Motor Trend: 2016 Miata vs 2015 BRZ

[Levi]

Originally Posted by fatoni

yeah but its super hard and expensive and then all the weight is all outside of the wheels. nobody is going to spend more money to make a car worse.

That is the most absurd thing I ever read.

Porsche 944 and 928, Alfa Romeo 75, Maserati GT/Quattroporte, Ferrari 599/F12/FF/California, Mercedes SLS AMG/AMG GT, Corvette, GT-R, LFA are worse with transaxle than without?

Why then do front engine race cars get mid-front and transaxle conversion?

[ZDan]

Originally Posted by Levi

Porsche 944 and 928, Alfa Romeo 75, Maserati GT/Quattroporte, Ferrari 599/F12/FF/California, Mercedes SLS AMG/AMG GT, Corvette, GT-R, LFA are worse with transaxle than without?

What is fine for 2+2s and bigger/heavier/longer-wheelbase cars with upscale nameplates at much higher price points is not necessarily the best solution for a smaller, 2-seat, lighter-weight, less expensive MX-5.

In the case of the Corvette, moving the transmission from the back of the engine to the front of the diff certainly resulted in a longer wheelbase and no improvement in weight distribution. Longer wheelbase on a very high-powered supercar may be desirable, but on a low-powered fun sports car it's a drawback.

Why then do front engine race cars get mid-front and transaxle conversion?

A lot of reasons I'm sure, with available race transmission configurations and the rulebook no doubt playing a large part in what is optimal, as well as aero. Again not necessarily relevant to a small/light/relatively-inexpensive production road sports car.

I think a rear transmission or transaxle would have been a bad move for the MX-5. It almost certainly would have increased the wheelbase, added weight, added cost, and probably would not have improved f/r weight distribution and likely would have increased polar moment of inertia.

[acro]

Love the miati. Looks great, I am sure it performs well. But at this point. No way I'm buying a car without rear seats, I have carried adults and tons of other stuff in them, you would be surprised. Not to mention that a hardtop would be absolutely necessary.

There is room in the market for both cars though. I'm glad people still make cars like these.

[humdizzle]

Originally Posted by abraxis

Bizzare thought process you have there. At least you acknowledge cars aren't heavy just because they make more power or have bigger engines.

Okay, I'll play along with the bad logic. Are you saying if the 86 had a 3.5L V6 making 270hp it would have to weigh 700lbs more like a Nissan?? Obviously then, if the 86 made 400hp it would have to weigh 1000lbs more like a Chevy. Put like 250lb rotors on each corner to stop that beast!! Oh wait, higher performance brakes can usually be lighter. Maybe you need like three 350lb offensive linemen strapped in the back to keep the car from flying off into space with all that powah!

in general most higher performance cars do gain some weight. adding aero, wider track, more cylinders, turbos, piping for those turbos,bigger rims, bigger tires to fit over those rims, a stiffer chassis to handle the added grip, bigger brake rotors/calipers, cooling ducts, beefier suspension. And of course if you're spending more on a higher model you want a better interior.

to keep the weight down while adding all these things you need to spend some money. just look at the bmw m4 vs 435i. or the 991 gt3 vs carrera. The base model porsche carrera is actually lighter than the track focused GT3.

[FR-S.13]

Love the new Miata. I'd consider one if they offered a hardtop. I love their obsession with keeping weight in check, the styling is fantastic, and I have absolutely no need for rear seats. However, the roofline is one of the defining traits of a beautiful design in my view, and though it looks great with the top down, a tin top can't be beat. .02

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by humdizzle

in general most higher performance cars do gain some weight. adding aero, wider track, more cylinders, turbos, piping for those turbos,bigger rims, bigger tires to fit over those rims, a stiffer chassis to handle the added grip, bigger brake rotors/calipers, cooling ducts, beefier suspension. And of course if you're spending more on a higher model you want a better interior.

to keep the weight down while adding all these things you need to spend some money. just look at the bmw m4 vs 435i. or the 991 gt3 vs carrera. The base model porsche carrera is actually lighter than the track focused GT3.

