Why change the suspension in an MX5. To be, or not to be

[BARMY1]

I’m aware other manufacturers exist, but it just so happens that I’ve had MeisterR CRD adjustable spring/shocker combinations on my last four MX5s. All have been set to 330mm rear/320mm front between the middle of the wheel and the wheelarch, so a bit lower than standard. All have been more comfortable than standard as they are simply smoother and more controlled in operation. All have noticeably improved roadholding, braking, and allowed more precise steering, thus making the car even easier to drive well. Some use CRDs for the track too. If there’s no track use expected then Sportives will have a lot of the effect of the CRDs.

The next car is mainly a track car and also already has new poly bushes, extra chassis stiffening and will have BC Racing track suspension that is designed to do everything the CRDs do plus will allow me to aim at higher curbs at the track. These, and MeisterR Club Race, make an NA or NB as crashy (but still tolerable) as standard again, but make a further bigger improvement again on the roadholding side.

[raymond-hill]

The MX5 on ordinary factory springs, actually looks as if it needs lowering a bit, 30mm is about right, The wheels then sit in the wheel arch Looking cosmetically better than the ‘ egg shaped gap around the arch on cars that have not been lowered. For me It was all about ‘ looks ‘,
better or worse performance didn’t come into it, Once lowered 30mm ( it doesn’t sound much ) but it becomes a new little character … H&R 25mm spacers finishes the job for me, ‘Perfection’

[raymond-hill]

You have just described ‘ Me ‘
For me it’s all about the Cosmetics… . I just potter about the local lanes Roof down even in mid winter, Hot seats ON, Heater at full pelt, My little MX5 NC is like a little Oven once up to temperature, I have been known to have a hot water bottle up my jumper for the first few minutes. It once fell out of my jumper whilst lining up for petrol A bit embarrassing So I kicked it to one side and Said “ anyone dropped a hot water bottle “ ? Some bright spark shouted back “ what colour is it “

[Jitsuka]

Everything you have said is definitively correct and made for genuinely interesting reading - thank you - but most people (I’m standing by that description) who adjust their suspension simply aren’t fussed. Their choice of upgrade is primarily aesthetic, not functional. Those who are fussed may choose to read up and sort things properly in the way you describe but probably don’t have the tuned senses necessary to notice sufficient difference to perceive the need and so choose to leave things slightly compromised.

Those who are interested will certainly find your original post highly valuable.

[McTrucky]

My take,
You are absolutely right. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.

But the definition of “broke” is the problem.
For me, my suspension was bouncy and worn out. So I went down the aftermarket route as the options and costs lead me that way.

For others “broke” means standard height is ugly. Wouldn’t bother me, but plenty people put image over performance - manufacturers know this, look at the number of vehicles shipped with low profile tyres that ruin the NVH of cars, but look good to some.

And then there are some that are looking for different handling characteristics for whatever reason.

So… when a car comes out the factory it is the manufacturer’s best guess compromise to suit every buyer. With combinations of colour, trims, engines gearboxes, etc etc there can be thousands of variations of individual models. If they gave us ride height, springrate, compression and rebound damping sertings, roll bar stiffness, etc etc then we could be into the millions of variables. And fitting adjustable suspension would be expensive when perhaps 90% of buyers don’t care.

So the short answer is “Because some people like free choice”, even when the choice is perhaps flawed in others’ eyes. (Stretched tyres over wide rims anyone?)

[ckleanth]

I will mention an example with sports bikes that I’m somewhat more familiar and I have quite a few years of experience. Sport bikes generally come with a basic but adjustable front and rear suspension.

Because “basic” or “stock” is frowned upon some buy an ohlins rear shock and go to a shop to get it fitted. Some actually buy an ohlins rear shock, fit it themselves and expect it to work.

For any sportbike suspension the rider is a considerable part of the sprung mass and you really have to adjust the suspension it to your weight so the static sag is correct and rebound is even both front and rear. Otherwise the bike will be all over the place and won’t inspire confidence to chuck it into corners.

So… How many of the people I know actually did adjust their suspension? I can safely say the ones who are mechanically inclined. And the ones who didn’t really know how to do it, went to a bike shop that know how to do so. However there is a good proportion of people i have met who thought fitting an ohlins shock will magically fix an issue on its own. I found out that most times the limitation its not the tools, its the tool that uses them even if the tool itself is mediocre.

Now going back to the old mx5, if the car is bouncy yea your shock absorber is shot, the NA’s now a 30y+ car. And even if miraculously the suspension damping is not completely inoperable, I’m sure you can probably improve how it rides if you actually get it to a specialist to get it sorted.

I also understand the “looks” crowd, i don’t really agree with the reasoning but hey its your car you can do whatever you want with it.

However having worked closely with the guys at Jaguar research (albeit in a past life) i have actually met with powetrain people and know the engineering behind developing cars. I honestly find it difficult to swallow internet stories about cars being made deliberately 30mm taller for xyz reasons.

So as an engineer my suggestion is, if your car is relative new and it works fine for the intend you use it, please leave it alone. If it doesn’t work properly or you want to change it for a particular purpose and you don’t know how - ask a specialist. Try find someone who will ask what you want to do with the car and not a shop that just want to sell you stuff.

Obviously if you do know the how and all that jazz you are in luck because probably i will be chatting with you at some point because i want to learn more about your experience with your mods.

[anon35904086]

Great post - articulate and well argued

In my, limited, experience most handling issues can be resolved through proper set up of camber, caster and toe (aka geo or alignment)

Adjustments can materially impact steering turn in and feel, without requiring new hardware.

[MickAP]

That’s a very good explanation of how we as owners should go about changing the suspension set up, see a specialist, especially one with MX-5 experience.

I owned a Mk1 many years ago, the front suspension was shot, it was the only bad thing about the car when I bought it. Never thinking about dropping it in any way I renewed the suspension at each corner, the droplinks too. New tyres on 15 alloys completed the job, not surprisingly the car was transformed and it just looked good as is on stock suspension.
Next up a Mk2, that just needed some TLC nothing changed re suspension again some different alloys and decent tyres. It looked just right sitting on the standard Bilsteins, it was an imported RS model.

Now on to the Mk3 next, not much wrong with the suspension, again this had Bilsteins being a Sport model but my word that arch gap, it needed something doing to satisfy me. I had lowering springs fitted then a full alignment, job done it looked great and handled great too👍
That was ok for a couple of years or so but I was finding when driving in undulating roads the back end was bottoming out occasionally, when pushing on a little. I also had an annoying rattle when going over rough roads, droplinks replaced but that rattle still persisted. I convinced myself (I do a good deal of searching on these problems before acting) that the Bilsteins were getting past their sell by date, a refresh was needed.
Step in the specialist, we had a chat told them what I wanted and how I used the car and it was decided to fit the MeisterR’s, of the adjustable damping type CRD’s. All alignment and corner weighted to suit. After a little twiddle of the adjusters when things had settled it was very much what I wanted in handling and looks.
Now that NC sold I have one with MeisterR’s on again but TBH I’m not fully happy with the ride, a little twiddling is needed or a swap out for the fully adjustable type, these I have are the Sportives ATM. An expense I know but one I’ll have to consider to get it how I had the former NC looking and handling.

[NickD]

When the NC was introduced there was much speculation about the ride height, because it did quite frankly look agricultural. There was much reference to the pre launch photos, including those from the USA, where it was seen to be sitting much lower. The common idea at the time was that Mazda had been caught out by bumper and light height specifications and had had to increase ride height. If anyone knows the car industry or just industry in general, you don’t get caught out in a 5 or 6 year development program by not knowing the regulations, which are never just dropped on you, and suddenly go “Oh **** we have got to raise the car up.” A more plausible explication would be that US focus groups, or even a senior manager decided that it was sales limiting if those on the wrong side of svelte would struggle with the car being too low in one of it’s target markets, so added additional ride height late in the development.
Anyway, so what? But it was a recorded issue with early cars that reasonable alignment settings could not be achieved and handling was far from what was expected. However, it was stated by Tony Bones from Wheels in Motion at that time that they could not get a “decent” alignment on the car in standard form, but when the Mazda lowering springs were fitted in all came into alignment.
Everything is a compromise, changing your car just takes you from one compromise to a different compromise.

[ast]

I was part of those NC focus groups. They never talked about ride height. They worried more about whether the NC would be front-mid, or mid-mid. Or how the car would compare to the competition; its sometimes forgotten, but the NC faced the most competition of all the generations. If it was all about satisfying the US market (which had become a smaller market compared to the EU), then you would have had a 2.5 MZR as standard, to meet the challenge from Pontiac (the Solstice twins had basically a 2.5 Ecotec 4-banger than might have been from a Vectra).

The NC wasn’t aimed at NA and NB owners. Mazda already had their money, and, as was shown, there was a lot of brand loyalty (lots of owners went from NA to NB to NC). It was aimed at another demographic; those who didn’t buy a NA or NB. Mazda, in Europe, considered the following as direct competitors (MX5 owners might disagree, but this is what Mazda thought); 4 Cylinder BMW Z3, Lotus Elise, Toyota MRS, MGF/TF, Fiat Barchetta. The SLK wasn’t considered in my sessions. The focus groups were arranged when there had already been quite a lot of work done on the styling, as we were shown finished clays from US, Europe (Germany, Peter Birtwhistle’s group), Japan (Hiroshima and Yokohama each had their ideas). The US had the most radical departure; something more like an Elise/MR2 effort. It was considered worthy, but didn’t “feel” like a MX5. Europe came up with an evolution of the NB look, but it had changed to something that looked Jaguar or Porsche like, the perception was it would be expensive. Looking back, it was one of the Japanese submissions, and it was pretty close to a NC, with butch arches.

