The next-gen MX-5 Miata thread

[CodeRedR51]

Bill Cardell (owner of Flyin' Miata) purchased #421

 

[05XR8]

I wonder where #1971 was purchased. That'd be sweet to buy , when I turn 50 in 2 years.

 

[homeforsummer]

I do quite like the orange. It's a bright colour, and bright colours suit MX-5s.

Would definitely be good to see some other bright shades, but I don't think a darker colour like Montego Blue (much as I love that colour) would have been right for an anniversary car.

 

[R55NA]

Mother now has a Mk4 RF in red. Such a nice shape.

Its so weird how it is more cramped, with less storage, than my Mk1!

 

[05XR8]

Kind of weird there is no Classic Red and Mariner Blue. I don't even think there's been a basic silver on the ND's palette.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Mother now has a Mk4 RF in red. Such a nice shape.

Its so weird how it is more cramped, with less storage, than my Mk1!

The lack of storage space on the ND is frankly annoying. Would it kill them to put some door pockets or at least some door nets?

 

[dice1998]

Kind of weird there is no Classic Red and Mariner Blue. I don't even think there's been a basic silver on the ND's palette.

In the USA, there isn't. Closest color to Silver we offer is Ceramic Metallic, or as I like to call it when I'm not trying to sell it to a Customer, Toilet Bowl White.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

 

[05XR8]

Anyone else have a similar critique?

 

[homeforsummer]

Anyone else have a similar critique?

Pretty much anyone who has driven the car hard. The 2-litre is particularly bad for it as it has the power to get you into trouble and wider tyres so it breaks away more suddenly when grip runs out. I used to leave the ESP on when I did track days because the roll oversteer was quite sudden and the steering didn't have enough feedback to let you know when it was coming. Driven a couple with modified suspension and they're a bit more predictable.

Don't get me wrong, I still like the ND, but I think Mazda's gone a little too far with deliberately letting the car roll as the body movements can be quite violent and start affecting the balance.

For reference, it's why I still prefer the NA to the ND. Those roll too, but it's more proportional to the car's responses, and on narrower tyres it doesn't let the car load up the chassis quite as much before grip runs out. And it's got more steering feedback which makes correcting the car more natural.

Oh, and in the interests of fairness, NCs weren't dissimilar, if not to quite the same level as the ND.

 

[05XR8]

Pretty much anyone who has driven the car hard. The 2-litre is particularly bad for it as it has the power to get you into trouble and wider tyres so it breaks away more suddenly when grip runs out. I used to leave the ESP on when I did track days because the roll oversteer was quite sudden and the steering didn't have enough feedback to let you know when it was coming. Driven a couple with modified suspension and they're a bit more predictable.

Don't get me wrong, I still like the ND, but I think Mazda's gone a little too far with deliberately letting the car roll as the body movements can be quite violent and start affecting the balance.

For reference, it's why I still prefer the NA to the ND. Those roll too, but it's more proportional to the car's responses, and on narrower tyres it doesn't let the car load up the chassis quite as much before grip runs out. And it's got more steering feedback which makes correcting the car more natural.

Oh, and in the interests of fairness, NCs weren't dissimilar, if not to quite the same level as the ND.

Trying to remember, is this why the 30th Ann. model got a stiffer suspension? Or has that been rectified by the stiffer suspension?

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

Don't get me wrong, I still like the ND, but I think Mazda's gone a little too far with deliberately letting the car roll as the body movements can be quite violent and start affecting the balance.

It's a bit of a shame, because while I haven't driven either I prefer the suspension philosophy behind the 86. Neither of them seem to be quite what they could be. The Miata could do with a suspension that corners flatter, and the 86 should have the torque dip fixed/more power. Luckily, I guess the BRZ/FRS have been out long enough that you can get a used one for a good price and get some aftermarket parts. The refreshed Miata with the updated engine is still a bit...fresh.

 

[homeforsummer]

Trying to remember, is this why the 30th Ann. model got a stiffer suspension? Or has that been rectified by the stiffer suspension?

It doesn't make much difference, as far as I'm aware. Almost all the NDs I've driven have had the optional Bilstein suspension (all the top-spec cars in the UK get it as standard) but to my knowledge that's only dampers, not springs, and no anti-roll bar changes.

The modified car I drove recently simply had a firmer set of springs better-matched to the Bilsteins, and a set of thicker anti-roll bars, and it transformed it.

It's a bit of a shame, because while I haven't driven either I prefer the suspension philosophy behind the 86. Neither of them seem to be quite what they could be. The Miata could do with a suspension that corners flatter, and the 86 should have the torque dip fixed/more power. Luckily, I guess the BRZ/FRS have been out long enough that you can get a used one for a good price and get some aftermarket parts. The refreshed Miata with the updated engine is still a bit...fresh.

