NA Turbo or NC PHRT?

[captaincabinets]

Hi all

Apologies if this is in the wrong area.

I have been planning on getting an NC PHRT for about 6 months. However, I've had some house repairs come up that I wasn't expecting so the NC savings are going on that. So now it looks like it's going to be another 6 months to a year before I can afford one.

So in the meantime I've been window shopping other cars for fun, and I've come across some turbo NAs that seem pretty cool, e.g.
viewtopic.php?f=73&t=69569

Now I've dríven a stock NB and an NC before, but not an NA. How would a turbo NA compare to the other two? I'm tempted because it's a good 10 grand cheaper than a lower k's PHRT and I think it'd be a hoot, but I'm wary of unreliability / high fuel use / not being able to take it on interstate trips as I think I would with the PHRT.

Thoughts?

[Okibi]

NC is a much more practical car and newer so less to replace/maintain (unless those bits have all been replaced on the NA already).

A low boost NA should be very reliable but similar power to the NC.

If money is tight the NC is more sensible, if it's a toy or for motorsport or you like modifying cars you might enjoy the NA more.

[TTT]

A low boost NA should be very reliable but similar power to the NC.

the car in the link states "Dyno results showing 147kw at the wheels"

that's somewhat more than a stock NC.

[ManiacLachy]

You're looking at cars that represent two oppostite spectrums of MX-5s, IMO. The PRHT NC is a bit of a GT cruiser, it quiet and comfortable and as refined as an MX-5 gets. An NA is a proper little sports car, it's raw, communicative, stripped back - add the turbo and everything gets turned up.

I think if you want a car for thrills then the NA is the one to look at. If you want something to drive in comfort daily and to provide a few fun turns now and again, then the NC.

[BlackLeaf]

...but I'm wary of unreliability / high fuel use / not being able to take it on interstate trips...

Here is an excerpt from a fuel consumption / performance chart I used to keep for my mariner blue NA (RIP). This was a daily drive vehicle predominantly doing suburban / city driving for work and running the kids around to their various activities, and the occasional franging chucked in to the bargain. Worth noting that most of the fills were with 91 octane (I was a tight-@rse and on reflection I can't believe I did that to my trusty steed).

By today's standards 8.58 L/100km is certainly not exceptional, but it sits comfortably between my Mitsubishi Grandis people mover (est. 12-13 L/100km) and the Hyundai i20 (7.2 L/100km). There is a lot of info but the other key points are a fuel cost of $12.40/100km, and if you do a long highway drive (e.g. 23 Dec 2011) you can drive a fair way with decent economy (potential 634km on a full tank @ 7.1L/100km)

Reliability? I only recall being stranded once in almost 25 years of driving the car and that was the fault of mechanic who did the service.

I will be starting another chart for my recently acquired red NA, and as I look at what I did previously I think I need to include data capture around fuel type 95 vs 98 (I can't always get 98).

[StanTheMan]

yea reliability of the NA's is pretty good.
sure Ive been stranded a few times but only because of my own neglect.

NA's are simple. It doesn't take much to make them reliable & even less to keep them that way once there. Years & years of neglect will make them less reliable.

That Blue NA6 is very tasty. Especially with the current price. its a sleeper. I wouldn't be too concerns about engineering it for your local state personally. As a sleeper you probably would have to be real unfortunate to get pulled over.I'm sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to get it engineered if you are in a different state.( our mexican friends keep telling us its impossible in Vic though)

The one thing I would look hard at is how drive ability is in traffic. Gentle throttle. I'm sure it goes like a rocket on WOT.find out where the holes are if any. If there is none. OMG!!!! stock drive-ability....grab it with both hands provided everything else is in order.

And yes I also agree an NA would be purely for the fun of it. although practicality of an NC.....can't be a huge amount more. LOL

[BlackLeaf]

Consider also that the NA (or any MX5) is the perfect family car. When you have four kids, you can only ever take one with you... or two if you consider the boot as an option. Perfect!

[Mr Morlock]

Okibi is right on the money. A turbo NA is a play thing but an NC is a car that you can go touring in and get many more years of reliable and fun motoring for adults. A low KLM NC is going to last a lot longer than an NA which starts with probably a 20 year start. An NC is also going to be a safer car.

[PeterB]

I wouldn't be too concerns about engineering it for your local state personally. As a sleeper you probably would have to be real unfortunate to get pulled over.I'm sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to get it engineered if you are in a different state.( our mexican friends keep telling us its impossible in Vic though)

In the ACT : not engineered for the ACT means not legally registered means all insurance is void. A defect notice and fine is the least of the concerns if things go pear-shaped.

My previous NA6 turbo (engineered) with 135 rwk, lsd, konis, hardtop and a/c was a delight to drive and the best thing on the road. Fuel was sensible depending on use. However it did have reliability issues, largely due to underbonnet heat and I didn't think it was a practical every day proposition in traffic or long distance tourer.
However I wish I still had it as it was the best fun ever on a brisk run through the mountains, etc.

Our stockish NB (a NC is probably better) will go anywhere, anytime without hesitation, and is a lot of fun, but nowhere near the NA6 turbo for sheer driving pleasure.

One of each is the best idea !!!

[NitroDann]

A turbo NA or NB chassis is just a real giant killer in terms of outright performance and fun.

NC is an old mans tourer in OEM form.

Dann

[bruce]

Are you old or young. It answers itself.

[93_Clubman]

I'm tempted because it's a good 10 grand cheaper than a lower k's PHRT

If you can wait a while before you buy a low km NC PRHT, then that will give NC prices a chance to settle. In the meantime buy a cheap NA6 from the money you'll save.

[speed]

Think maniaclauchy it the nail on the head with this comment.

"I think if you want a car for thrills then the NA is the one to look at. If you want something to drive in comfort daily and to provide a few fun turns now and again, then the NC."

Personally I'd go the turbo NA but I only use/treat my NA like a toy and have a much more comfortable car for daily use

Let us know what you decide

[davekmoore]

Both highly impractical because 2 seaters.

NA turbo for fun. Can be left/made quite refined.

NC PHRT not that much fun, but is already more refined.

NB turbo, well done (by NitroDann?) excellent middle ground.

[StanTheMan]

I wouldn't be too concerns about engineering it for your local state personally. As a sleeper you probably would have to be real unfortunate to get pulled over.I'm sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to get it engineered if you are in a different state.( our mexican friends keep telling us its impossible in Vic though)

In the ACT : not engineered for the ACT means not legally registered means all insurance is void. A defect notice and fine is the least of the concerns if things go pear-shaped!!

Very good point. It's probably the same in all states. Certainly here in NSW as well.