How many people r going to buy the new model ND

[pcmx5]

Notice, though, how few are pics of new cars actually available as opposed to demos or library caricatures of examples of cars that eould be available to order.

Yes probably right,that is what I mean't by bait.

Peter.

[taminga16]

Peter,
Perhaps we really are 'old school', wringing necks is just not where it is at.
Greg.

[orx626]

Wonderful opportunity stuffed up IMHO.NC with a 4.1 ratio is looking more attractive and affordable.

I don't think the 4.1 out of the Auto will be the saviour either!





A 3.7 would be nice...just need to find a suitable gear set (not convinced one exists though!).

Cheers,
Danny

[JBT]

The NC manual is diff is 3.72 but I guess nothing is interchangeable with the ND.

The ND (1.5 and 2.0) and the NC are all pulling about 3200RPM in 5th at 100km/hr. I only ever consider 6th in the NC and the ND as an overdrive for cruising at >90km/hr.

However, the NC certainly has more response at 100km/hr in 6th (2700rpm) than the ND 1.5 (shade over 2500rpm) from my short ND drive. The 2.0 ND at 100km/hr in 6th (shade under 2500rpm) should have similar real world response to the NC.

The NA and NB8A both pulled about 3300rpm in 5th - very similar to the ND and NC in 5th and a very good highway gear to use for moderate acceleration or climbing long hills. An ND would be pulling those revs at 100 km/hr in 6th with a 3.72 diff.

[JBT]

Correction to NA and NB above - approximate RPM at 100 km/hr
NA6: 3200 in 5th
NA8 & NB8A: 3100 in 5th
10AE: 3600 in 5th and a shade over 3000 in 6th
NB8B: 3300 in 5th and 2800 in 6th

[Steerpike]

I test drove a manual 1.5 ND on a lap of Mt Coot-Tha here in Brisbane. If you are used to a torquey 6 cylinder car, then you'd probably cruise up there in 3rd in a 4 or 5 speed box. Too steep for 4th in a 4 or 5 speed. The 1.5 MX-5 is a revvy little sports car. I remember driving the pretty steep "back section" in second and third, and the car was very willing and easily able to hold speed up to the cornering limits of the road (2 adults on board). It could still proceed in 4th, but wasn't happy. Use the gears, and it does what you want. I have a 2.0 litre on order. Dealer says that they can't yet place actual orders in the system, but the prediction for delivery is late November at the very earliest, but more likely December. He also said that nearly all the interest is in the 2.0 litre. I'd say that the 1.5's are sitting while people wait for the 2.0 litre. The base 2.0 litre is a bargain- $2.5K extra gets you the bigger engine, bigger brakes, wheels and tyres, plus the touch screen infotainment system and satnav.

[JayMo]

The base 2.0 litre is a bargain- $2.5K extra gets you the bigger engine, bigger brakes, wheels and tyres, plus the touch screen infotainment system and satnav.

That is what I reckon; I am hoping a bunch of those all get novated at once, so there is a nice glut to pick through in 3/4years time.

[manga_blue]

The base 2.0 litre is a bargain- $2.5K extra gets you the heavier engine, heavier brakes, heavier wheels and tyres, plus the heavy infotainment system and satnav.

Fixed I'm a purist.

[StillIC]

Fixed I'm a purist.

Then you had better remove that big block and oversized brakes from your NA!

[pcmx5]

Wonderful opportunity stuffed up IMHO.NC with a 4.1 ratio is looking more attractive and affordable.

I don't think the 4.1 out of the Auto will be the saviour either!

Cheers,
Danny

I agree, I was saying that an NC with the 4.1 (as I have had ) is looking more appealing and something around 3.4-3.7 in an ND 1.5 would be spot on.My experience with the Japanese is that they are reluctant to make changes and loose face so I also think you are right to be saying that those ratios are unlikely.JUst wish they were and I woild have an ND 1.5 in my garage.

Peter.

[Dan]

Wonderful opportunity stuffed up IMHO.NC with a 4.1 ratio is looking more attractive and affordable.

I don't think the 4.1 out of the Auto will be the saviour either!

Cheers,
Danny

I agree, I was saying that an NC with the 4.1 (as I have had ) is looking more appealing and something around 3.4-3.7 in an ND 1.5 would be spot on.My experience with the Japanese is that they are reluctant to make changes and loose face so I also think you are right to be saying that those ratios are unlikely.JUst wish they were and I woild have an ND 1.5 in my garage.

Peter.

I think an ND with a 3.4 would be psychotic and like running a 4.5 on your NC in the first few gears.

To me the gearing on the ND looks pretty good, Mazda made the ratio on the first few gears much shorter to make the car playful in the first few gears with the higher gears being good cruising gears.

It looks like apart from the top 2 gears the stock ND is closer to an NC with a 4.1 than the NC’s stock 3.7 when comparing the stock ND 16” and stock NC 17" tyre setups.

Even with the same size wheels & tyres (the 17” option is the same between the NC and ND being 205/45/17) every gear except 5th or 6th is still shorter on the ND with 5th only being a tiny bit different.

Here were my calculations of speeds using the Europe NC Gearing from this site (https://www.flyinmiata.com/tech/gearing.php) which I assume we share as we share final drive and the ND Gearing with different final drives:


Happy to be told if my math is off here, I'm thinking it could be since people are complaining about the gear ratio and it doesn't look bad to me.

[pcmx5]

Wonderful opportunity stuffed up IMHO.NC with a 4.1 ratio is looking more attractive and affordable.

Happy to be told if my math is off here, I'm thinking it could be since people are complaining about the gear ratio and it doesn't look bad to me.

I assume you have dríven one as any comparison on gear ratios that doesn't take into account power and torque is ...... However do concede that a 3.4 would be too short but a 3.7 looks good.

Understand we all have different objectives but why you would want a car with reasonably low power and torque delivering it's top power at well over 200klph in top (ie NEVER)in Australia and with no real performance in it's top 3 ratios is beyond me!

Peter.

[JBT]

I'd prefer to cruise fairly quietly and economically at 100-110 in 6th and use 5th (or 4th) as required for those times you need the extra go.

[Dan]

Wonderful opportunity stuffed up IMHO.NC with a 4.1 ratio is looking more attractive and affordable.

Happy to be told if my math is off here, I'm thinking it could be since people are complaining about the gear ratio and it doesn't look bad to me.

I assume you have dríven one as any comparison on gear ratios that doesn't take into account power and torque is ...... However do concede that a 3.4 would be too short but a 3.7 looks good.

Understand we all have different objectives but why you would want a car with reasonably low power and torque delivering it's top power at well over 200klph in top (ie NEVER)in Australia and with no real performance in it's top 3 ratios is beyond me!

Peter.

Nope I haven’t dríven one, I’m just saying the gear ratio doesn’t seem bad to me on paper.

It's not really worth arguing with you since you clearly don't understand how gear and final drive ratios work which you proved in 2 sentences by conceding a 3.7 would be better than a 3.4 when in fact it would be worse and thinking that the top gear ratios are built for 'top power' rather than making the car cruise at a comfortable RPM in high gears.

[Guran]

Nice one Dan. One slight flaw in your analysis: the 2.0L ND cuts out at 6500rpm and your calcs are for road speeds at 7000rpm.