Mazda MX5
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Mazda MX5
Thinking about changing car, whilst there's nothing particularly wrong with the S I fancy a change, the only car that currently appeals to me (and is affordable) is the MX5 but it has to be the latest face lifted model with 2.0l engine else it might be a bit of a snore-fest.
Has anyone taken this route? Am I actually clinically insane for considering it?
Has anyone taken this route? Am I actually clinically insane for considering it?
#2
Thinking about changing car, whilst there's nothing particularly wrong with the S I fancy a change, the only car that currently appeals to me (and is affordable) is the MX5 but it has to be the latest face lifted model with 2.0l engine else it might be a bit of a snore-fest.
Has anyone taken this route? Am I actually clinically insane for considering it?
Has anyone taken this route? Am I actually clinically insane for considering it?
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bournemouth, Dorset
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I moved from a 2.0 Sport NC (Mk3) Mx-5 to the S2k.
I do miss it slightly. 160 horses and pretty skinny tyres were a lot of fun. You could chuck it round corners and roundabouts, slide the back out and feel 100% in control and know exactly what the car was doing underneath. The feel through the wheel and chassis was 10 times better than the s2k.
It did have its problems though. Wrong geometry from the factory is a common problem (they were jacked up on bigger springs for the euro market but the geo was set at the factory on the JDM springs) either have the geo set correctly (WIM do loads of NC Mx5's and are happy to share the settings that work best! Ask for Tony - he hasn't seen a factory MX5 where the geo has been correct!) or you can stick it on Eibach springs and the drop brings the geo in spec. Blocked drain pipes and flooded cabins are a common problem.
It's not a fast car. It'll get to 62 in about 8 seconds with a full tank and the engine is pretty boring. It's a Mazda badged Ford Duratec unit and doesn't really have any character. It'll also only return 30 odd MPG driving like a granny. I haven't noticed that I spend any more on petrol in the s2. There are very few aftermarket parts out there. K&N do a generic induction kit and Milltek do an exhaust but that's about it. The Cosworth supercharger never really caught on as it just threw rods through the block. The seats are also crap. They don't really offer any support. Although after 3 years the leather looked as good as new.
The Sport has Bilstein dampers, LSD, leather and is 6 speed rather than 5 in the normal 2.0. Tax is also a bracket higher in the Sport due to the gear ratio’s causing higher emissions for whatever test the government run.
Facelift cars (Mk3.5) have an extra 500 rpm and an 'intake sound pipe' into the cabin to give better induction noise.
I think on balance I prefer the s2k. If I could have the feel of the MX-5 and the drivetrain from the s2k I think I would never need to change cars in the future!
If you have any other questions, I’ll do my best to answer!
I do miss it slightly. 160 horses and pretty skinny tyres were a lot of fun. You could chuck it round corners and roundabouts, slide the back out and feel 100% in control and know exactly what the car was doing underneath. The feel through the wheel and chassis was 10 times better than the s2k.
It did have its problems though. Wrong geometry from the factory is a common problem (they were jacked up on bigger springs for the euro market but the geo was set at the factory on the JDM springs) either have the geo set correctly (WIM do loads of NC Mx5's and are happy to share the settings that work best! Ask for Tony - he hasn't seen a factory MX5 where the geo has been correct!) or you can stick it on Eibach springs and the drop brings the geo in spec. Blocked drain pipes and flooded cabins are a common problem.
It's not a fast car. It'll get to 62 in about 8 seconds with a full tank and the engine is pretty boring. It's a Mazda badged Ford Duratec unit and doesn't really have any character. It'll also only return 30 odd MPG driving like a granny. I haven't noticed that I spend any more on petrol in the s2. There are very few aftermarket parts out there. K&N do a generic induction kit and Milltek do an exhaust but that's about it. The Cosworth supercharger never really caught on as it just threw rods through the block. The seats are also crap. They don't really offer any support. Although after 3 years the leather looked as good as new.
The Sport has Bilstein dampers, LSD, leather and is 6 speed rather than 5 in the normal 2.0. Tax is also a bracket higher in the Sport due to the gear ratio’s causing higher emissions for whatever test the government run.
Facelift cars (Mk3.5) have an extra 500 rpm and an 'intake sound pipe' into the cabin to give better induction noise.
I think on balance I prefer the s2k. If I could have the feel of the MX-5 and the drivetrain from the s2k I think I would never need to change cars in the future!
If you have any other questions, I’ll do my best to answer!
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Lincs
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing wrong with the MX5 (I had one before the S.) I would consider it a downgrade though, V slow in comparison and generally not as sporty.
Depends what you want, if you want to save money the MX5 isn't a bad idea. If finances aren't your main reason then yep, you're clinically insane in the membrane!
Depends what you want, if you want to save money the MX5 isn't a bad idea. If finances aren't your main reason then yep, you're clinically insane in the membrane!
#6
Mk1 MX5 with some FI fun
#7
Thinking about changing car, whilst there's nothing particularly wrong with the S I fancy a change, the only car that currently appeals to me (and is affordable) is the MX5 but it has to be the latest face lifted model with 2.0l engine else it might be a bit of a snore-fest.
I'd say that any MX-5 is a backward step from an S but none of them are poor cars by any means, and cheaper to run than the S - I'd actually say that the latest MX is more likely to be a snorefest than the lighter, more bare-bones earlier models - the pre-05 1.8 would be my pick for cheap, chucking fun.
But any of them will feels slow compared to the S, all of them are less handsome and (at the risk of stating the obvious) bugger all happens at 6.5k on the tach - I couldn't do it now.
Trending Topics
#8
It'd be going in reverse for me.
But I think the NA cars are absolutely the dog's nuts. Shame about the fragility of the NC's engines, though.
Be interestong to see how they stack up agains the AS (that's a GT 8 6!)
But I think the NA cars are absolutely the dog's nuts. Shame about the fragility of the NC's engines, though.
Be interestong to see how they stack up agains the AS (that's a GT 8 6!)
#9
When you look at new car prices of Golfs and the like the MX5 looks very good value, especially after the large discounts that are available.
I tried to get my wife to buy one a few years back but no, maybe I'll try again in a couple of years or so.
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bournemouth, Dorset
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts