Alfa/ND Mule spotted in Michigan

[emily_mx5]

Do you guys rekon that due to the really poor front nosecone fitment (look at the bonnet gap!)
That they are hiding it's new look?
Because that looks just like the ugly nc we have currently, not grounds to call it a new series.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

[manga_blue]

It's really a slightly shrunken NC body shell disguising an NA platform. It is believed there never was a better model MX-5 than the original, so they have used that as a basis but with a new power train and body. It comes complete with scuttle shake....oh and they are ramping up the price in Australia to $65,000 to bring it in line with early 90s cost equivalency.

Alternively it's an NA with some NC body parts gafftaped on to it. Remove them and the true beauty underneath will be revealed! Agree with JBT about all the rest.

[Lokiel]

It's really a slightly shrunken NC body shell disguising an NA platform. It is believed there never was a better model MX-5 than the original, so they have used that as a basis but with a new power train and body. It comes complete with scuttle shake....oh and they are ramping up the price in Australia to $65,000 to bring it in line with early 90s cost equivalency.

At that price at least it will keep the value up for our "old" NA/NB/NCs.

Mazda really need to bring it in around the cost of the FT86 if they hope to sell any volume of these since we're not prepared to pay "90's cost equivalent prices" any more - new cars these days are MUCH cheaper than they were in the 80's/90's if you factor in inflation.

Would anyone here be prepared to pay an extra $20,000 for an ND MX5 instead of an FT86?

[22Silver]

Depends if it kicked a lot more ass than an 86..
It would have to handle much better, look much better, an go just as fast as an 86.

[Rocky]

This is the $64,000. question isn't it, how much more than the price of an 86 will buyers of this category of car pay.
It is also an interesting point that a lot of the Forum Members bought their MX5s second hand precisely because they considered the new price too expensive/bad value.
It would be interesting to see some detailed statistics on new MX5 buyers, and compare that to the demographics of the people who end up with them 3 yrs down the track.
I suspect that the new buyers are less concerned with price than we are, and if the car delivers the image they want they will pay the asking price. They are probably not potential 86 buyers anyhow.
I like the 86 but probably wouldn't buy one as it lacks the 'presence/flair/style' - whatever you want to call it - of an MX5. It's no 240Z.

[Lokiel]

:
I like the 86 but probably wouldn't buy one as it lacks the 'presence/flair/style' - whatever you want to call it - of an MX5. It's no 240Z.

I'd have one BUT it would require the obligatory FI.

[two-3]

I guess the funny thing about this forum is that very few of us could, or if we could we wouldn't, buy a new model MX5 off the showroom floor. (Remember that weird guy who got an NC3 and made those creepy posts about being aroused by the gear stick... or whatever?) You can pay up to $55k for a new MX5. That's madness. I could have a near new Lotus Elise for that. Or I could have a supercharged NC1 and an overseas holiday.

Point being, doesn't matter if it's out of our new-price-range. We'll start to get them in a few years when the aftermarket has more parts and the used prices are no longer mental.

I could afford to buy of the showroom floor but my general view in respect of cars is that anyone that does this is nuts. Case in point my 2009 NC2 I bought second hand from a dealer for $37,000 in 2011, practically new, lovely condition, would have been $55,000+ new being the sports pack option. Why would I pay that?

Having said that, I bought a new x-trail this year off the showroom floor (so to speak) - TS DCi (turbo diesel) six speed. $30,900, and the only reason I bought it new from the dealer was because it was so cheap I couldn't justify buying second which were going for practically the same money. Further they were able to finance it at 1% interest over 3 years which works out to like $450 over the term of the loan. I do not understand the economics of it. I really can't. I spent a lot of time trying to work out what the catch was.

[gslender]

I do not understand the economics of it. I really can't. I spent a lot of time trying to work out what the catch was.

Investing in the brand. Seller provides the product at or below cost to create brand interest and market share so that future models can be sold for a profit.

[Lokiel]

I'm betting that the dealer just needed to move it because he had new stock coming in.

Not sure about Australia, but in the US, many dealers commit to selling a specific number of vehicles a month. During the GFC, when nobody was buying cars, many dealers were forced to sell vehicles at way below cost price and many went under. It's better to get some money for a vehicle than be left stuck with it.

[gslender]

It's better to get some money for a vehicle than be left stuck with it.

Some will even factor in future servicing and maintenance into their business plans when taking product on... no different to selling a game console for below cost and making money on the game sales.

G

[PB]

Not sure we can make too make too many assumptions from those photos.
Doesn't look too much like a new model to me.
Come on Mazda - give me a reason to consider a new MX5.
(what was that stuff about a manual gearbox only in the UK?)

Rocky, if you ever sell - give me a call!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

[7StringSamurai]

Would anyone here be prepared to pay an extra $20,000 for an ND MX5 instead of an FT86?

Firstly, you can't really compare apples and oranges, since neither Toyota nor Subaru will be bringing out a convertible version of the 86 / BRZ, and Mazda won't be bringing out a coupe (hardtop) version. The best test of this would be to look at the price delta between coupes and convertibles within a single product line; for instance, the BMW 325 comes in both variants, as does the Peugeot 308. What's the price difference between the two? (hard-top vs convertible, that is... not BMW vs Peugeot).
Secondly, Toyota went out of their way to give the 86 a loose back-end... not just through suspension, but by fitting skinny wheels / tyres to the back. The result is a car that can get the back end at at relatively low speeds. This seems to fly in the face of the attitude Mazda have always taken when setting up the MX5.

You can hardly compare the two, because they're hardly the same car. So yes, I reckon people WILL pay the extra $20,000.

[OurCognitiveSurplus]

I didn't buy the MX5 because the roof went down. I didn't and don't much care about the roof. I care that it's a small, light, manual, RWD, 'sports car' (in before 'sports car' defintion argument).

I suspect a large per cent of MX5 buyers would be in the same position as me. On that basis, I think the 86 v mx5 comparison is very fair.

[sailaholic]

I didn't buy the MX5 because the roof went down. I didn't and don't much care about the roof. I care that it's a small, light, manual, RWD, 'sports car' (in before 'sports car' defintion argument).

I suspect a large per cent of MX5 buyers would be in the same position as me. On that basis, I think the 86 v mx5 comparison is very fair.

+1 totally comparable cars look at how many mx5 run permanent hard tops.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Smacca]

I suspect a large per cent of MX5 buyers would be in the same position as me. On that basis, I think the 86 v mx5 comparison is very fair.

I agree. Although the roadster body type was a big factor for me in wanting to buy an MX-5, I can see why many enthusiasts like OurCognitiveSurplus simply want a light, fun, affordable RWD sports car.

Mazda will have you believe the MX-5 does not directly compete with the 86 due to price point, customer demographic and design/function philosophy. But surely there are potential MX-5 customers out there who are buying 86's instead based simply on BFYB. Mazda cannot ignore this with the ND.