New Mx5 turbo

Tony C · Post by **Tony C** » Thu Mar 25, 2004 10:11 pm

For anyone who's interested:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/motoring/moto ... n=motoring

helenandtim · Post by **helenandtim** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 5:26 pm

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/motoring/moto ... ID=3556527&
thesection=motoring

(snip)
The nimble MX-5 is one of the best-handling cars made. Around 750 have

been sold new in New Zealand since 1989.
(snip)

this is scary only 750 ...
any guesses about how many have come in pre loved??

Simon Hardman · Post by **Simon Hardman** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:34 pm

Anyone know what the relationship is between this and the US market
Mazdaspeed Miata?

I had assumed they were the same, but comparing this with the info on the
mazdaspeed
(http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp ... le_id=7868), the
US model has 178hp (as against 162 for the NZ), and does 0-60mph in 6.7
seconds (They claim they were being gentle with it...), against a quoted
7.8s 0-100 for the NZ one.

Still, I would not say no to either...

Simon

Rex Johnston · Post by **Rex Johnston** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:42 pm

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 18:34, Simon Hardman wrote:

Anyone know what the relationship is between this and the US market
Mazdaspeed Miata?

I had assumed they were the same, but comparing this with the info on the
mazdaspeed
(http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp ... le_id=7868), the
US model has 178hp (as against 162 for the NZ), and does 0-60mph in 6.7
seconds (They claim they were being gentle with it...), against a quoted
7.8s 0-100 for the NZ one.

Something doesn't gell.

The BPT in the GTX, without variable valve timing, a low compression
ratio and 8psi pokes out 134kW. A better turbo, port match it, and in
the GTR we have 143kW. Still without variable valve timing, low boost
etc etc. Add this back in, include all the other goodies the MX5 has,
and you must be looking at more than 121kW. What have they done to it?

Rex

---
There's always free cheese in a mousetrap.

Matt & Sarah Avery · Post by **Matt & Sarah Avery** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:27 pm

How does the torque figure compare to the old BPT? Maybe the new turbo
setup is designed to provide more Ooomph (highly technical term) lower
down in the rev range, whereas the old BPT produced it higher up. Just a
wild uneducated guess?
I have discovered that peak HP figures aren't much of an indication of
how quick a car is. I used to think that my cars 104 rwKw (7psi
supercharged)was pretty pathetic compared to what turbo cars were
producing, especially when I saw the dyno graph of a local 9psi
non-intercooled turbo 5 that did over 130 rwKw. That was until I
compared his dyno graph more closely to my one (Both done on exactly the
same dyno) I was happy to see that up until 5000prm my car made a
constant 10kw's more. After that point the turbo car's figures went up
at a sharp rate while mine plateaued soon after, but it doesn't worry me
much now as 90% of my driving is done at less than 5000rpm.
Maybe the new turbo car is a similar story. I wonder if I can con them
into letting me take one for a test drive

Rex Johnston · Post by **Rex Johnston** » Fri Mar 26, 2004 10:37 pm

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 22:27, Matt & Sarah Avery wrote:

How does the torque figure compare to the old BPT? Maybe the new turbo
setup is designed to provide more Ooomph (highly technical term) lower
down in the rev range, whereas the old BPT produced it higher up. Just a
wild uneducated guess?

The BPT usually pokes out > 200Nm, mind you that is at > 4000rpm too.

I have discovered that peak HP figures aren't much of an indication of
how quick a car is. I used to think that my cars 104 rwKw (7psi
supercharged)was pretty pathetic compared to what turbo cars were
producing, especially when I saw the dyno graph of a local 9psi
non-intercooled turbo 5 that did over 130 rwKw. That was until I

Eeek 9psi without an intercooler!

Cheers, Rex

---
Buck-passing usually turns out to be a boomerang.

jeff · Post by **jeff** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 12:24 am

my guess is that it's either hamstrung by:
a) emissions requirements
b) drivetrain longevity requirements.

The custom setup on my '96 seems to be at least 200hp
(~160kw, based on trap speed) , and that's with a GTX
teeny-tiny VJ20 turbo and default (ie safe) Link maps.

Haven't broken anything yet

Jeff

--- Rex Johnston <mx@sclnz.com> wrote:

On Fri, 2004-03-26 at 18:34, Simon Hardman wrote:

Anyone know what the relationship is between this
and the US market
Mazdaspeed Miata?

I had assumed they were the same, but comparing
this with the info on the
mazdaspeed

(http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp ... le_id=7868),
[...]

Who is online