MX5 Owners in here....bring your curling tongs
- Thread starter Conscript
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 11,378
- Location
- Derbyshire
Wow that is crap!
If my MK1 did that it would sap half the fun! I love going sideways in the wet!
just had a joyful afternoon of sorting out the niggles on the 5 ready for its retest for its MOT. replaced all the pads and discs, changed one of the calipers (although think it may be worth replacing another as it was a bit sticky) MAF has been cleaned to remove one of the engine fault codes and some new tyres fitted.
whilst i was at it was tempted to change the handbrake cable, have many people changed the handbrake cable to an aftermarket one? heard the handbrake cable used in the mk2.5(maybe all mx5s) is not the best?
whilst i was at it was tempted to change the handbrake cable, have many people changed the handbrake cable to an aftermarket one? heard the handbrake cable used in the mk2.5(maybe all mx5s) is not the best?
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 2,721
- Location
- Nr Colchester, Essex
I think it's a bit of a pain because of where it routes, I also think there are two at the back and a joiner in a really awkward position if I remember correctly.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2011
- Posts
- 6,278
- Location
- Southampton
Hello MX-5 owners!
I've been looking to get something a bit more exciting and involved to replace my first car- a 95 Nissan Almera 1.4. I've been looking at MX-5s as they seem to be a relatively inexpensive (including fuel insurance and tax (and tyres?) ) but also 'safe' way to get some rear wheel drive fun under my belt. However I have a few questions..
1) this would be a daily driver (Only a 10 minute drive to the train station though). Is a hard top a must? Is a 3rd gen a must? What is it like to drive at 6am on an icy January morning?
2) do you wish the second gen had more power? I'm worried that I'll be disappointed...
3) I have a budget of £4.5k. I seem to be able to get a fair few 3rd gen models and a bazillion second gen models. Which would you go for? The second greens for the same price seem to have fewer miles on them and seem to be Special Editions.
4) my current car is loud and uncomfortable on long journeys. It has electric windows but that is about it- I'm actually expecting a 2nd gen to be more comfortable and refined than my car! Or is this not likely to be the case?
Cheers!
I've been looking to get something a bit more exciting and involved to replace my first car- a 95 Nissan Almera 1.4. I've been looking at MX-5s as they seem to be a relatively inexpensive (including fuel insurance and tax (and tyres?) ) but also 'safe' way to get some rear wheel drive fun under my belt. However I have a few questions..
1) this would be a daily driver (Only a 10 minute drive to the train station though). Is a hard top a must? Is a 3rd gen a must? What is it like to drive at 6am on an icy January morning?
2) do you wish the second gen had more power? I'm worried that I'll be disappointed...
3) I have a budget of £4.5k. I seem to be able to get a fair few 3rd gen models and a bazillion second gen models. Which would you go for? The second greens for the same price seem to have fewer miles on them and seem to be Special Editions.
4) my current car is loud and uncomfortable on long journeys. It has electric windows but that is about it- I'm actually expecting a 2nd gen to be more comfortable and refined than my car! Or is this not likely to be the case?
Cheers!
As to your questions...my opinions (as a Mk3 owner who has passengered in, but never driven, a Mk1 and Mk2):
1) Hard top is not a must but for me its nice to have, making the car more secure, much more refined, and (in the mk3 at least) freeing up headroom slightly, due to the hood frame over your head taking up more space with the roof up. The Mk3 is notably more modern feeling and more comfortable than the earlier cars, with a much more modern and better equipped interior, but some feel this refinement takes away part of the back to basics ethos which makes the MX5 fun.
2) I came to a 160bhp Mk3 from a series of faster cars (200bhp Fiesta ST, 220bhp Civic Type R, and briefly a Honda S2000 with 240bhp) and whilst its fun to drive, it could do with a bit more grunt. Its still very fun to drive, outright speed is really not the point to a good '5', its more about feel and involvement, but if you are a speed demon then I'd test drive one first. The engines in all 5s as standard are revvy and willing but do require working hard. The 2.0 Mk3 is noticably quicker than the Mk2 1.8 cars. I know I'd find the Mk2 1.8s too slow personally...I'm about to spend money making my Mk3 2.0 a bit faster as its the only area of the car that has disappointed me.
3) £4.5k is a tricky budget, towards the lower end of Mk3s and puts you in the realms of cars with higher mileages, however at this time of year you may get a bargain.
The problem with buying a Mk2 or Mk2 facelift is how badly they rust. I'd buy a Mk2 on condition/lack of corrosion more than spec or specific model.
For the Mk3, the 2.0 'Sport' is the best spec, with Bilstein suspension, LSD, fog lights, heated leather seats, climate control and 6 speed gearbox. It has a strut brace too over the non sport cars but this basically does nothing discernible whilst driving.
