Is it just me or are the mazdaspeed version mx-5's slow?

Today I was all amped-up to go test drive a turbo mazdapeed mx-5. The turbo was EXTREMLY laggey and even when it kicked in I was still FAR from impresed.
A few months ago I took out a new NC mx-5 and that seemed faster? Has anyone had the same experience?

Again, I write this respectfully and just from my experience.

 

its only rated at 178...and the turbo back exhaust sucks. Its laggy and the intercooler is to small. I know FM makes the turbo upgrade/exhaust upgrade that makes like 40 more hp or something?

I've never driven an NC so I couldn't tell you.

 

Well, the two cars weigh about the same, and the NC has a much broader torque curve that's only a few rear-wheel horsepower shy of the Mazdaspeed....so I'm not surprised. See here: http://flyinmiata.com/tech/dyno_runs/NC_vs_MSM.pdf

 

The msm seems fast to me at 153whp...so I guess when I get my turbo system built arround 200-230whp I'll **** myself.

Its been about 4 years since my vw made 268whp. It was fwd too, so not really fast.

I drive a pro-turbo 421 smallblock f-body, and that doesn't really compute or get compared to power in a car without 30" of rubber in the rear

 

I figure im getting maby 180whp and I almost **** myself just because of the huge increase over stock!

Whats the true definition of an f-body?

 

I can't remember what it stands for, but I know three of the five cars in my driveway have the name on the door sill.

any camaro or firebird (I think??)

 

[QUOTE=Snowsurfer03;45474
Whats the true definition of an f-body?[/QUOTE]

In the old days it used to say "Body by Fisher" Maybe some connection.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_F_platform

 

ya thats the one... they all say that, I dont pay much attention to them anymore... all they do is leak oil and make my house look like a trailer park (they are all 3rd gens, and all rusted to hell)

 

From my expierence with the mazdaspeed miata:
-turbo is way too laggy
-exuast was to restrictive for a boosted vehicle.
-the ic was way to small and heatsoaked.
-dIdnt seem powerful enough to me.

likes:
-the interior kickes *** and sound system was nice.
-body styling was sleek and sharp.
-nice rims.

A srt-4 is cheaper and smokes the **** out of it, mazda should rethink there pricing.

 

F body's are just the firebirds/camaros/trans ams, etc. A bodies are chevelles, GTO's, buick GS's/skylarks, G-bodies are montecarlos, regals, GNs, cutlasses. Just a way to distinguish cars of the same chassis.

I think.

 

You had me until there. My sister hustled her MSM new for $19k...so I think thats worht it.

 

HA! The sticker for the one i was looking at was $24k and it had 2K miles on it authough he did say he had alot of room to move on it and it is getting colder here!

And yes the interior is awesome!

Im glad Im not the only one who has had this experience. It was so funny, i always held the MSM up so high now its makes me laugh!:gay:

 

I think they "designed in" the slow onset of boost. EDIT: Here's some mag info:

"On our Dynojet, our tester laid down 152 hp at 5800 rpm and 143 lb-ft of torque at 3700 rpm at the wheels, making it the absolute most powerful Miata Mazda has ever made. According to Robert Davis, senior vice president of marketing and product development at Mazda, engine combinations making up to 250 hp were tested, but a nasty oil down on an L.A. freeway at that power level and the limitations of the Miata's chassis kept the engineers from turning the wick up too high. "We could have made a lot more power," says Hiraishi during a walk around the car at Mazda R&D in Irvine, Calif. "But it would overpower the chassis."


"Mazda chose to regulate boost so it doesn't come on all at once and send novice drivers off the road backwards, and you can feel this in the power delivery. It's not really turbo lag, but you don't get that kick in the pants boostheads live for. Mazda's engineers told us they wanted the car to feel more like a Miata with a 2.5-liter normally aspirated engine than a turbo motor."

 

I thought the MSM was not like a 2.5 liter NA at all. Just a laggy, weak turbo engine. I was not impressed with it. My little old 1.6 at 6-7psi is making a whole lot more power all through the range.

I liked the NC i drove much better. I was really impressed with it.

 

I agree. Old 1.8t vw's and audi's also have this programmed turbo lag...but its just programmed into the ecm.

You have to think about who buys these cars...and how many people do you actually know who can drive a rwd turbo car (a-typical females)? However, I think spooling lower would be safer than coming on hard at 4k rpm in the rain on an asphalt road in 3rd gear.

 

We have dyno'd both MSM and NC here. Both did the same horsepower, but the NC has a lot more low end torque.

The MSM turbo is small and a little wimpy, and the turbo kick in at high rpm's stinks...... Personally the stock NC drives much better than the stock MSM.
Stephanie

 

Can't the tuners get rid of all this annoying "we know better than you, you need the extra safety margin BS?"

 

its easy...replace the turbo and put an exhaust on it. lol. x.X

 

Better add "ECU" to that easy list