Any-one got a marvellous MX5 ?
- Thread starter yottie
- Start date
Not really my scene, but they are a great little roadster with a strong following.
Not impressed with the handbrake system on the rear though, and some of the early ones have lots of rust under the rear end.
Great engine, easy to do timing belts etc. Fitted loads of springs though!
My biggest problem is actually getting in
Enjoy the Mazda! Fit bling bits by the ton.
John
Not impressed with the handbrake system on the rear though, and some of the early ones have lots of rust under the rear end.
Great engine, easy to do timing belts etc. Fitted loads of springs though!
My biggest problem is actually getting in
Enjoy the Mazda! Fit bling bits by the ton.
John
Can't see what age has to do with it, some people can't get into one at 21 !
Don't go for bling myself, and my 2.5 has no rust. If MG and Lotus had built 'em like these they'd still be somewhere now. A fun second car that clings to corners like the proverbial.
Don't go for bling myself, and my 2.5 has no rust. If MG and Lotus had built 'em like these they'd still be somewhere now. A fun second car that clings to corners like the proverbial.
Well can't agree with that. The MGF and MGTF outsold the MX5 every year they were in production. The MX5 is OK, but not a shade on a Lotus or MG. Accept the perception of reliabilty, but it's not as clear cut as Clarkson makes out.
Could also point out Lotus are doing very nicely thank you and MG are on teh way back as well.
- Joined
- 30 Oct 2006
- Messages
- 6,755
- Reaction score
- 386
- Country
are you mental? the F/TF is a horrible turd. a mid engined ****tard and a sorry excuse for a "sportscar" made by a sorry excuse for a car manufacturer. to say they are on the way back is a laughable, that shocking beast they are making now is a joke. you can guarantee it will be a failure......one ****ing engine at launch and it's a re-hash of a re-hash. outsold the mx? how many of those sad birmingham turds are still on the road compared to the mx?
the elise (i assume that's what we are on about) is a solid car and mx5 is just superb in any guise....even the lardy mk3 is streets ahead.
I didn't realise they could have a 2.5 motor....is that a V6?
Should be a real mover.
John
Well you are entiteled to your opinion - even if you seem to have mixed emotion with facts.
Compare the 0-60 times, handling etc of the MG and MX5 and you'll see that like for like the MG beats or is equal to the MX5. It also has the advantage of not looking like a plastic boat left too close to a heater - which the MX5 in all guises does. MX5 has loads of failings - as does the MG, but £ for £ the MG is the better drivers car by far. If you think otherwise you have never driven them both either on quick roads or on a track. Of course if you want to cruise in an arm chair then the MX5 is the way to go.
As for how many MGF/TF still on the roads - loads of them with the attrition rate about the same as the MX5. And yes for every full year of production the MGF/TF outsold the MX5 by a considerable margin - just look at the motor manufacturers records if you dont believe me. Not my data, but theirs - the same data all manufacturers use as their bible.
Don't disagree that the MG6 is not the prettiest of cars and only having one engine is **** poor. But, UK is a tiny market for them. In China they sell the Rowe and MG cars by the bucketload. I wouldn't buy one as I think it's a pretty average car at a high price, and yes I think it has the hall marks of failure in the UK. But if they get the MG Zero and the MG5 right then there may be hope for them. Those concepts do look good. I still can't imagine buying one as I am not in the market for that kind of car, and unless they broaden the engine range they have little hope
- Joined
- 30 Oct 2006
- Messages
- 6,755
- Reaction score
- 386
- Country
now i know you are mental.
looks are entirely subjective of course but the F/TF can hardly be described as a looker. the MX5 could probably be described as slightly dull in the looks department, particularly the later models.
so the MX5 handles like an armchair? the mk3 maybe but the mk1 has superb handling. i have only driven an F once and it was very capable but not world beating and certainly not better than the mk1. 0-60's are not that far out and neither car was built for drag racing. also don't forget that the MG is heavier in just about every form.
as for sales i think we can safely say the MX5 has trounced the F/TF on the world stage. saddo brits buying unreliable, badly made brit cars should not be relied on for a gauge of a decent car. there are far more MX's left on the road now than MG's i would wager.
I certainly seem to have stirred up a hornets nest. The MX was relaxing on a grass verge in the wilds last week, this car pulled alongside and we exchanged pleasantries, he then said he'd had two MX's before these two arrived (pointing to two teenagers in the back of his Volvo) and couldn't wait for them to be self supporting and to be in a position to have another MX, his only fear was that there may not be so many around then. I assured him there would be. Can you say that about the two marques we were talking about (unless you fancy a trip to China !)
ps the 2.5 refers to the model before the present one, it's a 1.9 just the same.
ps the 2.5 refers to the model before the present one, it's a 1.9 just the same.
I nearly bought an XM estate, but decided it was a bit on the large side. I practically needed binoculars to see the rear window from the drivers seat.Citroen XM diesel estate - best car in the world
Instead I went down the route of solid, reliable VAGs.
Yottie, unlike Nikso who seems to be quite happy to agree the two cars are similar in capabilities but that still the MG is ****, but the MX5 brilliant, I am not that unbalanced.
The MX5 is a good car - just not for me. The early MX5s were IMHO ugly and performance was pedestrian. The latter ones dull and still pedestrian. They are certainly more comfortable to drive over a longish period of time particularly on our rubbish roads due to their softer suspension.
I have driven quite a few examples of both and even considered an MX5 so I am not saying it's rubbish. What I am saying is that it is not miles better than the MG - and IMHO slightly worse. That doesn't make it a bad car.
And yes i think there will be plenty of MGs as well as Mazdas on the roads in 15 to 20 years time.
Yes looks ar subjective and the MG has won design awards around the globe, where as the Mazda has not. The plastic boat comment was not invented by me but is a fairly standard remark about the MX5 styling, so I would humbly suggest that you are in the minority.
I have driven a lot of MX5s and MGF/TFs and no the MX5 doesn't handle like an armchair - never said it did. But , like for like, the MGF and even more so the MGTF handle better. And yes the MG is heavier, but as you agreed still manages to have the edge on performance. I don't have the MX5 Mk1 figures, but I doubt that they beat the MG as I have never seen a report where like for like cars were compared in a silly Top Trumps way that the MX5 performance was better.
As for your final riduculous statement about Brits - well what can I say. Brittain is the largest soft top market in Europe and per population in the world - so youd think we have some idea of what soft top to buy. And by what yardstick do you regard unreliability? Jeremy Clarkson hysteria? Well Top Gear is a great entertainment programme and Jezza is very funny, but a car show it aint so like him and the mad press what they say has to be taken with a pinch of salt.
BMWs strangulation and Phoenix 4s cost savin Project Drive did a lot for the bad quality image of MGR, but your comments are just way wide of the mark.
