mx5cartalk.com

A lot of critism and sarcasm has been directed over the years about the MX5 automatic and why anyone would buy one citing manuals as a true sports car and more fun with better feel etc. etc.

I can understand this but just wonder if any of those knockers have ever dríven an auto model MX5. MAny of the later model high powered sports cars are now automatic with optional paddle shifts for manual use etc.

I have dríven many manual sports cars over the years including Austin Healeys, MG's, MR2's, Alfas etc. and enjoyed all of them but recently I retired and bought a 1999 NB automatic mainly because I wanted to involve my wife on the MX5 runs etc and she cannot drive a manual.

I was quite surprised at the way the car performs and I would say it does not lose a lot compared to the manual according to performance figures and I was easily able to keep up with other members on recent runs I have been on even though we weren't 'racing'.

Obviously not suited to a racetrack but that's not what I bought it for as my racing days were over many decades ago.

It is probably one of the best automatics I have dríven coz it's not over willing to drop down a gear and tends to hang on til the hills become quite steep or you kick it down. It is only a four speed but can be dríven similar to a manual as it has a button which allows you to hold it in the lower gears for mountain climbing or windy roads etc. as many autos have.

Anyone else like to comment on their experience with an auto MX5?

The difference between an auto MX5 and an automatic Golf GTI (with DSG) or Ferrari 458 is that the latter two have computer controlled clutches, giving a direct mechanical link from the engines to the dríven wheels. The auto box in the MX5 (and the vast majority of automatic cars) uses a fluid coupling, which reduces responsiveness and feel. That's not to say the auto MX5s are completely devoid of feel, but until they put a clutched auto in, it's never going to be the same as a traditional manual box.

Apart from the pedigree of the manual sports car, fluid coupling auto boxes are typically heavier than manual boxes (Mazda claim an extra 10kg for the auto version of the NC2), more costly initially (Mazda quote $2175 more for the auto version in Victoria, roughly 5% of the vehicle price), and consume more fuel while driving (the energy required to change gears has to come from somewhere).

Yeah---I am aware and agree with all of that lee. I am only commenting on personal enjoyment of the car.

Sounds like the car puts a grin on your face. The rest is a moot point.

wiz043 wrote:Yeah---I am aware and agree with all of that lee. I am only commenting on personal enjoyment of the car.

Apologies if I came across as brash; my mind's not in the right place today. But like George said, if it makes you happy, nothing else matters

wiz043 wrote:I would say it does not lose a lot compared to the manual according to performance figures

it's not about outright performance - it's about driver enjoyment.

i dislike driving automatics because i want to choose which gear to be in and when. generally (not always), the driver knows best.
i did not like the behaviour of the DSG gearbox in the golf R32, however i can appreciate the engineering that has gone into it and didn't hesitate to recommend it to a friend who was looking for an automatic car recently. they ended up buying a new DSG golf.

to me, manually engaging gears is part of the fun of owning a sports car. i love heel toe double declutching my downshifts when approaching a corner. even if there was a robotic twin clutch manual gearbox option for the mx5, i would take the manual option in a heartbeat.

When i see a car without the 3rd pedal or stick i feel sad. I have no interest in owning nor driving a automatic car Wat so ever.

^ not granny shifting

Yeah----I know all the advantages and preferences for a manual car as I stated in the first paragraph of my first post. Of course the majority of drivers prefer a manual MX5 to an auto and that's why there is a lot less auto models on the road.

I was merely asking if anyone has dríven or owns an auto and if so, what were their thoughts.

Locutus wrote:

wiz043 wrote:I would say it does not lose a lot compared to the manual according to performance figures

it's not about outright performance - it's about driver enjoyment.

i dislike driving automatics because i want to choose which gear to be in and when. generally (not always), the driver knows best.
i did not like the behaviour of the DSG gearbox in the golf R32, however i can appreciate the engineering that has gone into it and didn't hesitate to recommend it to a friend who was looking for an automatic car recently. they ended up buying a new DSG golf.

to me, manually engaging gears is part of the fun of owning a sports car. i love heel toe double declutching my downshifts when approaching a corner. even if there was a robotic twin clutch manual gearbox option for the mx5, i would take the manual option in a heartbeat.

and this x1000000

i hate how lambo,ferriri, auston martin, have a gay fappy pedel head.
only porsche still has that pure driving stick and 3rd pedel still n m3

I am a bit confused by several of these responses as wiz043 asked : Anyone else like to comment on their experience with an auto MX5?""

Why the responses knocking autos, when wiz043 obviously has a good reason to need an auto? If you don't like autos then don't buy one, but respect the decision of those who need/prefer an auto for lifestyle reasons.

I drive a manual NA because I track it and need the control it gives, but also have an auto XR6 as it is much better suited to city/traffic driving.

I haven't dríven an auto MX5, but have dríven an auto Mazda 6 and is is an excellent thing to drive - silky smooth gearchanges, very willing to kick back and is surprisingly economical. If an NC auto drives like the Mazda 6, then it should be a great thing to drive for those who need an auto and don't want to track the car.

we must have got a bit off topic i guess

The main reason so many people poo-poo the auto MX-5's is that with the NA and NB models, the auto versions actually had less horespower than the manual cars and some models got smaller wheels too.
Having said that, from my experience, and I have dríven auto 5's a number of times, the autos are still great to drive.
For a real enthusiast, the manual will always be preferable, but there's nothing wrong with the auto.

The NC's and later with their 6 speed autos are actually just as good, if not even better to drive than the manual versions.

I too love driving manuals, double de-clutching, heel and toe etc., but if my 5 was my only car, I'd probably buy an auto, as Sydney traffic is the pits.

Nothing wrong with an auto box.
After all, if the big one up there wanted us to drive manuals, he would have given us 3 legs!

Why can't your wife drive a manual?
I would never marry a woman that couldn't drive a manual!

Curious opinions here.

I purchased an NC Auto for several reasons all personal, all relevant. You prefer manuals - great - but don't try and get across my choice. Like another - my wife can drive manuals but is happier in an auto. The paddle shift overcomes my main objection to auto's in that I can select and hold whatever gear I choose with the advantage of having auto available if I get stuck in heavy city traffic for example. The Mazda Auto is the smoothest and nicest box I can recall using and that recall goes back about 60 years.

So - each to his own huh?

Safe driving

I also have a manual NB but, drive an auto every day of week which is great in traffic as has been previously mentioned, but from everything I have heard regarding auto NC's I would be very interested to try one, and would seriously consider one if the car was my daily driver.
With the new Auto's you get the best of both worlds, auto mode perfect for stop start traffic, and manual mode for a bit of fun.

Cheers
Dale