mx-5 vs S2k

Siliconslave · 30 Sep 2008 at 13:06

I'm looking at getting another 2 seat convertible to enjoy the lovely British <looks out the window> to drive around in the rain, for the money the two options i'm considering are the s2000 and the MX-5....

My budget is somewhere between 7&10k (ie i have 7 now, or i can wait for 9-10 by the end of the year) so i'd be looking at:

7k for ~2005 mk2.5 MX-5 special edition (ie Euphonic) with ~30k on the clock

OR

9.5k ~2001 rev 1/2 S2000 with >50k on the clock.

power wise the S wins by far although the price difference could easily be put towards fixing this. In most other areas the S leads slightly but is it really worth the price increase.... like for like the S is 'worth' somewhere around £7k more than 5, although i'm struggling to see the extra value...

I'd be interested to hear the views of people on here, obviously driving the two back to back is going to sort the heart side of the decision out, but the head side is still not finalized yet

OCUK what do you recon?

Siliconslave · 30 Sep 2008 at 13:12

vs

(and i know which i prefer looks wise...)

Siliconslave · 30 Sep 2008 at 13:14

Firestar_3x said:
You really need to drive both, the S2000 is a much more grown up car i did love it but i didn't like the engine so much.

Doesn't really help you much, sorry!

i know what you mean, its a much more serious car... not totally sure i want that (yet) but the idea of poodling along under vtec then hooning around at other times is tempting.

Having said that i'm driving the misses' celica at the moment i'm not really loving the vvti on that..

Toekiller said:
By more fun, you mean kill you quicker, yes?

thats the other concern, the early (or any) s2000 is a little lary on the edge, more setup for race vs the mx5 drift style setup... i'd relish the challenge in a way, but again i'm not sure i want to sacrifice the fun aspect

Siliconslave · 30 Sep 2008 at 13:22

Firestar_3x said:
Remember the Mk2.5 is a variable cam engine so will drive similar to that in the Celica, i found the Mk2 and Mk2.5 engines to be different beasts.

yer, unfortunatly its getting really hard to find a low mileage mrk2 (been looking for the last couple of months) damn 10AEs are almost as pricey as s2ks...

i'm going to have to get driving some more of each...

Siliconslave · 30 Sep 2008 at 13:30

Firestar_3x said:
I'd be tempted to sack it off and have that Mazdaspeed + power increase.

which mazdaspeed? http://pistonheads.com/sales/660219.htm?

Siliconslave · 1 Oct 2008 at 17:15

Abyss said:
I've got plenty of pics of the MX-5 euphonic in gunmetal if it helps

Lovely

My only issue with the gunmetal is that the misses has literally just bought this:

and we'd look like a right pair with his and hers Mazdas..... (and no comment about whose wearing the trousers!)

Siliconslave · 2 Oct 2008 at 10:05

I've seen a couple of turbo mx5 vs s2ks on the, erm, track and tbh theres not much in it...
Obviously its not stock vs stock or fettled vs fettled but as pointed out it works out to pretty much the same money, and the 5 would be considerably newer & lower mileage.

FF i'm sure you've told me before but how much did your setup work out to in the end? What sort of mpg did you end up getting as well?

the other consideration is that a S comes with all the power out the box, and while i'll enjoy messing with the 5 it does come with its own complications (time off the road, servicing etc...)

Siliconslave · 2 Oct 2008 at 10:33

Firestar_3x said:
Turbo MX5 resale values vs what you spend to sort one out is rubbish!

yup, they really don't sell too well turbo'd up, but the plan is to keep it long term so not too much of a worry... although i'm keeping my eyes peeled for a lowish mileage turbo'd 5 on the off chance...

(and no, i'm not getting this one, looks very nice but that little bit dodgey!)