, as the keys were tossed my way. “Have a go in this one and see if it’s any better than that Mk1 you bought.”

MX-5 feels fun even on a motorway

I was in the even more fortunate position of having driven a Mk2 Mazda MX-5 last week, enabling a near back-to-back comparison. Growing up and devouring magazine road tests almost as fast as they were published, I’d assumed the MX-5 and the MR2 would be pretty similar things. On the face of it, they are. Yet driving the two so close to each other revealed a real difference in character.

For full disclosure, it’s worth pointing out that the two were very different examples; the MX-5 a pre-facelift 2000 model with 70,000 on the clock, and the MR2 a post-facelift 2006 example with just 13,000 miles under its belt. Hard to compare them accurately, therefore, which is why this isn’t a true road test – more, the musings of a bloke who’s always admired both.

Facelift MX-5 looks better to my eyes

Despite the Mazda’s obvious disadvantage in terms of age and use, it made a convincing case for itself. Because I’m an idiot, I drove it one night down the entire length of the M3, in mid-February, at rush hour, with the hood down. And you know what? It was fantastic. It was comfy in seats and suspension and instead of a roof, I had a smattering of stars above my head. But as you’d expect, it really came into its own on the back roads. The great thing about the MX is that it’s laid-back enough to allow you to pick and choose. Drive it like a hooligan, and there’s always tail-out fun on tap. Or drive it with care and precision, and it rewards with plenty of grip, steering feel and a wonderfully pointy front end. The engine can’t disguise its lack of grunt, but it’s always responsive and willing.

Jumping into the MR2, it was immediately obvious that it’s the sharper, more honed car of the two. The whole car felt more taut and more alert. Sounds great, but it had a downside: the same journey down the M3 was suddenly no longer a joy. Halfway down, I realised I was getting back ache as I couldn’t move the seat far enough back; what’s more, the suspension picked up imperfections that simply weren’t there in the Mazda (nor, even, in our Cup-spec Megane 265).

MR2 is the sharper car of the two

Turning off the motorway in the MR2, that discomfort did pay off – to a point. It was undoubtedly sharper and more responsive than the Mazda. But it also felt more fidgety, and as a result, less confidence-inspiring – like it had had a big caffeine hit earlier in the day and couldn’t quite settle down. That said, it allowed gleeful, eminently catchable oversteer on tap, and more easily than the MX-5 – thanks largely to the standard limited-slip diff – and the engine, while feeling flat and sounding uninspiring at low revs, did provide zingy, rev-rewarding acceleration once you hit the top end.

Reading this back, it sounds like I had a downer on the MR2, but I didn’t. I did think it was a less-accomplished all-rounder than the MX-5, but I also reckoned it to be the more rewarding driver’s car. Where the MX-5 is happy to play ball however you fancy, the MR2 demands you grab it by the scruff of its neck to get the best experience from it. I prefer its bluffer, chunkier lines to the MX-5’s, and I find it feels less cramped inside, despite lacking legroom.

This one looks a cracker

I liked both equally, and as a result I find myself in something of a quandary. Which would I choose, if I had to part with my cash? If it was to be the MR2, it’d have to be a post-facelift; I’ve heard too many stories of earlier cars ingesting their engines. So at the two-grand mark, or thereabouts, the MX-5 would be the instant choice. One like this, for example, with respectable mileage and all the history you could hope for, would be a seriously tempting prospect. But with a little more cash to play with, I think the Toyota would probably edge it by a whisker, purely because of its looks and proclivity to oversteer. This one would be just the ticket - leather and a hard top are great options to have, the mileage is reasonable, it's got a full service history and it looks well looked-after. But it’s a subjective decision, rather than an objective one – so I’d be keen to hear your take.

Alex

[Lead pic: Will Williams/What Car?]

[tom5678]

I had a MK3 MR2 and I loved it. Not sure whether it's through slightly tinted eyes as it was my first 'decent' car and I was only 21 and living in Cornwall, so a great place to drive it! I had mine lowered slightly with 17" team dynamic wheels and a TTE spoiler, massivley improved the looks.

[Richair]

I found myself in the 'I have £2k in my pocket and fancy a roadster' position 2 years hence and narrowed my choice down to a these two (albiet an NA VR-ltd MX5). I chose the MX5.

The MR2 felt great out on the road, but I also felt it to be a bit edgy where the MX5 is happy to play ball what ever mood I'm in (although it does help mine has a propper torsen). But to be honest, there wasn't much in it all!

I was fortunate enough to find a good example of each car within half a mile of each other on the same day. That was a tough decision to make...

I still have the MX5 and have no intention on selling any time soon. It will soon be getting a 'proper' spec new engine too

[Salgar]

Damnit, You've reminded me of a similar roof down winter midnight journey I had in my mx5 a while back.

I want another mx5.

[JamesHayward]

As an avid MX-5 owner I should really shun the MR2 - but I can't. It is damn good. A mate of mine bought one after owning an S1 Elise and described it as "an everyday Elise with more body roll."

I wouldn't choose one over the MX-5 but that's more of a personal preference thing rather than the ability of the two cars.

[Dog Star]

akaRob]The MX5 [... said:

little more leg room and the boot sealed the deal. As much as I would still like an MR2

For real? I'm 6'3" and the OH is 6'2" with a very long 37" inside leg. The legroom in the MX5 was atrocious compared to the MK3 MR2 which had more legroom than anything else I think I've ever tried.

[suffolk009]

Mk1 Eunos every time.

Even though I'm just about to write a big cheque for it's MOT. Sill replacement, wheelarch repairs (both of which I'd been ignoring) and a new shock and spring at the back. So I'm upgrading to coil-overs, and getting the body work done. About time too.

