MX-5 Project log thread

Peter Diffey · 31 Mar 2009 at 22:19

Did yours look the same as that though? (notice the much deeper thread on the new one). Ive just ordered the MX5parts one so I will see for myself in a couple of days

Howard · 31 Mar 2009 at 22:46

Scroll up

They're the same

Howard · 3 May 2009 at 14:21

This morning I fitted some front and rear chassis/subframe bracing bars.

Early mk1s weren't braced as well as later ones, and these are meant to make things a fair bit more rigid.

The braces - front top, rear bottom

Rear mounting holes in the subframe

Bar in place

Mounting the front one - Getting the bolts in is a lot more fiddly, as you need to "guide" them down behind the wishbone mount, but there's a bigger hole underneath that you can poke your finger through and guide the bolt. I then used some twist-tie to keep the washer and bolt in place whilst I placed the bar onto the bolts and tightened the nuts.

And the front finished article also

Has it helped? Yes, a lot. The body doesn't feel quite as jittery going over rougher surfaces now, and as a consequence feels a fair bit more planted. Turn-in seems sharper, also.

An inexpensive and simple bolt on modification, but it has made a decent difference!

Roll on new suspension :cool:

Kitchster_uk · 3 May 2009 at 14:38

Looking good mate, I may look at those next. Suspension was defo a great mod for me, 2nd had set of Apexi shocks was £120 delivered and has made a world of difference - great result.

The Bee sting conversion is a piece of cake with the manual aerial btw, unscrew the 'whip' and put the bee sting on - dead easy.

Howard · 3 May 2009 at 14:39

Really, don't need a new base bit?

saitrix · 3 May 2009 at 17:35

Tut tut, you didn't do the bolts the other way round on the front like I did. That way I don't have the bolts sticking down under the car. Plus it looks like you have fitted the bar upside down.

Go do it again, I fitted it the other way round with the box section upwards, will give you more ground clearance.

Kitchster_uk · 3 May 2009 at 18:30

Howard said:
Really, don't need a new base bit?

Not if it's a standard uk car, unscrew the whip, fit the plastic spacer and screw the 'sting in - 5 minute job. I actually bought the standard base to replace the electric aerial I had and that involved slightly more work in fabricating a ***** bracket - an additional 10mins.

/edit, I'll upload some pics.

Kitchster_uk · 3 May 2009 at 18:44

Howard · 4 May 2009 at 08:23

saitrix said:
Tut tut, you didn't do the bolts the other way round on the front like I did. That way I don't have the bolts sticking down under the car. Plus it looks like you have fitted the bar upside down. Go do it again, I fitted it the other way round with the box section upwards, will give you more ground clearance.

I followed the instructions :rolleyes:

Thanks Kitchster, that looks good, will add it to the list

Howard · 4 May 2009 at 10:23

had a quick look at why there was a loud crackling noise when listening to the stereo at an adequate volume on the motorway..

Ahh, that'll be why then!

Poor little 20 year old speakers have had it

Pair of cheap 6" speakers will do, I think

Howard · 4 May 2009 at 18:44

Ah yes, while we're at it

Kitchster_uk · 4 May 2009 at 18:53

Good result on the RR - 20 years old and it has increased it's power by a few bhp!!!

Howard · 4 May 2009 at 18:54

Yep, torque's bang on the money too

Gonna order that stubby aerial along with some new speakers for my door now I think!

mattpc · 4 May 2009 at 18:55

I just don't see my car having increased in power. The engine really does feel tired compared with yours kichster. That said- it's felt pretty much the same for several years so I guess I should just leave it be while the going is OK and then stick the spare engine in when it fails horribly!

Howard · 4 May 2009 at 18:56

I went for a ride in DrDee's 1.8 mk2 and it didn't feel a great deal faster. Probably due to the increased weight though. mk2s are cool though, refined yet sharp handling

mattpc · 4 May 2009 at 18:57

Howard said:
I went for a ride in DrDee's 1.8 mk2 and it didn't feel a great deal faster. Probably due to the increased weight though. mk2s are cool though, refined yet sharp handling

Is his a mk2.5 tho? Surely it was only the mk 2.5 VVTI or what ever they called that 143bhp engine that should feel faster?

Howard · 4 May 2009 at 18:59

No it's a mk2

Dorje's 1.8 mk2 made 142bhp though

Dorje · 4 May 2009 at 19:02

There isn't much difference between the early 1.6's and 1.8 variants really. But I could definitely notice the difference coming from a Mk1 1.8 to a mk2 1.8.

DrDee's 5 is indeed a mk2 like mine but has mk2.5 doorcards and seats.

Kitchster_uk · 4 May 2009 at 19:03

I would be interested to RR mine, mattpc is right, it does feel a little better though there are 30,000 less miles on my engine!

The 1.6 is supposed to be there or there about with the power delivery, that's why they strangled it later on to make the 1.8i feel more powerful. The difference seems to be taste tbh. Howard - your 5 looks ace mate, keep up the good work!!!

mattpc · 4 May 2009 at 19:03

Howard said:
No it's a mk2 Dorje's 1.8 mk2 made 142bhp though

Hmm, confusing. I wonder if my spare engine will make that. It's from a MK1 but it's JDM so I reckon that's worth at least 10bhp!

I'd quite like to bring mine to the rolling road just to see how poorly the engine is.. It pulls ok but sounds thrashy and doesn't seem to rev as freely as kitchsters. That said- I remember we replaced the cam cover gasket back in new year 2007 and thought we could see scoring (not that either of us are engine experts) and it's done probably 30k since then...

Having recently had a passenger ride at cadwell in both 1.6 and 1.8 I would say there is certainly a noticeable difference between 1.6 and 1.8 in performance but it's not a massive gap and the 1.6 is still a very capable engine when in 115bhp form rather than the stifled 90bhp form. I would ideally like to decat my 1.8 to see what it is capable of when not restricted by the CAT.