miataturbo.net-like debauchery thread (about the ND or something)
#902
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Detroit (the part with no rules or laws)
Posts: 5,677
Total Cats: 800
I dunno what engine this is with.
https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/2016-m...162600487.html
34mpg highway.
https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/2016-m...162600487.html
34mpg highway.
#905
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Posts: 7,951
Total Cats: 1,004
I dunno what engine this is with.
https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/2016-m...162600487.html
34mpg highway.
https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/2016-m...162600487.html
34mpg highway.
We really shouldn't be surprised that this doesn't get the same mileage as the 3: The gearing on the 3 is super high, and it's a more efficient FWD layout. The new Miata is going to get fantastic mileage when driven reasonably, and I am sure we will see reports of 40+ at 65 mph highway.
#906
I guess I expected more out of an engine designed recently and not in the 80's, a heavily updated drivetrain, and a car that weighs less. If it's not gonna make decent power, it should at least get serious mpg. I mean we're talking about 15 years worth of technology. Way more if you consider that the NB is just a hopped up na, not a complete re-design. The 3 also weighs much more and I bet it doesn't have better aero either ( just a guess )
#907
I guess I expected more out of an engine designed recently and not in the 80's, a heavily updated drivetrain, and a car that weighs less. If it's not gonna make decent power, it should at least get serious mpg. I mean we're talking about 15 years worth of technology. Way more if you consider that the NB is just a hopped up na, not a complete re-design. The 3 also weighs much more and I bet it doesn't have better aero either ( just a guess )
You can likely have better MPG out of it.
If you want to gear it like a cruiser.
Show me a legit sports car that gets super awesome make-me-jizz-myself gas mileage. They don't exist.
Every car is a compromise. The Miata is no different.
I get over 40mpg out of my F2 powered car, but yet... i don't get salty when pretty much nothing but diesels or hybrids does the same in the year 2015. Be realistic, friend.
#908
I guess I expected more out of an engine designed recently and not in the 80's, a heavily updated drivetrain, and a car that weighs less. If it's not gonna make decent power, it should at least get serious mpg. I mean we're talking about 15 years worth of technology. Way more if you consider that the NB is just a hopped up na, not a complete re-design. The 3 also weighs much more and I bet it doesn't have better aero either ( just a guess )
--Ian
#913
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Posts: 7,951
Total Cats: 1,004
city mileage with reasonable driving will be better, or at least as good as, the 3 because lighter weight (not reflected in EPA ratings, but will come out in the real world. Might not actually be BETTER just because RWD). Higher speeds the Miata will be hampered because drag.
I too was hoping for better, but am not surprised. Look at it this way: 6 MPG more than the current Miata on the highway.
OK you're right -- that's disappointing.
I too was hoping for better, but am not surprised. Look at it this way: 6 MPG more than the current Miata on the highway.
OK you're right -- that's disappointing.
#915
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,026
Total Cats: 6,592
cd is not the same as total drag.
Drag is cd * equivalent flat-plate area.
So it'd have the same aerodynamic drag as a Jeep, if it were the same size as a Jeep.
For reference, as brick has a cd of ~1, regardless of the size of the brick. Large bricks obviously have more total aerodynamic drag than small bricks.
Drag is cd * equivalent flat-plate area.
So it'd have the same aerodynamic drag as a Jeep, if it were the same size as a Jeep.
For reference, as brick has a cd of ~1, regardless of the size of the brick. Large bricks obviously have more total aerodynamic drag than small bricks.
#917
cd is not the same as total drag.
Drag is cd * equivalent flat-plate area.
So it'd have the same aerodynamic drag as a Jeep, if it were the same size as a Jeep.
For reference, as brick has a cd of ~1, regardless of the size of the brick. Large bricks obviously have more total aerodynamic drag than small bricks.
Drag is cd * equivalent flat-plate area.
So it'd have the same aerodynamic drag as a Jeep, if it were the same size as a Jeep.
For reference, as brick has a cd of ~1, regardless of the size of the brick. Large bricks obviously have more total aerodynamic drag than small bricks.
Thank you.