I've gone up against one and it couldn't even pull away from my valver (and yes he was trying).. The difference is, he's supposed to be in a sports car!

Went out in a 1.6 facelift one, was expecting alot more from it, quite disappointed with the straight line performance. You'd have to get the 1.8 really.

Anyone got any pictures of MK5s that actually look good? Think a few of us may need convincing

Edit - one above is the best so far.

I can guarantee that no amount of "oh but, yeah but" will change the fact that you will never know if that guy was actually racing you. It is an assumption that he was.

Before slagging a car off rotten you really should at least have an idea about what you’re talking about, preferably with some experience behind the wheel.

The MX5 was originally criticised for being slow in its class, a class which contains the likes of the MR2 Turbo.

In about 1993 Mazda updated the MX5 to meet new safety standards, improve the straight line performance and offer more toys. For the Japanese market the 1.6 was replaced entirely with the all new 1.8 engine to pull around the extra weight and add more sparkle to advertisement campaigns.

For some obscure reason the 1.6 didn't die the heroic death it deserved over here. Instead it was revised and restricted to just 90bhp giving the bods at parkers something to write about in their green credentials column.

The intention was simple, this version of the car wouldn't sell and if some poor misguided fool did buy one the lifeless, wheezy little snotbucket that it was would be no comparison to the 1.8. Fortunately for us the plan worked, we didn't see many of these whimpering around our country lanes.

The late 1.6 really was comparable to a donkey pulling a cart.

It's a shame really as the predecessor was something completely different. The early 1.6 was the model that made the car famous.

The early 1.6 was a 115bhp rev-happy screamer with a short ratio gearbox and diff all mounted into a lightweight shell. The sheer lack of luxuries made this car brilliantly capable on the road. The 0-60mph time was pretty good for it's day being sub 9 seconds, only a fraction of a second slower than the later 1.8.

This version of the 1.6 certainly would not bow down to the sheer manliness of Tris in his almighty 16v Polo. Upon embarrassing him on the straights it would have quite literally left him dying in a ditch of some corner in the middle of nowhere.

And yes, I have driven a 16V polo.

Well fuck me :lol:

Before slagging my post off rotten, with a load of fascinating information, I think the only things I need to point you out on is that I know the other car was trying because I knew the driver, had spoken to him about it before and after, and knew what the car was. No amount of "oh but, yeah but" needed, thank you.

It was a late 1.6 (with the mild facelift), gutlessly slow for what is supposed to be a sports car, over 9 seconds to 60. Just like my modest 1.4 Polo.

Therefore you'd be wrong in assuming he "embarrassed me on the straights" because there wasn't really anything in it.

And it was in fact a very, very straight road

I'm not going to bring other versions of MX-5s into it, nor twisty county lanes, tracks etc because the outcome would be obvious. But I can speak for the above experience, and stand by my original post.

To be fair even a 115 bhp 1.6 MX-5 takes 29 seconds to get to 100, surely a Polo 16v is faster than that?

When I got my car I had any number of people jump on it with the only predictable answer.

At the Polo Show 2009 it felt like people were avoiding me like the plague...still a bit mirked about that show, personally my ears were burning the whole time, but moving on...

No, it's not powerful, it's pretty slow for a 1.8 in standard form, my old twin carb mk2 would probably stick with it to 60 I reckon,

Back when I bought it I was choosing between an MX5 and a few other options including E30's, etc...I'm the type that has to weigh up several types of plain paper before making a choice so it was all about what people had to say from their own experience and it seemed to me that there wasn't a bad word said about them, at least nothing that had no substance (such as 'gay' or 'cockwagon' etc)

MX5's will never be cool until the popular view disappears - I understand why, because it only starts when someone spouts the phrase 'hairdresser's car' around his mates until it catches on. But knowing full well how people are, I can at least back it up by saying I've took to the track in mine 3 times, each time vigorously jizzing my pants around every single corner, under every single braking zone, under every single power out and every single gear change. These are the times when I can completely cast memories of my old car out the window because it would never compare to what I've got myself now.

If you want a car for show, don't buy one. If you want a car to actually drive, buy one and love it.

So in conclusion, they're gay.

I think a lot of MX-5 owners are quite paranoid. There are people who genuinely don't like them, and couldn't care less if they are "gay" or not. I have thought about an MX-5, but went off the idea the more I looked at them and just thought I didn't like them. I'd rather have a Caterham.

Buy roll-bars

Buy roll-bars

Yeah for sure, there was an Mx-5 in the scrappy near me that had been in a roll but had no roll bars, the top of the car was pretty much level with the bonnet, both of the seats had been flatteened and there was the remains of blood and hair all over the shop. Nasty as fuck.

I'm gay and I like these cars I think they are really pretty xxx

I agree with pretty much everything max_crox said on the previous page.

I'd rather have a Caterham.

Caterhams are quicker (unless you get a 1.4 ), and handle better than an MX but Caterhams aren't that handy for everyday use. Knowing British weather having to put on the stupid soft top that attaches by buttons isn't fun when it's already started pissing it down, believe me. When you do get the top on and you're driving in the wet, you can hardly see anything and they're skittish as. They're just not as comfortable or as easy to live day to day with as an MX. Of course this all depends on what you want from one.

^^ Adding to that point, you can't even compare the 2 cars fairly.. the cheapest Caterham on Pistonheads is 7 grand