Motor Trend: 2016 Miata vs 2015 BRZ

[abraxis]

Originally Posted by Sideways&Smiling

It's 50/50...

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/05/28/2...ibution-video/

Weight as tested: 52.7/47.3

http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/mx-5-mi...st-specs1.html

[Deslock]

Originally Posted by abraxis

I have a 2100lb MR2 so I get to sit back and laugh at all this Miata vs. 86 nonsense. Kudos to Mazda for making a better Miata. In the end though, it's still just a Miata. You either like that or you don't. Lots of body roll, not THAT lightweight, cramped interior that rubs against the side of your leg, engine in the wrong place, and ironically a now 53/47 weight distribution just like the 86.

Funny nobody seems to be crying about that yet like they did with the FRS. 50/50 has always been a mythical marketing 'ideal' perpetuated by front engined manufacturers anyway. It's like how they call a Corvette 'mid-engine'. Lol.

If you like the Miata platform, cool. Fun car. Enjoy. Let's not pretend it changes anything.

In my opinion, ~5.8-6.0 sec 0-60, ~2300 pounds, 27 MPG city EPA, RWD, and full warrantee and MY2016 safety features for $25k is significant.

I'm a fan of the MRS and appreciate its lower weight and rearward bias. However, I prefer the Miata’s smaller wheelbase, short throw, more openness, and extra practicality.

[Bristecom]

Originally Posted by krayzie

I hope Toyota and Subaru will never cave in and put a 2.5L 6500rpm redline boxer into the FRS/BRZ for here and ruin it all.

No, but hopefully they do a 2.2-2.4L at 7000 some RPM, which would be the best balance for torque, power, etc. Just look at the Honda Civic Si motor: 2.4L, 205hp, 174lb-ft torque, and 7000rpm red line, at 22mpg city and 31mpg highway. Those should be the target figures for their next engine. But most importantly - with a smooth/flat torque curve.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by Pat

I highly doubt manufacturers intentionally put more weight up front to more easily hold/recover from a drift.

Why? That's why they went with low resistance tires (not enough power to break traction otherwise). That's why they had an open top concept commercial with a girl drifting a convertible version of the FR-S. That's why Jeremy Clarkson and Chris Harris drifted it during reviews. That's why it has such similar design to the 240sx/Silvia (known for drifting) but with a longer wheelbase than any generation S-chassis... the shorter the wheelbase and the more rearward (or mid-engine) the weight placement, the faster the car rotates and the harder it is to drift.... hence why the S2000 is so difficult to drift.

[Bristecom]

Originally Posted by Pat

I highly doubt manufacturers intentionally put more weight up front to more easily hold/recover from a drift.

If you read the development papers (which I believe are stickied somewhere on here), that was exactly what their intentions were. A car with a 50/50 or rearward weight bias will be harder to control at the limits so they decided that it needed to have a front bias. That's also why they fit smaller, not so grippy tires. And that change in philosophy is what makes this car so unique.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by abraxis

Weight as tested: 52.7/47.3

http://www.edmunds.com/mazda/mx-5-mi...st-specs1.html

Interesting. If you watch the video, they literally balance it on a balance beam. I believe that's 50/50 with driver though.

[Bristecom]

Originally Posted by Sideways&Smiling

Why? That's why they went with low resistance tires (not enough power to break traction otherwise). That's why they had an open top concept commercial with a girl drifting a convertible version of the FR-S. That's why Jeremy Clarkson and Chris Harris drifted it during reviews. That's why it has such similar design to the 240sx/Silvia (known for drifting) but with a longer wheelbase than any generation S-chassis... the shorter the wheelbase and the more rearward (or mid-engine) the weight placement, the faster the car rotates and the harder it is to drift.... hence why the S2000 is so difficult to drift.

Looks like you beat me to it.

[HUNTERANGEL121]

Originally Posted by Sideways&Smiling

Interesting. If you watch the video, they literally balance it on a balance beam. I believe that's 50/50 with driver though.

That doesn't anything. You could have 50lbs on one end and move the car front or rear to balance off the weight. If they want to show it has a perfect weight distribution, do no driver, on a corner balance scale.

Sent from my toaster

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by HUNTERANGEL121

That doesn't anything. You could have 50lbs on one end and move the car front or rear to balance off the weight. If they want to show it has a perfect weight distribution, do no driver, on a corner balance scale.

Sent from my toaster

I know. It's just marketing. They specifically call it out as "50/50 weight distribution" though.... with driver in seat.

Like I said earlier, 50/50 isn't even ideal. It's just about the best you're going to get in a front-engined car.

The day we get a tiny agile coupe with a turbo and double wishbones all around in a mid-engined package at an obtainable price....... is the day I buy that coupe ASAP. Think of something like the BEST of the S2000/FD RX7/Toyota MR2 combined. That is my ideal car. haha.

Front-engine cars are still fun though and not a bad compromise.

[Sideways&Smiling]

Originally Posted by Bristecom

Looks like you beat me to it.

You've got the right idea though, sir!

[fatoni]

it is slightly amusing how all we heard is the "frs is 500 lbs lighter than the 370z/mustang/genesis" but its rather absent here.

[strat61caster]

Originally Posted by fatoni

it is slightly amusing how all we heard is the "frs is 500 lbs lighter than the 370z/mustang/genesis" but its rather absent here.

Probably because we all know how important weight is and respect what Mazda has done?

But I guess you're right, the Mustang guys don't focus on the 800 lb difference, we don't focus on the 450.

[abraxis]

Originally Posted by Deslock

more openness, and extra practicality.

What do you mean by more openness? Are you thinking of the gen 1T-top? Did Mazda fix the claustrophic leg crushing cockpit and A-pillars that wrap around in front of my face? The gen3 MR is much more open than all the past Miatas IME.

Yeah, practicality is what the FRS is for. The Miata makes a better single car solution for that if you want a drop top.

[abraxis]

Originally Posted by fatoni

it is slightly amusing how all we heard is the "frs is 500 lbs lighter than the 370z/mustang/genesis" but its rather absent here.

That's probably what you guys say over on the Miata forums versus the FRS.

I'm still a little upset they couldn't make the 2550 target for the 86, but you can get there on your own. I wonder how much weight there is left to strip out of the new Miata.