 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / BMW Cars / July 2006Miata Mx5 - BMW Z4 Compare
Hi, Many reviews of the Z4 - a great roadster in its own right - write that the car has a tendancy to understeer and for a sports car enthusiast lacks the feel that translates the road through the steering wheel. The new MX5 which obviously in a different price bracket, is more of a hardcore sports car, but of course gives up much of the refinement, beauty and quality that goes with the Z4. I would appreciate it if people could comment on this - and anything else they feel worthy of note. Unfortunetely where I am BMW dont have a Z4 for testing so I have no means of comparison. I am looking mainly at the 2.5siA. Thanks, Alex 2.5siA? As in automatic? Why bother. Both of those cars should be manuals, that's most of the fun in driving them. The Z4 will be a much faster car, a little more room, and looks better too. (yea, I know, but I actually like Bangle's designs.) > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Alex > Many reviews of the Z4 - a great roadster in its own right - write that > the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > testing so I have no means of comparison. I am looking mainly at the > 2.5siA. Let's be perfectly clear about this: *EVERY* production car in the world is engineered to exhibit understeer. (Well, a Lotus Elise might not be... but we're talking fewer than a handful of cars.) Understeer is a desirable trait for most drivers because it's generally safer for them. Rear-engined Porsches exhibit understeer. My NSX and my wife's Boxster exhibit understeer. Lamborghini's and Ferraris exhibit it (according to C&D). Given that, and having looked at the last MX5 review in Car & Driver that says it has "benign understeer", I doubt that is a substantial difference in the amount of understeer these two cars exhibit. In fact, the Z4, having more power, will be able to exhibit *MORE* oversteer (the opposite trait). Buy what you like; I know lots of people like MX5's. The Z4 is more powerful, faster and slightly plusher riding, and more comfortable and quiet than the MX5. Only you can tell if the extra $10K is worth it. FloydR >Many reviews of the Z4 - a great roadster in its own right - write that the >car has a tendancy to understeer and for a sports car enthusiast lacks the >feel that translates the road through the steering wheel. You can have the camber adjusted to remove the understeer, and that's something you have to do with every car out there nowadays. There are numerous posts about this on www.z4um.com. As for the steering, I think reviewer's complaints are more due to the writers only driving the car for brief periods. The steering is light with electric assist and if you're not used to it there's a tendency to over-correct and grip the wheel too hard because you expect more effort. epbrown -- "Everybody wants a normal life and a cool car; most people will settle for the car." Chris Titus 2003 BMW 325i Black/Black, 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black Thanks for your replies. As for the Z4 2.5A - I was of course referring to the manual - but the price list shows 'A' - have no idea what it stands for! One more question - do any of you know how the MX5 and Z4 compare in terms of depreciation? (I realise several variables are at play here including the country & the transmission, but any thoughts woud be appreciated - thanks!) > Thanks for your replies. As for the Z4 2.5A - I was of course referring to > the manual - but the price list shows 'A' - have no idea what it stands > for! A for Automatic. Jim > One more question - do any of you know how the MX5 and Z4 compare in terms > of depreciation? (I realise several variables are at play here including > the > country & the transmission, but any thoughts woud be appreciated - > thanks!) >Thanks for your replies. As for the Z4 2.5A - I was of course referring to >the manual - but the price list shows 'A' - have no idea what it stands for! > >One more question - do any of you know how the MX5 and Z4 compare in terms >of depreciation? (I realise several variables are at play here including the >country & the transmission, but any thoughts woud be appreciated - thanks!) I expect to see early Z4 prices plummet in the next couple of years as more and more come off-lease onto the used market. And it's due to be replaced in late 2009, which will further drive down prices. I could be wrong - the press seems to be turning around on it's appearance, and I've always gotten favorable responses to the car. It might be more of a hit as a used car - it is certainly a great value as one. epbrown -- "Everybody wants a normal life and a cool car; most people will settle for the car." Chris Titus 2003 BMW 325i Black/Black, 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black > Thanks for your replies. As for the Z4 2.5A - I was of course referring to > the manual - but the price list shows 'A' - have no idea what it stands [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > country & the transmission, but any thoughts woud be appreciated - > thanks!) Depends on where you are in the depreciation curve, but consider this...have you ever driven the two cars with over 100K. The difference in them new is very much exagerated. Leonard >>Thanks for your replies. As for the Z4 2.5A - I was of course referring to >>the manual - but the price list shows 'A' - have no idea what it stands [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > you ever driven the two cars with over 100K. The difference in them new is > very much exagerated. Personally, I can't see myself driving either one of these cars 100k miles. Two seat roadsters are great 2nd or 3rd cars to take out only on sunny days. So unless you are buying one with high mileage, who cares. If you are looking for a daily commuter car I'd be looking in an entirely different direction...  