Don't overlook a well specced 2.0 non-Sport spec car though - as all of the 2.0 cars had the LSD, many think the 5 speed box is just as good, and climate, leather and Bose stereo could all be specified as options....so you can find some 'non Sport' models that are nearly as well specced anyway, barring the gearbox and Bilstein suspension.
4) Refinement is not an MX-5 strong point but I find my Mk3 pretty comfortable even though I barely fit (6 ft 1 and 15 odd stone makes it a bit snug) and it is well equipped - the 2.0 Sport models have climate, heated mirrors/screen, decent stereo, and the seats are comfy too.
1) Hard top is not a must but for me its nice to have, making the car more secure, much more refined, and (in the mk3 at least) freeing up headroom slightly, due to the hood frame over your head taking up more space with the roof up. The Mk3 is notably more modern feeling and more comfortable than the earlier cars, with a much more modern and better equipped interior, but some feel this refinement takes away part of the back to basics ethos which makes the MX5 fun.
2) I came to a 160bhp Mk3 from a series of faster cars (200bhp Fiesta ST, 220bhp Civic Type R, and briefly a Honda S2000 with 240bhp) and whilst its fun to drive, it could do with a bit more grunt. Its still very fun to drive, outright speed is really not the point to a good '5', its more about feel and involvement, but if you are a speed demon then I'd test drive one first. The engines in all 5s as standard are revvy and willing but do require working hard. The 2.0 Mk3 is noticably quicker than the Mk2 1.8 cars. I know I'd find the Mk2 1.8s too slow personally...I'm about to spend money making my Mk3 2.0 a bit faster as its the only area of the car that has disappointed me.
3) £4.5k is a tricky budget, towards the lower end of Mk3s and puts you in the realms of cars with higher mileages, however at this time of year you may get a bargain.
The problem with buying a Mk2 or Mk2 facelift is how badly they rust. I'd buy a Mk2 on condition/lack of corrosion more than spec or specific model.
For the Mk3, the 2.0 'Sport' is the best spec, with Bilstein suspension, LSD, fog lights, heated leather seats, climate control and 6 speed gearbox. It has a strut brace too over the non sport cars but this basically does nothing discernible whilst driving.
Don't overlook a well specced 2.0 non-Sport spec car though - as all of the 2.0 cars had the LSD, many think the 5 speed box is just as good, and climate, leather and Bose stereo could all be specified as options....so you can find some 'non Sport' models that are nearly as well specced anyway, barring the gearbox and Bilstein suspension.
4) Refinement is not an MX-5 strong point but I find my Mk3 pretty comfortable even though I barely fit (6 ft 1 and 15 odd stone makes it a bit snug) and it is well equipped - the 2.0 Sport models have climate, heated mirrors/screen, decent stereo, and the seats are comfy too.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2011
- Posts
- 6,278
- Location
- Southampton
Will, thanks for that advice!
Is it likely that the low mileage mk2s at the top of my budget will have corrosion or will they be priced that high on the basis that they don't have corrosion issues?
How do MX-5s compare to similar but bigger cars like a civic type r or even a z4? Know it would be slower but will the bigger faster cars be as tight and involved and generally more fun on the back roads? And if so, is this b road fun worth the lack of power and refinement?
Im tempted to buy a boring box for 3.5k and then spending a grand on an mx5 to go nuts with and get some experience and fun with, with no intention of spending any real money on it and scrapping it when it dies. Am i nuts?
Is it likely that the low mileage mk2s at the top of my budget will have corrosion or will they be priced that high on the basis that they don't have corrosion issues?
How do MX-5s compare to similar but bigger cars like a civic type r or even a z4? Know it would be slower but will the bigger faster cars be as tight and involved and generally more fun on the back roads? And if so, is this b road fun worth the lack of power and refinement?
Im tempted to buy a boring box for 3.5k and then spending a grand on an mx5 to go nuts with and get some experience and fun with, with no intention of spending any real money on it and scrapping it when it dies. Am i nuts?
Can't comment on the Z4 but my 2008 Civic Type R was much less involving, the engine was better than that in the MX5, gearbox about the same, both fantastic, but the chassis on the Civic was just dull, felt heavy, and the (electric) power steering lacked feel.
The MX5 is just more balanced, more feelsome and just more enjoyable, more of a proper sports car than just a hatchback with a grunty engine and hard suspension. It lacks refinement even compared to the Type R though, a car reknowned for hard suspension and short gearing.
Its the most fun car I have had (I discount the S2000 from this as my ownership was so short).
