The next-gen MX-5 Miata thread

marcvic
Hah - so true about the fuel mileage! I mainly drive city miles, and usually average around 22-23mpg. When I make the 300 mile trip home on the highway, I am getting 33-35mpg.



I'd agree 95% of the time, but the market is consistently flooded with Honda's with 100K+ miles for what I think are somewhat absurd prices compared to similar vehicles in their class. People have a lot of faith in their reliability. My only experience with Honda is with my wife's old '93 Civic LX - we had well over 255K miles before dealing with serious fixes. Granted she did get it from her grandmother with around 120K miles on it.



Well that RX-8 engine is somewhat of an anomaly though isn't it? I agree though, the 86's problem isn't necessarily the overall torque figure, but the well-documented torque dip between 3500-4500. That's something the MX-5 doesn't suffer from, as it is much more linear and packs a punch down low.

.....

I'm surprised that they went for that big of a jump though - an almost 17% increase in power. I wonder if they decided on a power figure first and went to work, or went to work first and arrived at said power figure.
Click to expand...
I posted about getting info of a sporting MX5, when I worked for a Mazda dealer. After he attended a Mazda dealer meet, the owner told me Mazda were unsure about what to call the sporting MX5(however, did tell me about other sporting variants Mazda were working on).
Especially, thereafter, Mazda said they're not offering MPS/Mazdaspeed versions. I'm believing this is what they were working towards. As I posted above, it'd cost less(to the consumer) to offer more performance as an "update" than to brand it as an MPS/Mazdaspeed variant.

Whether MPS/Mazda speed will return, I don't know.
 
Tornado
It needs some torque delivered in a way that wouldn't have an RX-8 spit its coffee out more than it actually needs more power at the top. Then it would both be faster in most situations (if not overall) and have the fuel economy more consummate with what the drivetrain implies that Eunos_Cosmo mentioned above.
Click to expand...

I think a right-sizing of the engine would do nicely. A 2.5 liter with the same power but more low end torque would be such a great fit for the ZN6 chassis. The ND feels so punchy (compared to the ZN6) because the torque-peak-in-gear-to-weight-ratio (:lol:) is higher and at a lower RPM (4800 vs 6400).

*for below tq=ft/lbs - these numbers were derived by taking peak torque and multiplying it by the total gear ratio multiplication and then dividing by the curb weight
In the first 3 gears, an ND has 0.94tq/lbs, 0.55tq/lbs, 0.37tq/lbs, respectively, at peak torque (4800rpm).

By comparison, a BR-Z has 0.79tq/lbs, 0.48tq/lbs, and 0.34tq/lbs, in the first 3 gears, at peak torque (6400rpm).

You can see that in first gear, the ND has, practically speaking, nearly 20% more realized-torque accounting for weight and gearing despite a seeming deficit on paper. In fact the ND just about matches a circa-2000 Mustang GT in terms of how much torque you feel (using the above method, which I'll now call the butt-feel-apothegm) while being just about halfway between the ZN6 and Z34 370z for a more contemporary reference point.
 
Last edited:
Eunos_Cosmo
MR2 takes it to another level...there isn't even a trunk. I really wanted one until I figured out that detail.
Click to expand...


To be fair, the ND only has about enough space for a laptop bag.

And not a big one.

homeforsummer
The steering didn't impress me at all though - in terms of feel and weighting it's closer to my old Insight than some of the modern stuff. An ND has better steering, albeit not by much, a GT86/BRZ has much better steering, and a Boxster (of any age) has vastly better steering. Given how important good steering feedback and weight is to a sports car, that was pretty disappointing.
Click to expand...

That's a bummer. I'd still like to drive one just to hear it sing, though.

Eunos_Cosmo
the butt-feel-apothegm
Click to expand...

:lol:

Funnily enough, the soft suspension helps create the illusion of even more torque. Watching that tiny bonnet lift up into the sky with the raging fury of all those tiny ponies is giggle-inducing.

Lots of people don't understand that when we complain about the GT86's power delivery, we're complaining about the torque, not the headline figures. I don't care if it doesn't have a kajillion horses... I just want it to give me at least as much low end torque as a Corolla.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
I think a right-sizing of the engine would do nicely. A 2.5 liter with the same power but more low end torque would be such a great fit for the ZN6 chassis. The ND feels so punchy (compared to the ZN6) because the torque-peak-in-gear-to-weight-ratio (:lol:) is higher and at a lower RPM (4800 vs 6400).

*for below tq=ft/lbs - these numbers were derived by taking peak torque and multiplying it by the total gear ratio multiplication and then dividing by the curb weight
In the first 3 gears, an ND has 0.94tq/lbs, 0.55tq/lbs, 0.37tq/lbs, respectively, at peak torque (4800rpm).

By comparison, a BR-Z has 0.79tq/lbs, 0.48tq/lbs, and 0.34tq/lbs, in the first 3 gears, at peak torque (6400rpm).

You can see that in first gear, the ND has, practically speaking, nearly 20% more realized-torque accounting for weight and gearing despite a seeming deficit on paper. In fact the ND just about matches a circa-2000 Mustang GT in terms of how much torque you feel (using the above method, which I'll now call the butt-feel-apothegm) while being just about halfway between the ZN6 and Z34 370z for a more contemporary reference point.
Click to expand...
I'd be intrigued to see a pull from idle in second gear between an ND, GT86, S2000 and RX-8.