Signature-Fred W >Personally, I can't see myself driving either one of these cars 100k >miles. Two seat roadsters are great 2nd or 3rd cars to take out only on [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >looking for a daily commuter car I'd be looking in an entirely different >direction... The Z4 is essentially a 2-seat version of the BMW 3-series; same engines and running gear, stiffer chassis, a few tweaks to make it sportier. There's no mechanical reason it can't rack up miles as reliably as my 325i from the same year. High mileage cars aren't common since they are usually 2nd cars, but they'd be no more problematic than a 3-series with similar miles. epbrown -- "Everybody wants a normal life and a cool car; most people will settle for the car." Chris Titus 2003 BMW 325i Black/Black, 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black >but consider this...have you ever driven the two cars with over 100K. The >difference in them new is very much exagerated. Just curious... Do you mean that the differences are exagerated when they are new and that they disapear over time making them less different, or that the differences when new become even more exagerated when they accumulate miles? Thanks The difference in build quality and ride is very much exagerated when they are aging. We shopped last year for a used car for my son drove Mazdas and BMWs. Wen ended up with a 97 Z3 with 80K miles. The Mazdas did not age nearly as well. The newer product may hold up better, but I suspect the trend will be similar to previous years. In general, my experience has been that Mazda product ages out much more poorly. When I was selling used cars I would be happy to sell a high mileage BMW, Honda, or Toyotal product. I would stay away from Mazda. Leonard > >but consider this...have you ever driven the two cars with over 100K. > >The difference in them new is very much exagerated. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Thanks I have similar experience. I have looked at a lot of Miatas. Most of them at 10years old have pretty ragged interiors and the motors are suspect. I bought a base Z3 that had not been pampered and it was a lot more car for only a little more money. > The difference in build quality and ride is very much exagerated when they > are aging. We shopped last year for a used car for my son drove Mazdas and [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> >> Thanks > Many reviews of the Z4 - a great roadster in its own right - write that > the car has a tendancy to understeer and for a sports car enthusiast > lacks the feel that translates the road through the steering wheel. > The new MX5 which obviously in a different price bracket, is more of a > hardcore sports car, but of course gives up much of the refinement, > beauty and quality that goes with the Z4. > I would appreciate it if people could comment on this - and anything > else they feel worthy of note. Unfortunetely where I am BMW dont have a > Z4 for testing so I have no means of comparison. I am looking mainly at > the 2.5siA. If you're looking for a sports car, the new Mazda MX5 2.0 Sport is very close to the BMW 2.5 in performance, but beats it hands down in handling and economy as well as being more fun to drive hard. The Z4 is a big improvement on the Z3, but still more of a sporty tourer than out and out sports car. Signature*I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met * Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. thanks for your responses. Its really come down to the MX5 or the new Audi TT (launched as a '07 model in the US I believe), but no matter how much the TT improves in the enjoyment of the drive, I very much doubt it is a competitor to either the MX5 or the Z4. As someone already pointed out - the difference in RWD/FWD as a means for oversteer is now harder to find since manufacturers put safety up first. Still, the TT's FWD/Golf platform says a lot about its potential for enjoyment, and how Audi believe the TT fits the segment - if at all. > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Alex Beauty? Good God man, put on your eye-glasses before you spout nonsense like that again! > Hi, > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Alex Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. : Beauty? : [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] :: :: Alex >Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. > >When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. That's rather an