Then I'll run it another six years and another 50,000 miles.

[300bhp/ton]

The obvious answer is a wedge shaped 350i TVR.

HTH

[VAGJAX]

I currently have a 2003 MX5 1.6 on my stock books and I've used it to go to the butty shop a few times and when i took it to photograph it.

As a tool for learning to drift in these things are awesome. When it's slightly greasy you dumo the clutch and the back end steps out perfectly, then let off and it comes straight back in..........makes you feel like you have for more driving skill than you really have.....epic fun though, and I reckon this things must be doing 35+ mpg even though it's an old engine as it weighs bugger all. Goes without saying but not the most practical car in the world

For me though, with my own money, it would be an MR2! Not the new shape as in the article but a JDM Rev3 Turbo!!! Serious power for the money and with the mid-engine, rwd, big hp combo it certainly kept you on your toes with the impending possibility it was going to kill you. They were a bit like owning a Rottweiler, aggressive to look at but you quickly became comfortable with it until out of the blue it bit you in the face! .......if only Toyota made cars like they used to.

[mx5tom]

Are MR2s really that easy to provoke into controllable oversteer?

I looked at these before buying an MX5, and just assumed that being mid-engined (with LSD or not) would mean that it would turn into a bit of a handful when the rears lost traction.

[bigtrev200]

I had a Mk1 Eunos for 18 months about five years ago and I've currently got a '03 MR2 Roadster and I feel that the Toyota is a more complete car for my needs. It's got a fantastic chassis, it's better built, it's got a bit more refinement when you need it on the motorway (I do 900-miles a month on the M20 so this is fairly important), it's just superb when you grab it by the scruff, and to top it all off I regularly see 40mpg. The last one is a boring point I know, but I never got near that in my MX-5.

[RobM77]

I've driven both Mk3 MR2 and Mk2 MX5 on a number of occasions and for me at least, there's no doubt that the MR2 is the better driver's car. Obviously it's all down to a matter of preference though. I found that the MR2 felt more agile and considerably faster in a straight line (I know what happens here on PH, so please note that I said 'felt' in that statement, not 'was'); and because driving on the public road is all about sensations rather than stopwatches and laptimes, I preferred the MR2. I've also driven a Mk1 MX5 and owned a mk1 MR2 for a few years, and I preferred the MR2 in that comparison too, for the same reasons.

The MR2 remains one of the very few cars I've seriously considered buying new (the others being a Caterham R400, an Elise and the new GT86).

[patmahe]

I (along with many Phers forced to live in the real world I suspect) have been considering this one for a while. Your article really helps clarify something I always suspected, that the MR2 might be a bit too focused/tiring to live with day-to-day, brilliant as a track car no doubt, but for a simple roof down cruise through the countryside probably a bit too raw.

The MX-5 appears to be able to do both, without having to compromise either massively. I'll probably pick up an early NA MX-5 and use it as a second car on classic insurance. I'll let the snotter take the battering in shopping centres etc...

Anyway a good article, well written and very relevant to us petrolheads on a budget Thanks

[300bhp/ton]

patmahe said:

I (along with many Phers forced to live in the real world I suspect) have been considering this one for a while. Your article really helps clarify something I always suspected, that the MR2 might be a bit too focused/tiring to live with day-to-day, brilliant as a track car no doubt, but for a simple roof down cruise through the countryside probably a bit too raw.

Really???

[GTiFrank]

I should probably pipe up at this point and point out that the MX-5 can - just about be justified as a daily driver, whereas the MR2 certainly cannot without a boot and just cubby holes.

MR2 for a toy. MX-5 if it's your only car.

[Frimley111R]

I've had both. MR2.

[RobM77]

GTiFrank said:

I should probably pipe up at this point and point out that the MX-5 can - just about be justified as a daily driver, whereas the MR2 certainly cannot without a boot and just cubby holes.

MR2 for a toy. MX-5 if it's your only car.

It depends who you are I think. I need the daily driver I've got (3 series) because I frequently carry my bike, kayak, cello and guitars around. I also do a fair bit of my own DIY in the form of woodwork, groundwork and basic mechanics on my track day car. However, if I didn't do any of that (like a good number of people I'd guess), then I could easily have the MR2 as my daily driver. We don't have children, get 95% of our shopping delivered, and live near a train station that'll get us to Heathrow and Gatwick.

[Tom275]

I drive a reasonably modified MK1 Eunos as a daily. Apart from it being a bit low and bumpy its a perfectly reasonable daily.

Though saying that, I am going to see a chiropractor on Friday...

[Dog Star]

GTiFrank said:

I should probably pipe up at this point and point out that the MX-5 can - just about be justified as a daily driver, whereas the MR2 certainly cannot without a boot and just cubby holes.

MR2 for a toy. MX-5 if it's your only car.

I actually found that with the rear cubby "hole" (which runs the full width of the car) and the front cubby hole you could actually carry quite a lot of stuff. Stick a rear rack on (from what used to be classiccarriers.nl) and you could carry loads and loads - go for 3 week camping tours of Europe and stuff with loads of luggage.

The "it's got no boot" thing is a bit misleading.

As mentioned above - the legroom in the MX5 is an issue - I had to have my knees jammed against the dash as a passenger in the MX5, awful (and I wouldn't want to be in a crash) whereas in the MR2 you can stretch you legs out as long as you like and wave them around in the footwell.

[Galileo]

I'd buy an inferior MGTF and be happy in the knowledge I don't look like a hairdresser.

[warren182]

Picked up a pre face lift mr2 for £1500. Precats removed, chassis braces fitted, and it's superb fun. More precise and responsive than an mx5,it's the keen drivers choice.