The 86 definitely handles better out of the box (though that thing needs better tyres), but the Mazda definitely has the stronger engine. Overall I'd take the ND and then modify it to my taste, but you're right, it'll need a few more years for used NDs with the more powerful engine to start appearing in decent numbers.

 

[niky]

Even with the older 150+ hp engine, the MX-5 felt peppier (due to the torque hole).

I love the new 185 hp engine. Good low down torque, and then when it goes on-cam, there's some nice high end zing.

Driven at 8/10ths, the MX-5 isn't bad. But it is hilariously roly-poly at 10/10ths. Almost collected a wall in a low speed slalom run with an RF due to that roll oversteer when I turned the stability control off to check if it was losing any time to the nannies. To be fair, on the same test, the 86 understeered off the line on the same test with DSC off.

 

[Danoff]

Driven at 8/10ths, the MX-5 isn't bad. But it is hilariously roly-poly at 10/10ths.

In a nutshell, that's a good characterization of the difference between a good track car and a good road car. This is why James May went on so many rants about cars set up for the nurburgring.

Want to buy a car for the road? Let's test it at a track! (j/k, but seriously)

 

[homeforsummer]

In a nutshell, that's a good characterization of the difference between a good track car and a good road car. This is why James May went on so many rants about cars set up for the nurburgring.

May's rants were amusing, but also a little wide of the mark. In general, I'd say 'Ring development has improved cars. Partly because few other places on earth are as good for durability testing (which, among other stuff, means that modern cars have much stronger brakes with better endurance than they used to), and partly because the 'Ring is so challenging that a chassis has to be a proper all-rounder to work there.

Ironically, the sort of uber-stiff cars May was complaining about really don't work there - last time I spoke to a Hyundai engineer about the i30N, a car where the N literally stands for "Nurburgring", they told me that they actually run the dampers in their softest setting when testing there. And from experience, I can tell you that softest setting works really nicely on actual, real-world roads.

(The stiff suspension thing blamed on the Nurburgring is, I think, more likely down to high-speed testing, particularly with German brands that all design cars to work on the Autobahn. There you want as little suspension movement and tyre deflection as possible, so the result is a stiff setup and no sidewall...)

The MX-5 is a weird case. If Mazda had tested it seriously on a track, I don't think they'd have gone for quite as soft a setup as they did, because they'd quickly have discovered its issues when driven hard. Or maybe they did, and logically reasoned that most people won't drive like that, and those that do would modify the car anyway - which is a perfectly reasonable conclusion to come to.

The trouble is, the last modified car I drove was a better road car too, for being a little less roly-poly. I get what Mazda was going for - the roll makes you feel like you're working the car hard when you're not, so it's entertaining and old-school at low speeds - and ultimately ESP makes it a safe enough car anyway (how many owners actually switch ESP off on the road?). But a little more body control certainly wouldn't go amiss.

Edit: Or just slightly slimmer tyres. I've not driven a 1.5 in a while but I suspect that'd be friendlier at the limit on its 195s. The MX-5's problem isn't only roll, it's that it actually grips really well until the body movements take over, and then it breaks away quite suddenly.

 

[Danoff]

May's rants were amusing, but also a little wide of the mark. In general, I'd say 'Ring development has improved cars. Partly because few other places on earth are as good for durability testing (which, among other stuff, means that modern cars have much stronger brakes with better endurance than they used to), and partly because the 'Ring is so challenging that a chassis has to be a proper all-rounder to work there.

Ironically, the sort of uber-stiff cars May was complaining about really don't work there - last time I spoke to a Hyundai engineer about the i30N, a car where the N literally stands for "Nurburgring", they told me that they actually run the dampers in their softest setting when testing there. And from experience, I can tell you that softest setting works really nicely on actual, real-world roads.

(The stiff suspension thing blamed on the Nurburgring is, I think, more likely down to high-speed testing, particularly with German brands that all design cars to work on the Autobahn. There you want as little suspension movement and tyre deflection as possible, so the result is a stiff setup and no sidewall...)

Yea I agree with that critique of May's critique. If ever there were a track that might produce a good road car, it'd be that one (I'm exaggerating, but you get the idea).

The MX-5 is a weird case. If Mazda had tested it seriously on a track, I don't think they'd have gone for quite as soft a setup as they did, because they'd quickly have discovered its issues when driven hard. Or maybe they did, and logically reasoned that most people won't drive like that, and those that do would modify the car anyway - which is a perfectly reasonable conclusion to come to.

The trouble is, the last modified car I drove was a better road car too, for being a little less roly-poly. I get what Mazda was going for - the roll makes you feel like you're working the car hard when you're not, so it's entertaining and old-school at low speeds - and ultimately ESP makes it a safe enough car anyway (how many owners actually switch ESP off on the road?). But a little more body control certainly wouldn't go amiss.

