1992 versus 1998

Archives of Posts to the NZ MX5 List back in 2002
Locked
Allan & Robyn Barker

1992 versus 1998

Post by Allan & Robyn Barker » Thu Nov 14, 2002 8:58 am

Can I have some comment about the relative virtues and vices of M2's?
I have a white (lovely colour) 1992 slightly lowered on 195 50 15 which goes
very well but is also very road noisy.
I am tempted to go to a 1998 6 speed with all the safety standards and std
suspension wheels tyres etc.
Are there differences in reliability, performance, noise , weatherproofing,
etc?
All advice welcome!
Allan Barker

lou Girardin

1992 versus 1998

Post by lou Girardin » Thu Nov 14, 2002 9:48 am

The '92 is a raw sports car, the '98 is ?
Although '89's are best.
Lou

Simon Lord
See my 5 and raise you.
See my 5 and raise you.
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:09 pm
Location: Albany

1992 versus 1998

Post by Simon Lord » Thu Nov 14, 2002 10:21 am

Dear Allan

I think it depends what you are looking for. I drove both when I was looking
for mine - expected to go for a Mk2, but having driven a couple decided that I
would look for a good late model Mk1 instead. If the car is to be for everyday
use including commuting/motorway driving and the occasional thrash, the Mk2 is
quieter and more refined but the ones I drove didn't seem to have the
out-and-out fun factor round the bends of the Mk1. I don't have to use mine
every day and all year round, though - if I did, I might just have gone for
the Mk2.

Mine is a 97 SR Ltd with no mods. Doesn't seem to have any problems with
weatherproofing - the hoods must have been reasonably sorted by then. The one
thing I do want to add is style bars with a wind deflector between them. That
was the only thing about the Mk2 that I really noticed as a positive
difference.

Simon
97 SR Ltd (sparkle green)
Email: simon@franchise.co.nz

Charles & Morven Lynch

1992 versus 1998

Post by Charles & Morven Lynch » Thu Nov 14, 2002 6:37 pm

Simon,
The M2 wind deflector fits the M1, You can probably get one from Mazda or
mx5mart.co.nz (Ross doesn't advertise them, but I'm sure he could get you
one).
Cheers
Charles
--
Charles & Morven Lynch, chicnmo@ihug.co.nz on 14/11/2002

On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:21:44 +1300, Franchise New Zealand magazine
& website wrote:
Dear Allan

I think it depends what you are looking for. I drove both when I was
looking for mine - expected to go for a Mk2, but having driven a couple
decided that I would look for a good late model Mk1 instead. If the car
is to be for everyday use including commuting/motorway driving and the
occasional thrash, the Mk2 is quieter and more refined but the ones I
drove didn't seem to have the out-and-out fun factor round the bends of
the Mk1. I don't have to use mine every day and all year round, though -
if I did, I might just have gone for the Mk2.
Mine is a 97 SR Ltd with no mods. Doesn't seem to have any problems
with weatherproofing - the hoods must have been reasonably sorted by
then. The one thing I do want to add is style bars with a wind deflector
between them. That was the only thing about the Mk2 that I really
noticed as a positive difference.
[...]

my2cta
Need, more, 5-ing, time....
Need, more, 5-ing, time....
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 12:43 pm
Location: Upper Hutt

1992 versus 1998

Post by my2cta » Fri Nov 15, 2002 11:15 pm

Haven't noticed any real vices on my M2 after more than 18 months motoring.
Main niggle is that it can sometimes be hard to engage reverse. Mazda
apparently made this the case to ensure nobody found reverse when trying to
select 6th gear at speed. Ouch. Makes sense though. Some people would claim
that its extra weight is a vice, but most of this is from extra stiffening.
Lots of M1 owners add various braces to stiffen their cars up, which all
add weight. I doubt there is much weight difference in the end and the
extra power in the later models certainly makes up for it. Size of driver
and whether you have a passenger on board would make a bigger difference.
Improve performance, leave the partner at home :-)

Virtues. You get the benefit of technological design development that
occurred over a 9 year period - however the original MX5 design was so good
it is fine tuning rather than anything major. Fuel consumption appears to
be quite a bit better on later cars from what has been said in the past in
this forum. If you do a lot of night driving, the lights are really good on
the M2 and don't impede the air flow (no barn doors). The M2 is a bit
stiffer - should help the handling. There is LOTS of fun factor round
bends. Perhaps the fact that it corners so well without stepping out of
line may be considered by some as less fun. Haven't driven a M1 hard so
don't know what the differences may be there. The M2 has a heated glass
rear window in the soft top which means no need to decide whether or not to
unzip the plastic, and you have clear vision out the back in bad weather.
The windblocker makes a big difference. A full width flat boot space with
both spare wheel and battery under the floor.

NZ new M2's didn't have 6-speed gearbox until the 2001 model, with the
exception of the 1999 10th Anniversary Edition (only 4 brought into NZ I
think) and the 2000 Millennium Edition (only 15 of those brought in). They
also didn't have ABS as far as I know. Mine (2000 Millennium Edition) has
dual airbags but no ABS. The 6-speed box is nice to have. It has slightly
taller gearing (fewer revs when cruising) and the ratios are all closer
together. You always have just the right gear for the circumstances
(overtaking or hills). It helps make up a bit for the general lack of power
and torque of all standard MX5's. The extra cog does take a little getting
used to though.

Reliability. 20,000 kms, no problems at all apart from the driver's door
lock failing and that only needed a minor adjustment to fix.

Weatherproofing. With windblocker and side windows up, keeps out almost all
rain at any speed above 50 kph. In very heavy rain and strong cross winds
there is a tendency for some drips to be blown into the car from the top
edge of the side windows. Either the driver or passenger (depending on wind
direction) gets splattered a bit.

Ah, I may have misunderstood that question. Did you mean weatherproofing
with the top UP? Never lets any water in at all when parked, but then it IS
a new soft top (20,000 kms only). No rain gets in when the top is up at
speed either, although I've done more kms in the rain with the top down
than with it up so not such a good statistical sample.

Noise. Quiet on the original tyres for NZ new models (Michelin Pilot SX-GT)
in terms of road noise and squealing on corners almost non-existent.
Exhaust is quiet, but I like the sound it makes - a muted burble when off
the throttle, pleasantly sporty sound when accelerating hard. Certainly
doesn't wear you out from noise on long trips with the top up or down.

Performance. I find mine quick, but I'd like quicker. Maybe one day I'll
make some performance mods (once it's out of warranty perhaps?)

Tim Dutton
MY2CTA
Tim
MY2CTA

Locked

Return to “2002”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests