MK3 PRHT 1.8l v 2.0l

Hello All

I will be looking at a few of MK3 1.8l PRHTs (2007-09) over the next few days. My original wish list was restricted to 2.0l models, however, I think I should give the 1.8l a look just incase I’m over thinking things. Does anyone have any experience with both 1.8l and 2.0l MK3 PRHTs in terms of overall performance? Does the 1.8l handle the extra weight of the PRHT well? The intended use will be non-commute everyday and long road trips.

All comments and advice welcome.

Hi, not an exact comparison as I’ve owned a mk3 base + option pack roadster 1.8, followed by my current car, a mk3.5 2.0 sport tech PRHT. I thoroughly enjoyed the 1.8 model and in “normal” driving, the smaller engine was never an issue for me. However, the 2.0 car is also very nice with more oomph, 6 sp, LSD, cruise control etc, making it a great overall package. They both handle well and look the same going down the road too! I know you’re already looking at a purchase and my advice would be condition over anything else. An immaculat, fully serviced 1.8 IMO, is better than a poorly maintained 2.0 depending on what pops up in your searches. I realise I went from one end of the spectrum to the other in specs but both cars have their own identity and are great.

Barrie

Both of the MX-5s I have owned have been 2.0L PRHT models - one an automatic, and my current one, a manual Sport version.  I road-tested a 1.8L car once, and thought it a bit ‘lacking’. 

Personally, I don’t think you can ever have too many horses.  Some say that the 1.8L is more ‘driveable’, but to me that just means you have to constantly keep changing gear to keep the revs up to get anywhere.  That is fine for some folk, but being a lazy old git, I like to have as much oomph in my motor as I can get, and the greater torque of the 2.0L lets you drive the car as you feel at the time (lazily if that’s the mood your in), and not be dictated to by the limits of the engine.

Purely a personal view of course - but you did ask !

Hi, Couldn’t agree more regarding condition over everything else. I’m working up quite a tally of visits to dealerships (used as a baseline quality filter) that are willing to let me view vehicles prior to their pre-sales make-overs and put them up on a ramp so that I can give the underbodies a good inspection. Still waiting for the planets to align - so far I’ve seen examples with very good underbodies and engine bays but neglected bodywork and top bodywork with borderline underbody condition. In all cases the MOT reports can vary from spotless to horrific! 

 

I’ve test driven MK3 and MK3.5 2.0L PRHTs and for me the MK3.5 2.0L hit the spot, plenty of immediate torque, just how I like it. But, in the real world, I have a set budget to balance. 

Hang in there and wait for the 2.0 Sport if you get the 1.8 you’ll know you always wanted the 2.0 and never be truly happy

I was looking this time last year when I bought mine and started going MX5 blind convinced none was coming up for sale, but once I bought it seemed to be tons in October and beyond maybe not cheaper but plenty more choice…   

I know what you mean. I am starting to get a little twitchy now, after 16 months of searching, when I see a clean MK3/3.5 PRHT come in with 1-2 previous owners, full Mazda service history and clean MOT history only to read 1.8L! Then the justification debate begins over going for the 1.8L, that’s there for the taking, or hanging out for a 2.0L which may not materialise for another 16 months.

Hello

1.8 or 2 litre whichever check the oil level before you drive, if the level is lower than

maximum be very wary of buying such a car.

Oil kept at maximum level is essential on the whole MK3 - MK3.75 MX5 range to

avoid damaging the engines.

Regards

Keith

 

Yes, this is one of the main things that I have been advised to look out for. I have come across several 07/08 examples at main dealerships where the attention to oil level is obvious as one with one example the engine quietly purred in idle and the other sounded like an old-fashioned sewing machine clicking away.