Edit: Or just slightly slimmer tyres. I've not driven a 1.5 in a while but I suspect that'd be friendlier at the limit on its 195s. The MX-5's problem isn't only roll, it's that it actually grips really well until the body movements take over, and then it breaks away quite suddenly.

I can accept this. But this is the detail needed to really level the body-roll criticism (in my mind at least). It's not enough to say that it rolls too much on the track, because that's not what it's primarily designed to do. If that roll means it can be cheap and still ride nicely on the road, in otherwords if it makes it a better road car (and keeps the price down, like... minus the auto-adjusting race track settings), then Mazda is on the right side of it. But if, as you say, it's not good on the road either (where we're not driving 10/10ths), then Mazda missed something.

I have not driven the latest generation of Miata so I couldn't tell you for sure what was better. I'll take your word for it that it could be a better road car with more stiffness.

 

[homeforsummer]

I can accept this. But this is the detail needed to really level the body-roll criticism (in my mind at least). It's not enough to say that it rolls too much on the track, because that's not what it's primarily designed to do. If that roll means it can be cheap and still ride nicely on the road, in otherwords if it makes it a better road car (and keeps the price down, like... minus the auto-adjusting race track settings), then Mazda is on the right side of it. But if, as you say, it's not good on the road either (where we're not driving 10/10ths), then Mazda missed something.

It's not a car I'd say rides particularly well, but part of that stems from it being an open car lacking some chassis rigidity, so bumps have more profound effect than in something stiffer. But it's one of those cars that proves suspension is more complex than firm/soft absolutes, as it's a firm-riding car that also rolls quite a bit.

I've been skeptical of sway bars in the past as, logically, they tie together suspension at either side of the car which can transfer bump forces from one wheel to another, and harm the ride. But after driving the car with uprated springs and thicker sway bars recently, I'd say they're pretty much essential on the ND.

The modified car rode no worse than the standard one I drove it back to back with, had less scuttle shake (this was confusing, but I have to put it down to the springs and dampers being better matched and preventing certain forces being sent through the structure), and rolled less - without losing the sense of involvement that the ND naturally has.

I'm sure you're right in that cost is part of Mazda's decision, and some of it is a realisation that most owners won't drive hard enough for it to be a problem (if the number of NDs I've seen on the road is any indication, buyers love it), but part of it is I think a certain bloody-mindedness that Japanese car companies occasionally exhibit in assuming their way of doing things is the best way and then sticking rigidly to that formula.

I'd find it hard to believe that no Mazda test driver hasn't gone to a superior and said "err, boss, this thing gets a little tricky on the limit...", but the chances of that observation making it all the way up the food chain are pretty low...

Off-topic, but I find the way cars ride and handle fascinating on a level that I can't often go into even at work. It's such a black art sometimes but it profoundly affects pretty much every car ever made, and as cars like the ND demonstrate, it can vary hugely depending on what conditions you're testing a car in.

 

[niky]

@homeforsummer - I think there was probably a conscious decision at Mazda to make the cars in such a way that they felt entertaining and involving well below the limit, so that drivers weren't tempted to push them way too far. One of the big shocks I had testing the (previous) Mazda 3 on track was that though it felt far nimbler than your common compact, when pushed to 10/10ths, it was sloppy, loose and squirrely, whereas something from Ford or VW would do a better time without feeling quite as dramatic.

But that feeling goes back two or three generations, anyway... back to the original Mazda3 and the NC MX-5... though I daresay the NC2 feels like it was the stiffest and best handling of all the generations.

 

[homeforsummer]

NC2 certainly feels the sharpest and most planted of the lot, but it too suffers from having perhaps a bit more grip than it needs to. For fun and balance, the NA's still my favourite. Most progressive of the lot and the nicest steering.

Your comments about the Mazda 3 tie in with my final line above though. Not uncommon for cars to feel good at say 7 or 8/10ths, and become scrappy afterwards. Even the new Alpine's a bit like that, but the Alpine isn't quite to the same extremes as the ND, has better steering, and it breaks away a little more progressively. But I certainly know people who have complaints about their high-speed handling.

The German firms are generally good at those last few tenths to the limit, but the flip side is that they can often be a bit sterile most of the way up to that limit. In an ideal world I'd prefer a car that did the whole lot well (current Civic Type R springs to mind) but most of the time I'll take the car that's fun all the way up to 8/10ths rather than the one that only starts to wake up when you're driving like a lunatic.

Thinking about it, I'd say almost all of my favourite modern cars prioritise fun at more accessible speeds - ND, Up GTI, Kia Stinger, Mustang, Alpine, BMW i8.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Extremely thorough overview of the ND platform with one of it's lead engineers.



Really interesting to see the mechanical/structural differences between the NC and ND play out into different driving experiences. I remember @homeforsummer mentioning that the NC feels twitchy on the limit, and the discussion of the passive rear steering (18:20 in the video) I think explains that behavior - it was intended to benefit the longer-wheelbase RX-8.

