franky
|
| posted on 29/3/12 at 09:40 PM |
|
|
I've joined the hair dressers!
2000 model mx5, 84k fsh, years mot and new rear boots. Its had its rust issues sorted(no filler!). It was hard not to spend more than I needed to
getting at mk2.5 with leather/lsd/heated seats.
Not overly sure if I like it yet! feels like it needs another 50bhp but it won't be getting it! Nice to drive though and need to see if it
will meet my 35mpg requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
rdodger
|
| posted on 29/3/12 at 09:49 PM |
|
|
Nice.
I liked mine much more with an added 85 bhp.
Supercharge it! You know you want to!
|
|
|
franky
|
| posted on 29/3/12 at 09:58 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by rdodger
Nice.
I liked mine much more with an added 85 bhp.
Supercharge it! You know you want to!
I can't do that as I need to see 35mpg on my daily commute, it was a very sensible price so i'm happy from that point of view. Feels so
strange after driving the a3 with 4wd and the Vag 1.9tdi engine
|
|
|
austin man
|
| posted on 29/3/12 at 10:02 PM |
|
|
I could get 35 mpg out of my 200bhp Mk 4 golf 1.8 Turbo so you should be able to
Life is like a bowl of fruit, funny how all the weird looking ones are left alone
|
|
|
Simon
|
| posted on 29/3/12 at 10:08 PM |
|
|
ATB
Simon
|
|
|
rdodger
|
| posted on 29/3/12 at 10:10 PM |
|
|
I don't think I ever got 35mpg before the boost. It makes little difference on a commute if you don't go mad. So that means about 18 mpg
:-)
[Edited on 29/3/12 by rdodger]
|
|
|
Chippy
|
| posted on 29/3/12 at 10:46 PM |
|
|
Funny just been reading a "back to back" with the MGF. Mazda MX5 1.8 against MGF 1.8 VVC, the economy figures are quite interesting MX5
26.9 mpg, MGF 30.2 mpg. In every item the MG has better results more power, more torque, and a higher top speed plus better 0 to 60 times. There
findings come out clearly on the side of the MG even to the point that its a far better drive. Not much help to you though, as looks like you 35 mpg
may be a bit hopeful. Cheers Ray
To make a car go faster, just add lightness. Colin Chapman - OR - fit a bigger engine. Chippy
|
|
|
tomgregory2000
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 06:16 AM |
|
|
those are terrible mpg figures 
i got better out of my 2.5L turbo diesel defender and auto disco
but you should slap a supercharger/turbo on 
|
|
|
franky
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 06:48 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chippy
Funny just been reading a "back to back" with the MGF. Mazda MX5 1.8 against MGF 1.8 VVC, the economy figures are quite interesting MX5
26.9 mpg, MGF 30.2 mpg. In every item the MG has better results more power, more torque, and a higher top speed plus better 0 to 60 times. There
findings come out clearly on the side of the MG even to the point that its a far better drive. Not much help to you though, as looks like you 35 mpg
may be a bit hopeful. Cheers Ray
The official figures are 33mpg combined for the 1.8 mx5, not sure where you've got 26.9 from!?
I'm not a fan of rover products as I need the car to start everyday
|
|
|
scudderfish
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 08:17 AM |
|
|
Nitrous?
|
|
|
Stott
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 08:48 AM |
|
|
You can normally take the manufacturers official combined figure and take between 5-10 off to get the real world combined figure you will see
daily.
This has held true for every car I've ever owned. My fabia is 56 something official combined. You can realistically only get that on a 4 hr
run.
26.9 was probably the real average as tested.
Sorry! 
|
|
|
franky
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 09:08 AM |
|
|
My commute tends to make it the other way, what figures are claimed, I can normally get 3-4mpg better as its a lot of 50mph stuff.
It seems to be quite good on juice so far, even with me enjoying the last 1000rpm at every chance
|
|
|
rdodger
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 09:19 AM |
|
|
Go on!
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 09:19 AM |
|
|
Me too. Mine is a 1990 Eunos 1.6. It's a great car and I love it. I've kept my locost for when I need a bit of excitement.
Proportion is Everything
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 09:20 AM |
|
|
[img] [/img]
Proportion is Everything
|
|
|
zilspeed
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 10:28 AM |
|
|
MX5s are very dear to me.
My friend Douglas had a close run in with Leukemia a few years back.
When he survived it, his celebration was buying an MX5.
I don't believe he'll ever sell it.
I can see one in my future too.
|
|
|
sdh2903
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 12:49 PM |
|
|
You've gone from a 320bhp 800kg flying machine to a hairdresser wagon! Are you having a mid-life crisis in reverse?
|
|
|
adithorp
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 12:50 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by rdodger
Go on!
How much did it set you back, Roger? Just curious incase the one I picked up stays in the fold after this summer.
"A witty saying proves nothing" Voltaire
http://jpsc.org.uk/forum/
|
|
|
franky
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 12:54 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sdh2903
You've gone from a 320bhp 800kg flying machine to a hairdresser wagon! Are you having a mid-life crisis in reverse?
Its was 330bhp and 750kg
Yes a finacial crisis!!
|
|
|
JekRankin
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 12:55 PM |
|
|
Nothing to do with me, but this could be a cheap route to a bit more power for someone?
MX5 Turbo | eBay
|
|
|
ChrisL
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 02:10 PM |
|
|
I wouldn't be without my mk1 mx-5, great car, really fun daily drive, only get about 25 mpg from it though and the rear wings are rusting
through so they'll need a lot of work soon :-(
|
|
|
ceebmoj
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 03:32 PM |
|
|
Loved the two mk1's I have had as a package possibly the best cars I have ever owned as well.
|
|
|
Chippy
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 09:59 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by franky
quote:
Originally posted by Chippy
Funny just been reading a "back to back" with the MGF. Mazda MX5 1.8 against MGF 1.8 VVC, the economy figures are quite interesting MX5
26.9 mpg, MGF 30.2 mpg. In every item the MG has better results more power, more torque, and a higher top speed plus better 0 to 60 times. There
findings come out clearly on the side of the MG even to the point that its a far better drive. Not much help to you though, as looks like you 35 mpg
may be a bit hopeful. Cheers Ray
The official figures are 33mpg combined for the 1.8 mx5, not sure where you've got 26.9 from!?
I'm not a fan of rover products as I need the car to start everyday
The figures quoted are from a "Back to Back" artical in this months Classic Car, and I would guess that the MPG figures are pretty close
to what you will get. Cheers Ray
To make a car go faster, just add lightness. Colin Chapman - OR - fit a bigger engine. Chippy
|
|
|
indykid
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 10:34 PM |
|
|
I drive my mk1 1.8 pretty hard as a daily driver because I have a fantastic country road commute and have got between 27 and 29mpg pretty much every
tank since last july. When I've been on a decent length run, I've had 36mpg, measured from brimful tank to brimful tank.
The mx5 engine is low compression, based on the 323 turbo engine, so gives pretty poor fuel economy NA. The best way to improve volumetric efficiency
in cruise is to add forced induction. One guy on MX5Nutz is getting into 40mpg with his turbo car on a run. A turbo setup and decent tune equates to a
hell of a lot of fuel though, so isn't really worth considering on efficiency grounds alone.
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 30/3/12 at 11:02 PM |
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4moVr5nwBJg
|
|
|
.jpg)
