Totally agree that this would be fun. Reading the comments section, the overall costs for the 250bhp install is closer to 7k, tasty indeed…
Many owners may look to more powerful alternatives as mentioned in the thread, these will undoubtedly be heavier and usually incur higher running costs.
I was very wrong then, I had looked that mx5 supercharger site about a year ago and it was all discontinued, maybe covid related. £6500 though, you must really love an MX5 to drop £6500 on 90hp.
The crazy thing is you have BBR GTi and a few other tuners across the globe who do these conversions so there’s obviously a market for a faster MX5 and yet Mazda release the ND with only NA options and a massive 181hp. Seems like a lost opportunity, much like the GR86. Too conservative with new models.
It’s almost like their mind set is fast straight line speed or good in the corners, pick one.
Rather than paying BBR GTI .
There is the obvious alternative from Rotrex themselves , but that means dealing with the States, and getting someone here to map it.
Kit is $4415 at current exchange that is £3270 plus shipping plus vat, so just over £4000 That is 225 RWHP (RWHP difficult to find from BBR)
The reality is surely that the proportion of people who want to pay the money for upgraded power output is very small in terms of the total market. Bear in mind that cars like the 5 are almost completely missing from the marketplace simply because they don’t sell enough units to justify making them. The manufacturer has to aim at the largest part of the market to make it worth their efforts, which means making a sensible power output the right choice. Those few who want more power are enough to support small after-market businesses, as you’ve described, but not to support by themselves a model release from a major marque.
Well the recipe for the NA mx5 was great fun, reliability and cheapness (they kinda conveniently forgot do not rust - maybe because they wanted not to make them as good so to keep selling them 
)
Anyhow, it proved that you didn’t really need too much power or too much money to have fun. The target market was very specific. The owners that wanted something more from the car made it a platform for modifications.
However mazda tried to stay within the same boundaries, use the same recipe and target the same customers, this facilitate the fact the mx5 platform is a very successful product. With the NC and ND we did get more power but don’t forget vehicle manufacturers have to comply with emissions regulations.
On a sidenote to this and while I was doing my PhD at UoB (this was circa 2005). This was sponsored by JLR and we were researching new engine modes to reduce emissions. One of the methods that was promising was HCCI ( you can Google this up if you want to learn more) and mazda was actually one of the front runners with the technology and we were playing catch-up. Fast forward a few years Mazda was the only manufacturer who actually impemented the technology with the skyactive engine.
Although some people say Mazda missed an opportunity and do not provide a very high powered option, I personally don’t think so. I think they know exactly what they are doing, they know how to build a great (decomposable) chassis, they know how to make a great engine for the intended purpose. And its not just power, its the emissions and all the emissions restrictions they have to pass to go through vehicle approval. The reason why most manufacturers went with small turbocharged engines was emissions regulations - but we kinda see a return to larger capacity naturally aspirated engines.
I think an mx5 was never going to compete with a Cayman or any other high powered sportscar - these are cars aimed for completely different type of customers. And as they say, if the recipe works - why change it.
I think this works both way. Stick with a 33 year old idea and that helps with the fanatics but also really reduces your potential market space.
But that is a dead end because those same customers are aging, so in the long run it doesn’t seem like a good business plan. The most popular was the MK1 99 model that sold 21,000 in a year, then mk2 2002/03 and mk3 2006/07 models did 19,000 on those years. Jump to ND and it’s average is 14,000 pe-pandemic and that’s an acclaimed model where as the MK3 even on released was talked down upon.
Even so 1.6T engine in the fords makes 180hp, 240nm, same emissions tax of £150 but if you did want more power it’s not going to cost you £5000, that kind of stuff appeals to the internet generation who do a lot of research on pros and cons of vehicles.
It’s all different but you could still have a 1.5T mx5, small turbo with fast spool and it gives people the option that if you want more power then a £500 remap will give you more than you can handle with tcs off.
The MX5 can be a gem for people willing to try it but many wont based on the power figures alone, in the end who loses out due to low sells? Everyone I guess.
The turbo ND is no more. The reason being people don’t really want a small whiny engine (me including).
