Looking to purchase in near future

Hi
It’s my first post so please be kind :grinning:

I am not very knowledgeable when it comes to mx5s one of the reasons i joined.

I have around 3 grand to spend on a mx5 which would be mainly used for weekends and going on holiday to our caravan do you think i could find a decent one for that money also what do i need to look out for i believe the sills and wheel arches can suffer rust problems.

Thanks in advance

Steve

1 Like

£3k will get you one of 3 generations of MX5:

Mk1 “NA” (pop up lamps); Its possible to find one for £3k or less. It will likely have had welding to the rear sills done, which might be good for a few years, or might need redoing at a cost of about £700 per side. Mechanically robust and simple. UK spec cars might have factory immobilisers which give problems 25 years on. No real difference now on rustiness between grey imports and UK spec. Generally rust confined to rear sills and rear arches; treat these as one and the sam (ie. if rusty arches, factor in an assumption that the rear sills will also need repair, and vice versa). Very rusty cars might also have rusting on the front wings, particularly front corner. These cars are also more likely to have rusting elsewhee, to the floor pans etc. Probably no economic to repair. These cars are in an ascendancy with regards to value.

Mk 2; “NB”. 2 main flavours, 1998-2000 NB (or NB1), and a face lifted car “Mk2.5”, “NB2”, “NB-FL”. These also rust in the rear arch/sill area, but also commonly, on the front chassis leg. Essentially, repair of the commonly rusted areas will be double the cost of repairing the common areas of the Mk1. The front rust damage is harder to spot without the car on a lift. Repairs might be quite variable in quality. While external rear panel damage is quite superficial in terms of structural importance (its the inner sill that is more important, and, except in exceptionally rusty examples, the inner sill often survives well), a rusty front chassis leg is ALWAYS structural. One test for the rear sill (and for the Mk1 as well), is to jack up the car using the tyre jack and examine that jacking point (sometimes, in repairs, the lip is faked and has no strength. If the inner sill is rotted, the lip will distort under the weight of the car)

Mk2s are also mechanically simple and robust; some early Mk2s (and very late Mk1s) can be really oil burners, due to sticking rings. Additionally, the cars do become more mechanically complex, and not necessarily more reliable adter all this time.

With a £3k budget, it might be possible, through a private sale, to find a decent car, morel likely a less popular 1.6 mdel. The trade will be aware of all these issues, and I would not expect a £3k car on a forecourt not to have rust issues and/or a fair bit of filler lurking.

Mk3 “NC1”; £3k will likely get an early Mk3, with 2.0 or 1.8. If there is rust, it seems to be that it will be everywhere, rather than confited to a few spots. More complex, and the MZR engine is less robust, being less forgiving of oil starvation (oil surge under acceleration). Replacement 1.8 engines are hard to find.

All 3 will hav a diferent character. Mk1s will feel very old. A Mk2/2.5/3 at £3k will still be depreciating towards banger territory. A £3k Mk1, even one needing repairs, is in the ascendity.

Which depends on your needs. The Mk3 will be the most modern, wrt safety etc… The Mk1 willfeel the oldest, and likely need to most regular tinkering. If you are looking for some occasional use type of car that won’t need loads of mechanical work, I would look for the best £2000-2500 lowest mileage, lowest number of owners base model 1.6. It also seems that grey imported Mk2s were more likely to be 1.6 models (and potentially, less rusty).

What Saz said.

I will add that once you’ve bought your MX-5 you could become quite addicted.

These little cars are fabulous and can really get under your skin. Buy the best one that you can afford and that speaks to you. If you’re patient there seem to be a few to choose from.
When I bought my NB it just felt right the moment I got behind the wheel.
I wish you luck with your search and hope you’ll share your new car with us all here once you’ve found one :+1:

All the best,
Guy

Some effort made in that reply to portray Mk1’s as old, feeling old.

A more accurate descripion would be that if you savour the experience of directness, immediacy and rawness, the feel of a simple open top sports car, then in terms of MX5’s, that’s the one to have.

You will get a Mk1 for £3k if you’re prepared to search and travel and you’ll start your love affair where it all started.

Cheers for all replies very helpful👍

1 Like

NB 1.6 basically the same chassis as NA, with improved shock travel, and Mk1 1.8 brakes. Stiffer shell (cockpit gussetts), who while its 110hp B6 engine is slightly down on powe compared to the 114hp B6-ZE, I suspect its putting the power down better. Also came with a lightened Mazdaspeed flywheel so bragging rights.

The NA gives a good impression of appearing to be raw. Well, it appears to be raw by second quarter 21st century standards. By 1989 standards, Top Gear dismissed it as appealing to “purists” because it was “far too refined”. The benchmark for a 1989 purist might well have been a 1959 TR3. That was raw, “direct” (into a hedge). If you take 1959-2019, the NA is at the mid point. Of course its an old car now.

A £3000 Mk1 won’t drive like a fresh out of the factory Mk1. It will need a few thousand spent on it to get it back to that, removing the creaks, squeaks and clonks.

Each generation of MX5 was built for a different demographic, and hence has a different character. The Mk3 has the most different character, because it was supposed to capture those sales of people who didn’t want a Mk1 or Mk2. This is probably why it was the most divisive update in the MX5 timeline; not because it was a bad car, but because it appealed to a different sort of driver. The Mk4 was aimed at those people who wished they had a Mk1 first time around (or had one), hence the empty nester marketing. Like the Jinba Ittai, Mazda had to come up with some marketing nonsense about taking the car back its roots, but where the car went back its roots was in exactly the same marketing as 1989 (hence average age of Mk4 owners is the highest of all the generations).

The NB will feel a bit newer than the Mk1, not only because it is newer, but the trim is of a consciously newer design. The difference in the way the Mk1 and Mk2 drive is superficial; yes the 1.8s have more power, but the cars are a bit heavier. ABS can be disabled if you don’t like that. A base 1.6 Mk2 is less likely to be ragged on a track, less likely to be modified, more likely to be an import (Mk2 imports are rare, but most seem to be either 1.8 V-Specs or base 1.6 S-Packages). Most NB imports came in after 2008, and might have a bit less rust on them (admittedly slim chance of finding one, but its a plus).

The NB 1.6 has the simpler motor; no VICS, no VVT. After 20 years, that might not be a disadvantage. In Japan, Mazda preferred it over the 1.8 for its racing Clubman series (the NR-A). I think its a bit of an overlooked model. D-Technique, back in the day, offered some interesting tune-up packages for this model.

3 Likes

Thanks for taking the time to share this info Saz, very interesting and much appreciated :+1:. I do like the nose of that NB in your last pic. A bit Ferrari-esque :thinking:

Ultimately though, go by condition not spec. Always been the best advice.

This one might not be a bad start:

1 owner car, low miles. It had welding on both sides in 2014, and the repairs still seem to be good. I can see where they added new metal. Matching Pirellis Dealer has a few different MX5s, including a very pricey NB (low low miles). Also a late Icon there, same money, but I’m not getting a good vibe from the sill repairs.

2 Likes

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.