This is why I love the idea of the 4c. It has the performance without the extra weight. Unfortunately I'm not a fan of the looks or lack of manual option.

[thill]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

This is why I love the idea of the 4c. It has the performance without the extra weight. Unfortunately I'm not a fan of the looks or lack of manual option.

I don't mind the looks, but lack of manual or better automatic seems to be the one downside of the car.

My biggest concern would be the cost in parts/repairs of this car down the road. The same fear I have with buying a Lotus Elise (although at least with the Lotus you are dealing with a Toyota engine and transmission).

[JellyForSale]

Maybe I'm in a different spot than all of you. I was able to afford an FRS very young at 18 years old and it is already paid off. I am prefacing with this not to brag, but to explain my reasoning for the FRS.

At the end of the day, I could've bought a Miata, I don't have children, just a dog and a girlfriend, and they never ride with me together. A Miata could've been fine, I don't even use the back seats. But at the end of the day, the Miata is just not the look I wanted in my car. Don't get me wrong, they're very cool, but to me just less "aggressive" than the FRS. Not sure of a good way to say it(And NO I don't think its feminine in anyway!).

All in all, I just prefer the hard top and experience in my FRS, even for someone with no children or luggage issues, I still prefer the extra 500 or so pounds to drive a car I am much happier to visually experience as well as drive hard around an apex. Both could do what I want out of a sporty car, but the visuals do matter to me as it'll also be a summer daily driver.

PS: Mazda, why the hell wont you bring back pop up headlights?!

[humdizzle]

yup visuals are just as important as the performance. The FRS blows the doors off the miata in the styling department in my opinion. it looks angry compared to the 'cute' look the miata has.

another key buying point is the demographics. if you buy a vette or miata you better be prepared to hang out with 50 year olds at ur next meet.

[tennisfreak]

Originally Posted by JellyForSale

PS: Mazda, why the hell wont you bring back pop up headlights?!

Mazda, why the hell wont you bring back a real RX-7?!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[HUNTERANGEL121]

Originally Posted by JellyForSale

PS: Mazda, why the hell wont you bring back pop up headlights?!

Because aerodynamics. And it's 2015. No one wants pop headlights except people who like the na miata. And those people aren't enough to make Mazda change their mind about the design

Sent from my toaster

[JellyForSale]

Originally Posted by HUNTERANGEL121

Because aerodynamics. And it's 2015. No one wants pop headlights except people who like the na miata. And those people aren't enough to make Mazda change their mind about the design

Sent from my toaster

Considering a lot of the Miata market could be described as older car enthusiasts, a car that payed to the homage to the pop ups could possibly do well. Look at the corvettes with pop ups, guys(and gals) still love those! And the same people that would want a Miata or 'Vette with pop ups probably isn't someone totally concerned with the aerodynamics.

[krayzie]

Originally Posted by JellyForSale

Considering a lot of the Miata market could be described as older car enthusiasts, a car that payed to the homage to the pop ups could possibly do well. Look at the corvettes with pop ups, guys(and gals) still love those! And the same people that would want a Miata or 'Vette with pop ups probably isn't someone totally concerned with the aerodynamics.

How would pop-up headlights pass modern pedestrian safety regulations? Notice how they haven't been around for like the last 15 years. It's hard to even get a low hoodline these days. I'm actually quite impressed at Mazda trying to get around it with the hood pop-up mechanism upon impact.

[totopo]

Higher torque means more stress on call components means more weight. New cars also have more stringent crash standards. Look at the actual weight of cars. You need to go Mr or rr to save weight. Look at the weight of fr cars. The weights correlate well with torque. I doubt you will ever see a >250 tq <3000 lb fr car <$80k ever again

You can't get flip up headlights any more because of pedestrian safety standards.