ignornant, kennel-blinded statement. The Miata is an excellent car in its own right. The biggest advantage it possesses is that it is many hundreds of pounds lighter than any of the BMW Z cars, and to some of us, light weight is the *primary* virtue of a sports car. Its build quality is outstanding, and its powertrain is bulletproof -- probably more so than the BMW's. It can be easily (and much more cheaply) track-prepped to be just as competitive in its class as any Z-car. When you consider price, most people would describe the Miata as a better value than any Z car. I am considering a new roadster right now, and I know I do. But then I'm loony enough to consider a Caterham as well. 8;) Buying a BMW Z car, unless done for entre to a specific competitive class in autocross or track, is not done for compelling sports car reasons -- it is done for other qualities, which have more to do with luxury and comfort than street performance. -- Larry -1995 Miata R, with as many track as street miles -2005 330i > Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. > When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. You mean the Z4 is an old man's car? The MX5 certainly ain't. Signature*Shin: a device for finding furniture in the dark * Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. > >> When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. > >You mean the Z4 is an old man's car? The MX5 certainly ain't. Actually... People are always claiming the MX-5 is a "chick" car, but I almost never see a woman driving one. Usually, I see older guys in them - the sort who look to have had an MG or Triumph when they were younger and are sentimental enough to remember it fondly, but wise enough not to repeat the experience. :) epbrown -- "Everybody wants a normal life and a cool car; most people will settle for the car." Chris Titus 2003 BMW 325i Black/Black, 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black > Actually... > People are always claiming the MX-5 is a "chick" car, but I almost [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > repeat the experience. :) > epbrown That's pretty much on the money. Nothing wrong with a Miata. My Z3 has a little more legroom, and that was what I needed. > People are always claiming the MX-5 is a "chick" car, but I almost > never see a woman driving one. Usually, I see older guys in them - the > sort who look to have had an MG or Triumph when they were younger and > are sentimental enough to remember it fondly, but wise enough not to > repeat the experience. :) It was actually modelled on a Lotus - the original Elan - which was a fun car to drive, while it worked, which wasn't often. But had amazing handling and comfort - rare in those days of the '60s. The engine was a Lotus twin cam based on the Ford Cortina bottom end. Older guys in the UK often just get an old Triumph or MG - there are still plenty around and luckily spares are easy. Signature*Dance like nobody's watching. Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. > People are always claiming the MX-5 is a "chick" car, but I almost >never see a woman driving one. Usually, I see older guys in them - the >sort who look to have had an MG or Triumph when they were younger and >are sentimental enough to remember it fondly, but wise enough not to >repeat the experience. :) That's pretty darned accurate! 8;) Let's see, I'm 59, and have owned my present 1995 Miata type R (Hard Dog bar, harnesses, Borla, short-shifter, etc.) plus the 1980 TR-8, 1975 Spitfire, 1975 Lola 342 1600 FF, 1972 Pantera, 1971 Lotus Europa S2, 1970 Elden 1600 FF, 1960 TR-3A. Let's not even discuss the four Alfas and the Fiat Dino, among others... Although I will say that the TR-8 with a Holley 390 4-bbl, manual rack, Konis, and beefed-up competition brakes was the most rock-solid car I've ever owned for street and track -- wish I still had it and the Dino today. They were all a ton of fun. By comparison, today's Miatas and BMWs feel like appliances -- they're almost too perfect. -- Larry >Lola 342 1600 FF, 1972 Pantera, 1971 Lotus Europa S2, 1970 Elden 1600 FF, 1960 >TR-3A. > >Let's not even discuss the four Alfas and the Fiat Dino, among others... You are one brave brave motherf..ker. SignatureNeed Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net >>Lola 342 1600 FF, 1972 Pantera, 1971 Lotus Europa S2, 1970 Elden 1600 FF, 1960 >>TR-3A. >> >>Let's not even discuss the four Alfas and the Fiat Dino, among others... > >You are one brave brave motherf..ker. Nah -- if I were brave, I'd have been driving Citroens all that time... -- Larry :: Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. : :: When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. : : You mean the Z4 is an old man's car? The MX5 certainly ain't. Not at all, I mean a BMW is for the 'refined man/woman that apreciate the best quality, and is willing to pay for it', the Miata, while a pretty good car ... it's not a same level as the Z's. : -- : *Shin: a device for finding furniture in the dark * : : Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW : To e-mail, change noise into sound. The MX5 is the car that the British sports car should have been. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- >> Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. > >> When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. > > You mean the Z4 is an old man's car? The MX5 certainly ain't. >The MX5 is the car that the British sports car should have been. Bollocks. Top gear compared an Aston with an E type on their track and the bloody E-type did staggeringly well, getting a faster lap time than a Lotus Esprit turbo (I think, it was some hot Lotus). They also compared some tricked our ricer, like 30K pounds modded to a frogeye sprite. The Sprite was 3 secs faster. One thing about those British cars, when they work they're great. Sorry. If, not when. SignatureNeed Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net > They also compared some tricked our ricer, like 30K pounds > modded to a frogeye sprite. The Sprite was 3 secs faster. Yeah, but the Sprite was an all-out race car, and the course was a twisty, wet one. The ricers didn't realize they'd been had until it was over. > One thing about those British cars, when they work they're great. > > Sorry. If, not when. <insert your facorite Lucas joke here> >> They also compared some tricked our ricer, like 30K pounds >> modded to a frogeye sprite. The Sprite was 3 secs faster. > >Yeah, but the Sprite was an all-out race car, and the course was a >twisty, wet one. The ricers didn't realize they'd been had until it was >over. Wellll, all out race car, what does that mean? It's still a stock frogeye frame. Sure it's been tweaked (a lot) but that ricer had 30K pounds of mods and you'd think it didn't all go into spaekers. The sprite in stock form is not a car for carrying four adults in comfort. It goes downhill from there. >> One thing about those British cars, when they work they're great. >> >> Sorry. If, not when. > ><insert your facorite Lucas joke here> Like there's room here for all of them. If I've missed any lemme know: http://www.mbz.org/info/fun/lucas/ SignatureNeed Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net >>> They also compared some tricked our ricer, like 30K pounds >>> modded to a frogeye sprite. The Sprite was 3 secs faster. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Wellll, all out race car, what does that mean? It's still a stock > frogeye frame. If it's anything like the SCCA G or H Production cars on this side of the pond, or even prepared to Vintage specs, it's a highly refined race vehicle, despite it's humble beginnings. Those things run 13:1 compression in the engine, too. >>>> They also compared some tricked our ricer, like 30K pounds >>>> modded to a frogeye sprite. The Sprite was 3 secs faster. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >vehicle, despite it's humble beginnings. Those things run 13:1 >compression in the engine, too. And? Both cars were highly modified. SignatureNeed Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net Exactly. I don't think the MGs were a bundle of joy in that department. The best car is a RELIABLE car and the MX5 was that when it launched, was it not? DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > One thing about those British cars, when they work they're great. > > Sorry. If, not when. >Exactly. > >I don't think the MGs were a bundle of joy in that department. By the standards of the times, the MG-A and B, the Midget, and the Tr-3 through 8 were extremely reliable vehicles. Heck, I even put 90,000 miles on a 1972 Fiat 124 Spider in three years without anything but normal maintenance. >The best car is a RELIABLE car and the MX5 was that when it launched, was it >not? Certainly, and that's reflective of the advances in technology. Today's power trains should need only normal maintenance for at least 150,000 miles. -- Larry > I don't think the MGs were a bundle of joy in that department. I ran a two year old '70 1275 Midget for three years without any problems. And I drove it hard. Of course it needed regular servicing - not just oil changes - but then cars did in those days. > The best car is a RELIABLE car and the MX5 was that when it launched, > was it not? Of course it's more reliable than cars with points ignition and carbs. Signature*Do infants enjoy infancy as much as adults enjoy adultery? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> I don't think the MGs were a bundle of joy in that department. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >Of course it's more reliable than cars with points ignition and carbs. I had a load of fun in Spridgets in the 60's and even went abroad in them. However I don't think I would want to travel in one these days. Fond memories though:-) pete -- http://www.brazierbridgewood.blogspot.com/ >Of course it's more reliable than cars with points ignition and carbs. Especially *multiple* carbs. Especially SU's. Uni-Syn fans, anyone? 