mx5cartalk.com

The weight of the new ND has finally been released by Mazda.

In manual form:
998kg for the 1.5 litre engine
1058kg for the 1.8 litre engine

And if the article from Carsales.com.au is to be believed, they're estimating the 0-100km/h times of the 2.0 litre, manual ND to be a brisk 6.2 seconds. On paper this is 0.1 seconds faster than the MX-5 SP (1.6 seconds faster than the NC).

Clicky Clicky

Hammer wrote:6.2 seconds

asif.
mazda wouldn't.
they are a pack of girls.

I heard the 1.5lt was near 10secs.

beavis wrote:

Hammer wrote:6.2 seconds

asif.
mazda wouldn't.
they are a pack of girls.

I heard the 1.5lt was near 10secs.

not quite as a 121 bubble car

Pretty sceptical of anything with only 109kW/tonne doing that kind of time to 100, even with the short gears that MX5s are known for. Their claim of 7sec for the 1.5L version is pretty optimistic too, I bet.

Hammer wrote:1058kg for the 1.8 litre engine

Actually that should be 1058kg for the 2.0 litre engine.

Carsales calculations of 0-100km/hr times are very dodgy. There is no chance the ND 2.0L will get close to the SP in straight line acceleration. It is also misleading to quote US figures for kerb weight as Australia is more likely to get a European spec. At the Geneva Motor Show, it was stated that the 1.5L kerb weight is 975kg and the 2.0L is 1000kg (without the 75kg driver). Those kerb weights vary depending on trim level and the local interpretation of what constitutes "kerb weight". So the 1.5L has 10.2kg/kW and the 2.0L has 8.5kg/kW. In comparison the SP has 7.5kg/kW, and it is highly unlikely that any difference in torque curve or traction is going to make up for that gulf in weight/power ratio.

I was quite surprised that the 1.5L was in the 9sec range to 100kmph. I've always thought that over 10seconds in ecoboxes becomes worringly slow in terms of merging and stuff. 9 seconds for a modern sports car isn't right. Toyota says the 86 can sprint from 0-100km/h in 7.6 seconds for the manual. And that's not a quick car.

For context, the new MX5 would lose a drag race to a Toyota Camry Hybrid. It's just not right.

OurCognitiveSurplus wrote:I was quite surprised that the 1.5L was in the 9sec range to 100kmph. I've always thought that over 10seconds in ecoboxes becomes worringly slow in terms of merging and stuff. 9 seconds for a modern sports car isn't right. Toyota says the 86 can sprint from 0-100km/h in 7.6 seconds for the manual. And that's not a quick car.

For context, the new MX5 would lose a drag race to a Toyota Camry Hybrid. It's just not right.

The 86 isn't an especially quick car, no. But still faster than any stock non-turbo mx5 has ever been. That 9sec range is more than enough to merge onto highways etc, it's no slower than my NB and that has no trouble. The drivers are the problem.

Hold second, hold third, bam: onto the highway and your passenger is asking you to slow down.

No problems.

mattyredlocks wrote:Hold second, hold third, bam: onto the highway and your passenger is asking you to slow down.

No problems.

Amen to that!

What else is different between 1.5 and 2.0 cars ?

Also for Reasons of repeatability They prefer the 0-100 times to be performed on a Hub Dyno
this level of traction will never be achieved under real world conditions.

oztrackdays wrote:this level of traction will never be achieved under real world conditions.

Or non-existent wind resistance..

See here. viewtopic.php?f=18&t=67462#p836098
Greg.

Hammer wrote:The weight of the new ND has finally been released by Mazda.

In manual form:
998kg for the 1.5 litre engine
1058kg for the 1.8 litre engine

And if the article from Carsales.com.au is to be believed, they're estimating the 0-100km/h times of the 2.0 litre, manual ND to be a brisk 6.2 seconds. On paper this is 0.1 seconds faster than the MX-5 SP (1.6 seconds faster than the NC).

Clicky Clicky

now put fluid in...

1010kg for the 1.5L Manual S special model (one up from poverty pack). 1040 for topspec leather model with MT.

So how much is the 2L model going to be? 60kg on top of the 1.5L number? 1070-1100kg.

Don't believe the car mags is something I've discovered over the years, especially before a car has been released and tested.

Here's a site I've used a bit - seems to be within a more accurate range than one journalist's guess...

http://www.torquestats.com/modified/index.php?pid=calculator

Chuck in your kerb weight, drive type and power at the flywheel.

Have fun!