Perhaps there will be a Limited Edition…
the MK4 2.0i Corvair.
I have spoken to one UK owner with a faulty gearbox that hase been changed by Mazda and he advised he had also spoken to another ND owner with the same problem he advised they were not track day people.
The US info is from Miata.net and also includes members on there who have reported on friends cars where the owners of some of those cars were not posters on Miata.net.
That is why I gave a range of numbers as there may be double counting.
The problem I have with these numbers is that any production model is likely statistically to have some new cars that get engine changes and gearbox changes under warranty.
Manufacturers do not release these figures therefore if Mazda ever release these figures for all their cars we can see if one range of cars is worse than others but that will not happen.
Readers who have been around this forum for some years will know of Mk3 engines suffering engine failure both in the UK and the US again Mazda like all other manufacturers do not release these figures.
Are they for track use?
They do well in Japan, these are all road going cars, not the Global Cup spec
Now that is interesting. They don’t seem to be too worried about gearbox failure do they?!!
No and you don’t see the entire field crashing out with stability issues either.
I wonder why?
If they are not Global Cup cars (which are all prepped in the US), they are 1.5 JDM Roadsters.
Operative word; Skyactiv.
Well Saz you seem to be saying exactly what I said in post #28. The ND was designed as a 1.5l and the 2.0l was a bodged afterthought.
If you look around, there are publications from within the industry looking at specific fault incidence rates.
Nevertheless the OP has a significant track record of developing MX-5’s for racing purposes and being pretty successful in the process, there’s plenty of evidence out there for anyone who cares to look. I wouldn’t doubt the limits of the car that have been exposed in the 2.0l.
I wouldn’t say bodged afterthought, just prematurely released.
Though the US outfits have much more experience, going right back to the launch of the NA.
Re failures…
perrys barnsley have replaced at least 1 gearbox on a road car & a dealer at Cambridge has also replaced a gearbox that I know about…
I also wonder if there will be enough demand for an NE version.
In saying that for 5 months in 2012 / 2013 I worked beside the storage compound for Mini in Aberdeen.
The number of different body versions that were in the compound always made me wonder how they could possibly produce all those cars complete with spare body panels etc. in economic quantities. Therefore maybe the brake even point for a car derivative is lower than I imagine.
I wonder about you guys opinion on the 2 litre.
The NA was launched in the states, it appears that the ND was produced for the states first or at the same time as the JDM cars therefore why put an engine in that overstressed the gearbox without a full development cycle. Seems unlikely to me.
It could just as likely be an error in gearbox design as the car would not sell in the states with a 1.5 to the same extent as a 2 litre therefore I am assuming it was not a short development cycle but you never know.
Unless of course that Mazda may well be in a worse financial and organisational state than I presumed.
The many experts in their own bathtubs on the worldwide car industry are still saying that there is too much capacity and I think one of the German premium manufacturers has to go when you are looking at the deposit contributions they are all putting into a number of their PCP deals. It already looks like Opel are on the way out or if not at least part of the Peugeot production facilities.
At some time the full story of the gearbox issue may be released but for certain the guys on miat.net will mostly disagree with whatever is consider the real fault.
Have you any figures for the number of right offs caused by the problems Rodders describes in this earlier post?
Re stability
some of you will remember my first mk4 getting backed into the pit wall at Anglesey November 2015. I thought I was just having a bad day…so purchased another mk4 January 2016 this also ended in very similar damage…now even I’m not that unlucky!!!
so fast forward a bit and at Donington I was pushing the car through old hairpin when again it fired me off, this time luckily no damage and I was been followed by a mk3 with video footage that shows the car stepping out and leaving massive black rubber marks where the rear wheels had ‘braked’ trying to bring the car back straight. Unfortunately at 60-70 mph the car rotated.
so we then went back and looked at the footage from my car on previous occasions…yes VERY SIMULAR
this footage was sent to Mazda (owners club aware) and also shown to the accident investigation guys at SYP. Between SYP and BTCC driver Dan Welch we managed to find a solution. No thanks to Mazda. Mazda don’t see an issue…
now only last week (I must find out how to post pics) I was contacted by a salvage company asking if I wanted to buy any mk4 parts…when I saw the pics guess where the damage was???
yes you got it…the rear!!!
now remember this is a road car that someone just like YOU have purchased from Mazda and are using on the road, damaged on the road not on track.
would I let my wife drive one…I sold my road car!!!
IF Mazda or anyone on here are brave enough to lend me a car I will happily demonstrate this in a safe and controlled environment.
if Mazda want to know what we have done to cure the problem all they have to do is turn up at my workshop with a new car to replace the first one and £5k to re emburse the cost of repair to the 2nd one and I’ll happily give a solution.
The question is - who supplies the ND race cars? Mazda direct or a dealer? Normal policy is cars are supplied by a dealer, who then takes full responsibility for warranty and service problems on the sale. Mazda will shrug off any problems, pointing at the supplier. If on the other hand, Mazda supply the race cars, then the ball remains in their court, and if they limit warranty to no race, sprint, or trackday cars then owners don’t have a leg to stand on. We are in the UK, not the states.
I’m a bit dubious about owners saying “We’ve never tracked the car” - and it’s revealing to see - earlier - someone saying “Cover your plates when track driving”! Which also brings to mind general advice to an owner when tracking a car that breaks down - “Get it towed off the course, and preferably to a road - then you can get it towed”, where breakdown cover negates cover for track use. General term - elsewhere - is “Play stum”. (sp ?)
Eddie said he knows of 10 cars in the states, and 2 here that were not tracked (confirmed by Paul above) but overall it’s a minority issue, hardly the cause of great concern by Mazda. Sorry - but in comparison to the NB clutch issue - world wide, which was eventually solved by Mazda (Dealers holding up their hands and saying “Enough is enough”) - Though it took devious means to get them to do it. You have to get to an inner egg - ‘The Russian egg’ syndrome.
I’m not saying Rodders is at fault, and I sympathize with him, but it’s a classic head banger obviously and IMHO will not get any sympathy from Mazda.
Finally (famous last words) how many other 2L ND’s from race series have suffered either gear box or stability problems? - None mentioned. I would have thought several at least?
It was me that said ‘Cover your plates when track driving’. I’ve never done a track day myself but had wondered why I had seen pictures of people doing just that. It was reading this thread that made me think that could be their reason.
With regard to towing cars of track to the nearest road I believe there are a lot of bikes that slide of the road within just a couple of miles of our local Cadwell Park. Strangely it seems to happen more regularly on track days. Coindidence is a strange thing.
Four Mk4’s are racing in the MAX5 series this weekend at Croft, it will be interesting to see how their gearboxes stand up to race conditions.The results will be live on TSL timing
Ah - Race day syndrome, first experienced when we had cycle races on Nottingham’s Goose fair site, (Forest Recreation Ground) - after the race, when many cyclists fancied themselves on the road, as opposed to not having been on the track! As they say - S*** happens. That happens after any event, never mind cycling.
It is a valid point though, regardless of that.
Despite its outward show of modernity the (business) soul of Japan is still very conservative and traditional with a strict adherence to procedural protocol in order to avoid misunderstanding and loss of face. In the discussed situation protocol would require an approach to the manufacturer by the other party with their intended actions. Negotiations would then take place and hopefully an agreement reached, then with the deal done the petitioning party could proceed as per the T&C of the deal. In this case however the reverse happened. A product was taken and used in ways clearly proscribed in the manufacturers warranty, in the course of which certain items failed, whether by manufacturing fault or by misuse is something that each party has their own opinion on, and a request was made to the manufacturer for (free?) replacements. For the manufacturer to agree to do so under these circumstances would involve “loss of face” as they would be seen to admitting the product was faulty, and giving way to someone who has infringed the protocol and the warranty. I believe that it was stated that the request for replacement parts was addressed to and turned down by Mazda UK, wrong, it would be Mazda Japan that made the decision via Mazda UK, their local agent. You may think I talking out of the seat of my pants but for many years I worked in an international company who had a good deal of business with the likes of Mitsubishi, Mitsui, Kanematsu etc. and strict protocol was essential during negotiations. One trader had a motto that said “the party that bows the lowest the longest gets the deal”. It would seem that somebody didn’t bow low enough or long enough, if at all.