In addition to the above, the NC was also facing competition from the CCs; the hatches converted into party trick folding top cars. Nominally 4 seater, but in reality, only used a 2 seaters by older rivers spending the inheritance. Some of the negatives against the NA/NB was the ride quality (one man/woman’s sporty is another’s poor ride) and access (the height of the NA/NB conspires against access for the less mobile). Mazda offered the most diverse range in the European market, the only one with a choice of engines, and a wide range of trims (aka special edition). Mazda worked harder to win more European sales, not more US sales,. I suspect it saw a larger market to capture more sales, return a decent CAGR, compared to the US market, where the small roadster market was in terminal decline, and the compact convertible sector was frankly virtually non-existant. Europeans are more in favour of cross-continental holidays, traveling relatively lightly encountering roads of highly variable quality (US roads I found are generally of excellent quality). Mazda Europe’s MX5 mag, Blue Sky, seeme to be full of articles on which obscure corner of the EU you could take your MX5 on some sort of culinary tour. Americans don’t like driving long distances (long straight smooth roads, frequent speed traps).

[NickD]

And that is my point, while high H position cars are now the most popular, that the issue of getting in and out of a car, is quite likely not to present its self until preproduction models get out from under the Engineer’s gaze, who are well known for having a myopic view of their product operation, and get out to the real world of customer opinion. Whether ride hight concerns arose due to ingress and egress of the typical buyer, who is frequently not the young person who would have purchased in the hayday of the sports car or for some other reason. The driving dynamics and suspension specialists of the time were much in agreement that alignment and suspension design worked better when lowered from the original showroom height.

[ckleanth]

I have to say the only mx5’s I drove was the ones I owned. As a young lad 23 odd years ago I had a 1.8L NA which I believe was on lower springs and Watanabe wheels with a stainless steel exhaust. The car was a JDM import and although I bought it like that it handled great even if it was low on power. Speed bumps was my nightmare as the car was fairly low from the ground but its fair to say I didn’t really have as much driving experience as I do now.

Fast forward to present time, I own a 2010 MX5 NC Sport tech. The car drives brilliantly, the ride is firm but not uncomfortable. I miss all the speed bumps and on the B roads that I have driven it, I do not feel there is any real body roll, nor I can say anything on the car hinders handling. Its not a track car and although I will take it on the track for me it will never be a “track car”.

So talking about my MX5 NC Sport tech, the brakes are fine and honestly I cannot see the agricultural 4x4 look people mention. I don’t know if the Sport tech is the “sorted” NC but as regards to the suspension setup in my car - if any car drives as nice as mine - for all the intent and purposes I want to use the car I have absolutely no reason to modify its suspension.

[wacee]

Lots of interesting views in this subject, i can relate my own experiences from the 70’s up to date, i was around BMW’s when they first entered the UK market and i can tell you that the later square tail lighted 2002 had spacers in below the top strut mounts to satisfy UK demand on forward facing lights, that was back around 1973… and that affected the way they handled… we removed many sets, back in those days they were sold as a drivers car now they’re a status symbol all for show… like the business some on here are addressing with changing springs to fill out the wheel boxes and adding bloody spacers, to shorten the wheel brg life. I know that most of the springs we see on here are German or are designed there for the EU market, and where roads in Germany are as flat and well repaired as a sheet of glass you could run track weight springs, while here you need much more travel… back in the early 90’s i was at the GTI international at Crowthorn with 2 good GTI mates, one of them… a 6’3’’ truck driver spotted the stand selling Eibachs , at the time he ran a cabrio mk1 Golf …i ran a Campaign1.8 MK1 and a big bumpered mk2 16v and a lightweight track 8v 1.9GTI in RAC MSA hills, he grabs the well spoken southern chap and started on about the Eibachs, i had already tried a set and send them back to the local dealer who promptly sold them to one of the chaps that was with us, they were bloody awful and would be ok on a track car with decent anti rollbar upgrades, in broad ULster Scots he says to the chap pointing at me, ‘‘thon body doesny brake fer bumps’’ the chap looked vacantly at me , and asked what i was running, i asked him if he had ever spring weight measured them… he said no, you know i said they are 300lbs front and 220 rear, the OEM from memory on a mk1 was 140ish f and 110 rear… and they said they were ok with good std shocks…thats how much some of these dudes who are selling the gear know or don’t in this case, I still don’t brake for bumps… w

[NickD]

I haven’t put a great deal into searching for pictures but what I remember back in 2006, was all the pre launch articals had cars looking like the top picture, but when I went to look at the car at Coventry Mazda it had arch gaps akin to the picture underneath. I am fully aware that that car is cornering, but certainly the blue car in the showroom had arch gaps that you could your clenched fist in, with your thumb on top and still waggle it up and down.

[Jemster]

The Bilstein kit I bought is the same as fitted to the Sport models and as such a factory approved mod, it may well be a placebo effect but before fitting it felt vague and wallowy and now it feels planted and firm.

As one of my springs was broken and the shocks had 60k on them, I considered it to be a cost effective fix/mod

[ckleanth]

Did they changed it with the 2010 spor tech? I’ve got a task now to fist check all NC’s in the next meeting

[Jitsuka]

As long as you obtain consent first, legit.

[MickAP]

You might get your fingers in here, certainly not a fist.

I’m going to have it adjusted some time soon, it’s a touch too low for me.

[NickD]

[ckleanth]

@NickD is that your mx5 mate? tbh the wheel hub look is at a similar height to my car if you compare the hub to the underside of the car