Having driven all of them, albeit at different times (the ND and GT86 were back to back but big gaps to the others), I'd not at all be surprised to see the ND walk away from the others at first. Combination of better low-down torque (or that's how it feels, anyway) and lighter weight count for a lot. All three of the others really are engines that only get going at high revs, too.

Ultimately I think all three have more exciting engines than the ND though, and I've never felt they were too slow on the road (as you do naturally tend to exploit their revs). Heart-over-head it'd be the RX-8 for me.
 
homeforsummer
I'd be intrigued to see a pull from idle in second gear between an ND, GT86, S2000 and RX-8.

Having driven all of them, albeit at different times (the ND and GT86 were back to back but big gaps to the others), I'd not at all be surprised to see the ND walk away from the others at first. Combination of better low-down torque (or that's how it feels, anyway) and lighter weight count for a lot. All three of the others really are engines that only get going at high revs, too.

Ultimately I think all three have more exciting engines than the ND though, and I've never felt they were too slow on the road (as you do naturally tend to exploit their revs). Heart-over-head it'd be the RX-8 for me.
Click to expand...

Having driven all of them as well, I agree that the ND would jump out ahead....at first. But then the driver would have to shift to 3rd gear earlier than the rest...the MX-5 pulls harder, the others pull longer. I think the other three cars are ultimately faster, but the ND feels more eager than all of them. It's the MX-5 magic....punchy but not fast, which is perfectly aligned with the cars ethos and why I think its the perennial roadster. You can squirt it along on country roads with those short bursts of acceleration with a great amount of satisfaction, whereas the thrill from an S2000 comes from welding your foot to the floor and hanging on as you accumulate more and more speed.

The intriguing one is the GT86 twins because it can't quite do the aim & shoot thing that the MX-5 does, but it also doesn't quite agglomerate speed in the same way as an S2000 or RX-8, especially as it doesn't have the tires to maintain speed. I think that's the frustration that many have with the car...the engine seemingly exists just to provide transportation from corner to corner where one can work the excellent chassis.
 
Last edited:
Eunos_Cosmo
The intriguing one is the GT86 twins because it can't quite do the aim & shoot thing that the MX-5 does, but it also doesn't quite agglomerate speed in the same way as an S2000 or RX-8, especially as it doesn't have the tires to maintain speed. I think that's the frustration that many have with the car...the engine seemingly exists just to provide transportation from corner to corner where one can work the excellent chassis.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'd agree with that, and I agree about the chassis - best of all the cars mentioned, for me. The Mazda is fun but the grip/roll/steering response are all slightly misaligned with each other (and ultimately as a convertible - even the RF - it's compromised on body stiffness), whereas the 86 feels much more precise and adjustable, and there's more steering feel.

The steering is what spoils the S2000 for me, and I'm a fan of the RX-8 but haven't spent quite enough time with one to figure out the handling - though I'm led to believe it's similar to an NC, and I've spent decent time with those.
 
I’m curious about the roof vent’s purpose on the rally car.

upload_2018-8-6_15-59-22.jpeg
 
We just received 3 2019 Miatas here and I was able to drive an Automatic Grand Touring. You can definitely feel the difference in horsepower. It's around 5-6k RPM where it feels like a Mazda derivative of VTEC launches you forward. It's great! I also like the backup camera a lot more than on a 2018 2SS Camaro Convertible I drove last week.
 
Last edited:
dice1998
We just received 3 2019 Miatas here and I was able to drive an Automatic Grand Touring. You can definitely feel the difference in horsepower. It's around 5-6k RPM where it feels like a Mazda derivative of VTEC launches you forward. It's great! I also like the backup camera a lot more than on a 2018 2SS Camaro Convertible I drove last week.
Click to expand...

Does it feel as punchy down low as the previous engine? If so, the new one is definitely a winner.
 
For reference, the F20C in the S2000 made about 190-195whp without modification. So an ND with a full exhaust is right there in terms of power....but then the Mazda is 500lbs lighter. ND.2 new king of naturally aspirated roadsters?

Makes me wonder if Fiat is going to upgrade the Abarth. The ND.1 already felt faster over most of the rev range to me (ND feels punchier down low where the Abarth has not-insignificant lag, and the ND has more lungs up top. Abarth is definitely more torquey in the mid range though), so the new one has to be comfortably faster. Abarth could turn up the boost, but if I recall correctly, it's already quite high. I would actually love the 2 liter Mazda N/A engine in the Fiat. That would be an awesome package.
 
Eunos_Cosmo
500lbs lighter.
Click to expand...

A lot of people don't appreciate this tidbit. And it confuses them so when you tell them the MX-5 is already faster than the 86 with less power.

Interestingly, by the numbers, the ND was already just half a second slower than the 2.2 liter S2k stock versus stock in both quarter mile and in-gear acceleration.

And much easier to launch, too.

I am ecstatic to try this new one out.
 
Yeah, saw that one. Love BMI.
Funny, I saw two white 124s on the same road, half a kilometer apart. One driven by an older woman and other by a young man. A car finance & insurance woman I used to work with, has a black 124. I find the MX-5, classy roadster and the 124 like a mini Viper. Maybe that's the 124's appeal. Looks beefier.
 
I can't get on with the 124's looks, conversely. The proportions don't seem to work with that beefier bodystyle. It would probably have worked if it was on a FWD platform, oddly.
 

Latest Posts

Back