I’d rather have a nice sounding naturally aspirated engine, and if I’m honest you don’t really need more than 180bhp to get from 0 to 60 mph in a 1200kg car
in their defense they didnt say who would be resuming fitting just that fitting would resume in the sumer.
i basically assumed that it would be them.
So essentially BBR are now going to be marketing, selling and supporting what used to the Corten Miller supercharger kit. BBR have even acquired the white NC development car that featured in their press release.
It remains to be seen if the product will be in any way different to when CM were selling it themselves, but I’m sure BBR would clarify that point if asked. But what seems to me to be the biggest piece of news is that BBR are doing a DIY version - in other words they have created a set of fitting instructions that was never previously available from CM. I think that makes the product far more attractive than previously, although I’m not too sure quite what happens regarding re-mapping the car?
On warranties, in my experience it’s very rare for any aftermarket products/components to attract warranties, especially where motorsport activity might be involved. I can’t see it being any different with this.
To be honest I get the no warranty bit.
You can’t expect a company to fit parts to an unknown car that nearly double the bhp and hand it back then say do what you want with it and if it breaks we will sort it.
The engine could be worn to start with, the owner may have no mechanical sympathy whatsoever, and using it on track regularly will take its toll if the car is not serviced and looked after correctly.
Only my opinion of course.
With the above comment in mind … previously, the only thing that broke on turbo’d NC’s that had been BBR’d was…the cast manifold…which was a BBR manufactured item. Everything else worked ok so we’re not talking about engines grenading just a constantly cracking manifold if given a bit of welly.
I don’t really think anyone would expect BBR to warranty the engine. I anticipate if there’s any warranty to cover just the added parts to the car.
I was the first customer CM had for this kit, I owned the White car which appeared on their website for years. CM never offered a DIY kit because they were adamant once installed it needed tuning properly on their RR.
My kit was the Stage 1 & cost 5k, it was faultless while I had it, doing many Trackdays. I almost forgot what was under the bonnet it was that reliable. My biggest mistake was selling it!
Certainly interesting, I actually live in the same village as Corten Miller, a friend of mine is good friends with the owner.
They have done some work on my MX-5 recently and they are still doing the kits as well themselves. I had a lengthy chat with Tom Corten-Miller, but I don’t think at this stage I could justify doubling the cost of the car i’ve just bought!
The HP is not so much of a factor of 0-60, hence why you can have diesels with good 0-60 times because they make low down torque that gets mass moving quickly from a standstill, even though they tend to be heavier vehicles.
As for small engines being whiny, I don’t agree, the turbo sounds are petrol head heaven. It isn’t like the MX5 has an orchestra under the bonnet, it’s just an inline 4 and they all sound very similar unless you’re cammed or ITB. The 225 sounds excellent but then so does a standard K20 once you hit Vtec.
BBR GTi 1.5 makes 210hp with 260nm of torque, I would imagine if this was a factory option (price permitting) then a lot less people would not bother with the ND 2.0.
re why almost all 4 cyl engines these days are 2L - maybe this was another factor?
as for noise out of a 2L mx5… 
Do these look familiar?
I think you’ll find that CM are no longer doing the kits themselves.
Totally agree with not needing much power to have a lot of fun. For me personally, the fun is being able to enjoy a car closer to its limits, safely within the confines of public road driving. A few mates own much faster cars (Z4M, M140i with 400hp, etc.) but struggle to have fun at road speeds. I’m sure track environments would be a different matter for them, though…but even then I’d argue the MX5 would be a better companion (alert: MX5 Fanboy here!).
Similar, I wouldn’t want to step into the world of forced induction for sakes of additional hp. It’s fun to work through the gears!! Full BBR exhaust with a Racing Beat “Rear Silencer” (ironic, as it does the total opposite…) with ~190hp. I borrowed a friend’s Dragy and about half a dozen attempts saw 6.36s verified 0-60 on a less than perfect surface. It’s not a 0-60 car, but I think that’s not miles away from some of the more premium options - my point being that even its perceived “weakness” isn’t THAT bad.
It might have something to do with styling, and price differential too, but I see a lot more ND MX5s on the road than I do Abarth 124s (turbocharged). Mazda must be confident with its philosophy, 4 iterations in, and the basic principles of them remain the same.
Yes thats my old White car 