8;) -- Larry >Exactly. > >I don't think the MGs were a bundle of joy in that department. > >The best car is a RELIABLE car and the MX5 was that when it launched, was it >not? Bah. Real sportscars only work weekends. SignatureNeed Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net > Exactly. > > I don't think the MGs were a bundle of joy in that department. Actually, MGs were pretty much bulletproof, and still make a reliable everyday proposition nowadays. > The best car is a RELIABLE car and the MX5 was that when it launched, > was it not? Yup. The MX5/Miata may have looked a little like an Elan but it was definitely the spiritual successor to the dear old MGB. And there's nothing wrong with that. (If you cornered me and insisted that I compare my Z4 to a Brit sportscar, then I'd probably have to compare it to a big Healey....) - Robin SignatureTrout: Slightly fishy but never coarse. http://www.troutmag.org > Yup. The MX5/Miata may have looked a little like an Elan but it was > definitely the spiritual successor to the dear old MGB. And there's > nothing wrong with that. It *is* the spiritual successor to the Elan - that's what it was modelled on. Superb handling, decent comfort, good steering, gearbox, brakes and willing engine. Not just out and out performance, but fun to drive. Really not a lot like a 'B' - however nice they can be. But I always thought the Spriget a better car than the B. Signature*The man who fell into an upholstery machine is fully recovered* Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >> Yup. The MX5/Miata may have looked a little like an Elan but it was >> definitely the spiritual successor to the dear old MGB. And there's [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > on. Superb handling, decent comfort, good steering, gearbox, brakes and > willing engine. Not just out and out performance, but fun to drive. I understand when the original Miata was first introduced to the press in Japan, a nice original Lotus Elan - and nothing else - was on hand for comparison. The first Miata I ever saw was an autocrosser that was painted in the classic Lotus two-tone colors >> Yup. The MX5/Miata may have looked a little like an Elan but it was >> definitely the spiritual successor to the dear old MGB. And there's [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > on. Superb handling, decent comfort, good steering, gearbox, brakes and > willing engine. Not just out and out performance, but fun to drive. Yes, I can see that. However, I was thinking more along the lines of 'reliable, all-year ragtop from a major manufacturer; liberal use of the parts bin for the mechanicals; not blisteringly fast, but huge fun.' > Really not a lot like a 'B' - however nice they can be. But I always > thought the Spriget a better car than the B. So did I. I was very fond of my bro's little Series II Midget. It was a better car than my old Mk II Spit, anyway.... - Robin. SignatureTrout: Slightly fishy but never coarse. http://www.troutmag.org > (If you cornered me and insisted that I compare my Z4 to a Brit > sportscar, then I'd probably have to compare it to a big Healey....) I'd have said it's closer to a Stag. The Healey is a brutal heavy car to drive... Signature*OK, who stopped payment on my reality check? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >I'd have said it's closer to a Stag. The Healey is a brutal heavy car to >drive... The Stags I drove felt more nose-heavy than my TR-8. Now maybe a TVR... -- Larry >> (If you cornered me and insisted that I compare my Z4 to a Brit >> sportscar, then I'd probably have to compare it to a big Healey....) > > I'd have said it's closer to a Stag. The Healey is a brutal heavy car to > drive... It is indeed. However, I can't agree with you when you compare a Z4 to a Stag: a Stag's got too many cylinders, too many seats, too much metal above the waistline. Too much metal below it, come to think of it. I like Stags, and I've often vaguely contemplated getting one (a friend has a Stag to complement his Elise) but I have difficulty thinking of it as a sportscar. Nice sporty tourer, though. - Robin. SignatureTrout: Slightly fishy but never coarse. http://www.troutmag.org That pun works only in American. Good thing most people here are.. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > *OK, who stopped payment on my reality check? Written version, that is... DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- > That pun works only in American. Good thing most people here are.. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > [...] >> *OK, who stopped payment on my reality check? >(If you cornered me and insisted that I compare my Z4 to a Brit sportscar, >then I'd probably have to compare it to a big Healey....) Dead-on. -- Larry >>(If you cornered me and insisted that I compare my Z4 to a Brit sportscar, >>then I'd probably have to compare it to a big Healey....) > > Dead-on. > > -- Larry My Z4 reminds me a bit of the Jensen-Healey I nearly bought in the 70's. Tom K. >The MX5 is the car that the British sports car should have been. Considering that the MX-5 first appeared ten years after the demise of the affordable British sports car, that should probably be "would have been ten years later." OTOH, I've got a friend here in DC who currently vintage races MG-Bs, and they're remarkably robust. I rode around Summitt Point Raceway in a bugeye Sprite last year, and it still cornered like a roller skate and gace a thrilling ride that you couldn't get out of any significant quantity production car today, including the bloated BMW Mini-Cooper. My 1972 Elden is dead