My usage profile is this - I do lots of short journeys too/from work or places around town (average well less than 10 miles/day), and then my fairly infrequent longer trips tend to be for recreation anyway, so I'm not time pressured and can take detours to enjoy the back roads. For me its worth the trade off of refinement, to have something fun for those occasional longer trips. Buts its not a great car for lots of motorway mileage or many long trips....if you don't do many miles though, and want something fun for the occasional long trip, pound for pound its a good option with very reasonable running costs. Still good enough as a daily, the Mk3, comfy and nice enough inside in a well specced one - good stereo, heated leather, and a good heater make it a nice place to sit for shorter journeys even in winter with the roof up. I honestly think you'd cope well enough with one as a 'daily driver', especially with a hardtop, coming from a 95 Almera
Going back to your question about Mk2s and rust, its an odd one. The most 'fatal' rust (that which means its not cost effective to repair and leads to the car getting scrapped) on the Mk2s is not sills or arches as on the Mk1, its the front chassis legs (the bits that the engine is hung between and the front suspension bolts up to).
Mazda did not corrosion proof the front chassis legs very well on the Mk2 and they suffer chronic rust from the inside out. The strangeness is that the later Mk2 facelift (2002 on, often called a Mk2.5) cars suffer worse than the 1998 to 2001 Mk2. The rust is not often visible but is an MOT failure as its structural. For any prospective Mk2 purchase I'd insist on having the undertray taken off and have it properly inspected on ramps, to ensure its solid enough. The problem is bad enough that MOT testing stations are told specifically to check those cars. Plenty of Mk2 owners have been burned, buying a car that appears sound on the outside, only to find the structure underneath is badly corroded. Cost of repair is often prohibitive as its an engine out job to fix and the repair parts from Mazda are about £400 per side too, seriously pricey when the cars fetch £2-3k.
Spending just a grand on an MX5 is tricky, some real rotters around for that money, I'd avoid Mk2s at that price, and look at Mk1s only. At that price its likely all will need some mechanical work and ongoing maintenance to keep going, and many will be rusty.
My thoughts on doing this are this - if you are handy with a spanner and want something to tinker with as a toy, then fine, go for it, its fine if its a hobby car. But you could still spend several hundred on maintaining one then have it fail its MOT and need scrapping without spending proper money on rust repairs. And if a £1k purchase is truly 'disposable' to you....then you probably have enough money floating around to sensibly buy and run a nicer one anyway as a daily driver.
The MX5 is just more balanced, more feelsome and just more enjoyable, more of a proper sports car than just a hatchback with a grunty engine and hard suspension. It lacks refinement even compared to the Type R though, a car reknowned for hard suspension and short gearing.
Its the most fun car I have had (I discount the S2000 from this as my ownership was so short).
My usage profile is this - I do lots of short journeys too/from work or places around town (average well less than 10 miles/day), and then my fairly infrequent longer trips tend to be for recreation anyway, so I'm not time pressured and can take detours to enjoy the back roads. For me its worth the trade off of refinement, to have something fun for those occasional longer trips. Buts its not a great car for lots of motorway mileage or many long trips....if you don't do many miles though, and want something fun for the occasional long trip, pound for pound its a good option with very reasonable running costs. Still good enough as a daily, the Mk3, comfy and nice enough inside in a well specced one - good stereo, heated leather, and a good heater make it a nice place to sit for shorter journeys even in winter with the roof up. I honestly think you'd cope well enough with one as a 'daily driver', especially with a hardtop, coming from a 95 Almera
Going back to your question about Mk2s and rust, its an odd one. The most 'fatal' rust (that which means its not cost effective to repair and leads to the car getting scrapped) on the Mk2s is not sills or arches as on the Mk1, its the front chassis legs (the bits that the engine is hung between and the front suspension bolts up to).
Mazda did not corrosion proof the front chassis legs very well on the Mk2 and they suffer chronic rust from the inside out. The strangeness is that the later Mk2 facelift (2002 on, often called a Mk2.5) cars suffer worse than the 1998 to 2001 Mk2. The rust is not often visible but is an MOT failure as its structural. For any prospective Mk2 purchase I'd insist on having the undertray taken off and have it properly inspected on ramps, to ensure its solid enough. The problem is bad enough that MOT testing stations are told specifically to check those cars. Plenty of Mk2 owners have been burned, buying a car that appears sound on the outside, only to find the structure underneath is badly corroded. Cost of repair is often prohibitive as its an engine out job to fix and the repair parts from Mazda are about £400 per side too, seriously pricey when the cars fetch £2-3k.
Spending just a grand on an MX5 is tricky, some real rotters around for that money, I'd avoid Mk2s at that price, and look at Mk1s only. At that price its likely all will need some mechanical work and ongoing maintenance to keep going, and many will be rusty.