Also explains why the minor refresh received such a large (relatively) power gain - the ND was not originally going to have the 2 liter, it was more or less shoved in at the last moment. The refresh gave them an opportunity to actually tailor the 2 liter for sports car duty. Also, the engineering team didn't actually know their modifications yielded more power until the cars were already in production.

 

[homeforsummer]

I remember @homeforsummer mentioning that the NC feels twitchy on the limit

I think I'd mentioned that of the ND in the past rather than the NC (I've not driven an NC quite fast enough to really explore its handling like that), though the NC does have the same slight excess of grip that the ND does, and at lower speeds at least it can "snap" when you're fooling about with it, like the ND does, and in a way that the NA/NB don't.

The NC's bigger problem at launch was poor steering feel and, from reading contemporary accounts, a slight mismatch between the front and rear axles. That did make it tricky apparently, and Mazda mostly fixed both when it facelifted the car. I've only driven NC2s and they feel pretty good to me.

Wouldn't surprise me if passive rear steer plays a part though. I wasn't aware it was a thing (deliberately) in rear-drive cars. It was quite a big thing in front-drivers in the 1990s (or at least, manufacturers made a bigger deal of it) as it could be used to enhance the agility of FWD cars. I know that Mazda did it with the MX-3, and probably the best known was Peugeot with the 306.

Interesting to hear about the 2-litre. The early one really wasn't that spectacular - it did the job because the car was small and light enough, but the latest one certainly feels more like a "sports car" engine. When I spoke to BBR about driving its most recent tuned example they said the latest engine was way easier to get power from than the first one in the ND.

 

[05XR8]

https://www.carscoops.com/2020/12/t...-an-australia-only-affair/#Echobox=1607649909

Aimed exclusively at the Australian market, the RS GT boasts upgraded Brembo brakes with enhanced cooling and high-performance pads, reducing the unsprung mass by 2 kg (4.4 lbs). It also sports re-tuned gas-pressurized dampers from Bilstein, which, according to Mazda, provide more feedback and improve the car’s grip.

The new MX-5 GT RS also features a solid alloy strut tower brace for increased rigidity and rides on bespoke 17-inch forged alloy wheels from BBS shod in 205/45 Bridgestone Potenza S001 tires. Power comes from the 135 kW (184 PS / 181 HP) and 205 Nm (151 lb-ft) of torque SkyActiv-G 2.0-liter four-cylinder that’s mated to a six-speed manual transmission.

 

[homeforsummer]

There's a new special edition in Japan at the moment too with a pretty stunning blue exterior and white interior combo.

​

Edit:

Also, I didn't realise how long it'd been since this thread was active. Interesting regarding the NC discussion above that I drove one again recently and while the engine was modified with ITBs (from BBR), it had just a lovely chassis, and that had relatively few modifications - wheels/tyres and basic suspension upgrades.

In fact, I'd go as far as saying it feels better than a similarly-modified ND. Better steering feel, much more progressive balance. In the past I'd have recommended someone go out and buy an NA or NB if they wanted an inexpensive rear-drive car but the NC has risen sharply up the list - half-decent tyres and dialled-in suspension and it's genuinely among the best-handling rear-drive cars I've experienced.

 

[05XR8]

It's funny because it looks like the most "manly"(as some would feel) MX-5. I don't care. I dig each genreation. Anyway, looks like in the pic above, it could feature a V6 from the MX-3.

 

[Dan]

https://www.carscoops.com/2020/12/t...-an-australia-only-affair/#Echobox=1607649909

Woo! More letters to add to the mouthful!

“Nice car. What is it?”
“It’s a 2020 Mazda MX-5 GT RS RF!”

 

[homeforsummer]

It's funny because it looks like the most "manly"(as some would feel) MX-5. I don't care. I dig each genreation. Anyway, looks like in the pic above, it could feature a V6 from the MX-3.

Much as I like the MX-3's engine, I'm not sure why you'd fit a less powerful engine than the NC came with in the first place, let alone compared to a 225bhp version on ITBs...

 

[05XR8]

Much as I like the MX-3's engine, I'm not sure why you'd fit a less powerful engine than the NC came with in the first place, let alone compared to a 225bhp version on ITBs...

I'm saying the look of the car, to me, looks like it could fit a V6(a small Mazda V6). It's a tough looking car. I'm not doing any power comparisons.

 

[homeforsummer]

I'm saying the look of the car, to me, looks like it could fit a V6(a small Mazda V6). It's a tough looking car. I'm not doing any power comparisons.

Well in that case a 1.8 V6 making ~140hp is hardly a tough engine for a tough-looking car

 

[05XR8]

Tell the average person that "Miata" has a V6 instead of a four cylinder, 140hp or not, I think they'd take a second look.