reliable, and its 1600cc British Ford race engine is at least 15 years old. I think we're still seeing the cumulative effect of fifty years of Lucas jokes... -- Larry >I think we're still seeing the cumulative effect of fifty years of Lucas >jokes... Great. Only 50 more to go. SignatureNeed Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org 1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net 633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net Yeah, I guess so. DAS For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling --- [...] > Considering that the MX-5 first appeared ten years after the demise of the > affordable British sports car, that should probably be "would have been > ten > years later." [...] >>The MX5 is the car that the British sports car should have been. > >Considering that the MX-5 first appeared ten years after the demise of the >affordable British sports car, that should probably be "would have been ten >years later." MG didn't stop production before the first Miata was released - weren't they making cars up until last year? How were those? epbrown -- 2003 BMW 325i Black/Black 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black >>> The MX5 is the car that the British sports car should have been. >> Considering that the MX-5 first appeared ten years after the demise of the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > weren't they making cars up until last year? How were those? > epbrown MGBs were last made in 1980 IIRC. Thee were cars produced in limited numbers after that that bore the MG nameplate, but they were hardly comparable. >> Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. > >> When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. > > You mean the Z4 is an old man's car? The MX5 certainly ain't. Guess you guys (or gals) have not had the chance to drive a 04-05 Mazdaspeed MX-5 with factory intercooled turbo. A real blast. Factory stock it is faster than the Z4 2.5, and with a few mods considerably faster than the 3.0. It will handely out accellerate the Z cars up to its RPM limited top speed of 130 MPH. It was only sold in US, Canada and Japan. as a bonus, with the performance mods, it is still considerably cheaper that the BMW and certainly a more drivers orientated car. And before you slam me for praising it over the Z, I own and love both cars. The MX-5 is akin to a go- cart for having fun, where the Z is more of a touring car with a drop-top. When the weather permits, I find I reach for the MX-5 keys more than the Z's. Just my 2 cents '04 Mazdaspeed MX-5 '04 330Ci ZHP '05 C230 K Sport '05 Z4 3.0 On 7/3/2006 7:53 AM, - went clickity-clack on the keyboard and produced this interesting bit of text: >>> Yup, if you dare to ask .... go get the Miata, it's a nice car. >>> When you grow up, drive a BMW, after that, you'll never ask again. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > When the weather permits, I find I reach for the MX-5 keys more than the > Z's. I'm certainly not going to dispute your opinion, and frankly, I don't really have an opinion about which is better. However, speed is really a non-issue, isn't it? My '94 530i has a top speed of 145. I'm not sure I've even hit 100 in it since I got it 2 years ago. I'd LOVE to see how it'd do at top speed, not to mention how I'd do. But where can I do this? Even Montana cops will bust you if you do around 100. Unless you meant speed while cornering or other maneuvering. SignatureWhen I look at the smiles on all the children's faces, I just know they're about to jab me with something. > I'm certainly not going to dispute your opinion, and frankly, I don't > really have an opinion about which is better. However, speed is really [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Unless you meant speed while cornering or other maneuvering. I don't think ultimate top speed was the comparison being made. It rarely is, as it's both scary and boring at the same time. But if you really want to run your car at it's top speed, there are ways to do it. Several organizations have open road challenge events, where they get permission to close off a public road, then entrants can drive their cars at top speed for 60 - 90 miles or so. The oldest of these is the Silver State Challenge in Nevada. Similar events are held in Texas, with one near Midland. And by the way, there is an unused test track complex near Pecos Texas, which includes a 10 mile oval, with banking calculated to require minimum steering input to stay on course. It's flat-out all the way around, for anything on 4 wheels short of a Bonneville streamliner. Now, getting permission to run on it might be another matter. Last I heard it had been transferred to the City of Pecos to do with it what they will. They were shopping it around for someone to operate it as a test track. Personally, I don't care for the looks of the Z4 Roadster. I liked the Z3 just fine. I'm good with the new coupe though. And Mazda could have changed up the looks of the MX5 a little more, but it's a good-looking car. I love that copper leather interior. Rex B > Beauty? > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >> >> Alex |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.