My thoughts on doing this are this - if you are handy with a spanner and want something to tinker with as a toy, then fine, go for it, its fine if its a hobby car. But you could still spend several hundred on maintaining one then have it fail its MOT and need scrapping without spending proper money on rust repairs. And if a £1k purchase is truly 'disposable' to you....then you probably have enough money floating around to sensibly buy and run a nicer one anyway as a daily driver.
I have a MK1 as my only car. It's fine for day to day stuff, you might struggle if you wanted to go away for a week with someone. The spare takes up quite a lot of space but you could just run without one.
If you're going to use it daily you might want to avoid cars with Bilstein suspension as it is quite firm.
If you're going to use it daily you might want to avoid cars with Bilstein suspension as it is quite firm.
Yeah, I know of the special edition variants with the harder suspension. I'm just keeping my eye out for a nice plain unmolested Mk 1. AC isn't required at all either.
I've been keeping my eyes on a few from GoodWood Sports Cars. They looks like he really cherishes and cares for the Mk 1's that he sells on. So my next port of call will be there.
Do you have a hard top?
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 11 Dec 2002
- Posts
- 10,874
- Location
- Darkest Norfolk
A boot bag can pack a surprising amount of extra stuff in, done a week walking in the lakes over winter with the misses in a mk3.5 with a boot bad... There's even a guy locally that uses his mk1 to run a window washing business, got a ladder on a boot & roof rack thing, very cool
They can be tiring on very long trips though.
They can be tiring on very long trips though.
Picked up a hardtop for Mrs rjk's MX5 last night.
She found it on eBay and typed the number into her phone to message the seller about viewing. Turned out she knew the seller.
We couldn't tell from the pictures, but its the exact same colour as hers. Perfect condition, right colour match and working heated window.
Luckily, her car had the bolts and clamps in place to fit the hardtop.
She ended up paying £380, not sure if that's a bargain or not?
Was a bit grubby though so I gave the car a quick wash this morning and polished it off. Didn't have time to get wax on before it rained. Looks great in my opinion.
Also, replaced the indicator bulbs in the headlights with some silvertec bulbs to remove the orange fried egg look.
She found it on eBay and typed the number into her phone to message the seller about viewing. Turned out she knew the seller.
We couldn't tell from the pictures, but its the exact same colour as hers. Perfect condition, right colour match and working heated window.
Luckily, her car had the bolts and clamps in place to fit the hardtop.
She ended up paying £380, not sure if that's a bargain or not?
Was a bit grubby though so I gave the car a quick wash this morning and polished it off. Didn't have time to get wax on before it rained. Looks great in my opinion.
Also, replaced the indicator bulbs in the headlights with some silvertec bulbs to remove the orange fried egg look.
Don't bother with Goodwood unless you have your heart set on a MK1 and struggle to find a decent one. I bought mine from him and it just isn't worth the additional outlay.
Six months on mine needs the two front wings looking at due to paint bubble and a rear arch will need doing.
I don't have a hard top.
Care to elaborate a bit? I'm really interested in hearing from someone who's actually bought from him.
Reading between the lines of the last post then with the specialists it is the same old story. They can look great but they rust from the inside out.
As for their use as a daily... my mk1 was bought as a toy but due to a shift in work patterns I used it as a daily for 10 weeks May > July to do 60 miles a day and for all of September for the same distance and in all honesty... it was a pain in the arse. I was glad to get back behind the wheel of our Grande Punto.
Don't get me wrong on a Friday after work it was nice to get the top down but even then it loses its appeal when you are stuck in bumper to bumper traffic doing 40mph or even worse stop start traffic. Then there was the 32-34MPG, I get 40-42 in the Punto which adds up over a few weeks. I'll buy a cheap hatch back before running it for an extended period of time for work again.
Then there is driving it for pleasure when it becomes a completely different animal. Top down with the exhaust barking behind me putting down enough power to make decent progress but not so much that I don't explore the revs. Then there is the whole "analogue" feel to it which is a world away from the Punto and quite different to my old Octavia vRS... all of a sudden I remember why I bought it.
These exhaust and chip kits, are there any independent verifications of them increasing power by 10+hp? I've always been wary of that kind of thing on NA engines.
If you have the time to look for a car, I don't think it worth paying the extra money buy from him.
There are a few things that annoyed me specifically.
The one front wing where it meets the bumper had some paint bubble on that was repaired along with a few other bits of paint work before I got the car. 4 months after picking it up the paint bubble on the front wing is back.
The front pads were supposed to be changed before I picked the car up as he spotted they would need changing while doing something else. I don't thing they were changed as they need doing now.
The were a few other issues but I'm not sure they could have been spotted.