Mazda MX-5 drag race - 1.5 vs 2.0

[Hammer]

I'm sure it will not be a surprised to anyone who wins this drag race. Question is, by how much?

Here are some words from the Motor article:

"Which engine gives you the most bang for your buck? It's not giving away too much to say that the 2.0-litre MX-5 is the winner here. As it should be, with 118kW/200Nm to the 1.5-litre's 96kW/150Nm and only an extra 20-odd kilograms to push. But the question is: how much faster is it?

The baby-engined MX-5 has surprised us in the past by smashing its claimed 8.3sec 0-100km/h claim, so can the 2.0-litre do the same? Or is the gap between the two marginal?

Forty-degree temperatures on the day certainly didn't help the times, but we've now answered which is fastest. As for which is best? That's a story still to come."

Motor article

[manga_blue]

Lighter, simpler, almost as fast. I'll take the 1.5.

[Steampunk]

Red car also got away smidge earlier.

[Vat]

Lighter, simpler, almost as fast. I'll take the 1.5.

....and revs. Glorious, glorious revs....

[project.r.racing]

You dont buy an MX5 for its dragway straight speed. The video is only 25% of the story when it comes to an MX5.

[zossy1]

Hmm... So the 2L is nearly a second quicker over the standing quarter, and to 100kmh.

On the evidence of the video, the 2L will also put 3-4 car lengths on a 1.5L out of every corner.

Give me torque over revs any day. 2L is the choice for me.

[Rocky]

Seriously, a second is of absolutely no consequence. You get more than that due to differences in driver ability/reflexes.
3 or 4 secs might be significant.

[Okibi]

At least do about 10 runs and swap drivers every run to make the results a little stronger.

1 second down the quarter mile is significant enough, I think my stock NB was running 16.3s (with my fat ass onboard)

[Dan]

Seriously, a second is of absolutely no consequence. You get more than that due to differences in driver ability/reflexes.
3 or 4 secs might be significant.

3 or 4 seconds MIGHT be significant? A stock Nissan GTR is less than 4 seconds faster down the quarter than the 2L ND (the older ones are just more than 3 seconds faster).

A good way to compare performance and remove driver error is to divide the faster cars trap speed by the slower cars speed and then cube that number. That gives you a decent idea percentage wise of how much faster the other car is in terms of acceleration, in this case the 2L is about 19% faster.

[SE]

The best 500cc you will ever buy

[Mr Morlock]

the bigger engine will also be quicker on the road i.e. not so dependent on revs. Also the 2L engine surely is already underdone- the 86 puts out 147KW so with a bit of tweaking you might expect much better performance from the 2L.

[Steampunk]

At least do about 10 runs and swap drivers every run to make the results a little stronger. )

I'm assuming they have done so and this is the closest/most even run.

Seriously, a second is of absolutely no consequence.

Seriously? Ah.... no.
1 second is a very considerable difference especially since the gap was getting wider.
Read ANY car article in the last 15 years comparing higher spec models of the same car,ie Audi S4 vs Rs4, Impreza WRX garden variety vs sti, and you'll mostly see all the plaudits for the faster car even though they are tweaked versions of the same engine and performance times are approx 1 second apart.
Next time you happen to be standing beside a 70km/h road, count one second between cars and you'll realise how large the gap is, even at half the speed the video depicted.

[davekmoore]

Interesting test and it's good to see the results.

However, they ask which is fastest and which is best. Does being a journalist no longer include having a basic command of the English language?

[manga_blue]

Hmm... So the 2L is nearly a second quicker over the standing quarter, and to 100kmh.

On the evidence of the video, the 2L will also put 3-4 car lengths on a 1.5L out of every corner.

Give me torque over revs any day. 2L is the choice for me.

That's true up to a point, Zossy, but remember the 1.5 would be competing and often leading in the sub-1600cc classes while the 2.0 is running well back in the field against some very serious machinery in the 1600-2000cc classes in most competitions.

[SE]

Seriously, a second is of absolutely no consequence. You get more than that due to differences in driver ability/reflexes.
3 or 4 secs might be significant.

Seriously YOU cant be Serious