41 replies to this topic

[iain3915]

Hi, I currently have a 2001 mk2.5 MX5 1.8 Sport and I'm considering getting a vx220. Most likely an NA but maybe a Turbo if a cheap one comes up. Has anyone made the leap from MX5 to VX220. If so what are your thoughts? Obviously they are quite different but I'm still curious about the difference in straight line performance and how confidence inspiring the 220 is.

[G-Bob]

Welcome Cocopops might be able to answer your questions. He just sold an MX5 to get his 2nd VX.

[jules_s]

Strangely enough, I don't recall many MX5=>VX220 But quite a few who have done it the other way around who will help out with comments....

[Goosenka]

I did two cars ago and I would say they are very different. For me the Vx stays on the road better, faster and handles so much better. The mx5 is nice but not in the same league really. Bit wet in comparison Straight line speed well the Na is much better as will be the turdo and s/c but I guess we should really be comparing straight line speed with these babies. The Vx inspires huge confidence over and above the mx but I would say that the mx is a safe fun drive but far from exciting in comparison IMO

Edited by Goosenka, 27 December 2011 - 11:33 PM.

[AliM]

me, I had the mk2 1.8i S and now have an NA. IMHO The VX is much better in terms of both speed and overall handling. The one thing I did miss about the mx-5 initially was that it was more predictable, i felt more in control if I got out of shape. But this confidence comes back with experience in the VX.

[iain3915]

Thanks for the welcome. AliM - that's a very similar car you had. How do you find the straight line speed of your NA compared to your MX5? Particularly when it comes to overtaking?

[smiley]

MX5 = 0-100km = 8,7s NA = 0-100km = 5.9s How do you think that feels?

[iain3915]

Haha - I see what you mean Smiley. But I thought that the faster 0-60 would be more down to the VX220 getting off the line better. That's why I was interested in the overtaking ability of the VX - to get an idea of the difference once traction issues are out of the equation.

[Wolfstone]

The overtaking ability of a VXT is superb. I always have to be very careful when I then step back into a normal car and try to overtake and then realise that I simply don't have the acceleration.

[Wolfstone]

The 60-100 times using this comparison site are very telling:

http://www.torquesta...?pid=comparison

Select VX220 Turbo and Mazda MX-5 2.0 Roadster (2009)

VX220 = 8.7s
MX-5 = 14.2s

Edited by Wolfstone, 28 December 2011 - 12:54 AM.

[jules_s]

What's this hash tagging then #boring

[2.2_na]

I did two cars ago and I would say they are very different.

The VX looks much better.

[smiley]

But I thought that the faster 0-60 would be more down to the VX220 getting off the line better. That's why I was interested in the overtaking ability of the VX - to get an idea of the difference once traction issues are out of the equation.

Go get yourself a testdrive i would say.
Only way to get a good impression.

[JohnTurbo]

This is forgetting the various superior aspects of the mx5 such as comfort, build quality and getoutability.

[henjb]

Its very easy to overtake in the vx, drop it into 3rd and vooooossssshhhhh you're gone

[Wolfstone]

This is forgetting the various superior aspects of the mx5 such as getoutability.

But the VX has the advantage that it tends to put passengers off due to access restrictions.

[AliM]

That's true, the MX-5 is a nicer place to be! As us VX'ers tell anyone who is trying to compare the VX to any other car, it's not all about the straight line speeds. The VX is plenty quick enough (mine is much quicker than my mx5), but it's on the twisty tarmac that my VX really comes alive. Best way for you to decide is to go drive one

[Bobby]

The overtaking ability of a VXT is superb. I always have to be very careful when I then step back into a normal car and try to overtake and then realise that I simply don't have the acceleration.

There seems to always be something there when you need it.

I came from an MR2 (mk3) to a Turbo. As much as I loved the MR2, in terms of handling, feel and acceleration I don't think it's even worth trying to compare.

[fezzasus]

Welcome. the VX220 is a step towards a rawer sports car experience; it weighs less and had a bigger engine, meaning that when it comes to straight line speed, acceleration and overtaking, it edges out the MX-5. You'll find that with an NA you'll still have to drop it down a gear and rev it, while a turbo has enough torque for lazy overtakes in the same gear. The cons are the same as the plusses; it's a rawer experience so it's less comfortable to get in and out, less room, less comfy, crap heater (i'm working on this - still), plus the more exotic design over the standard pressed metal MX-5 is that a minor crash could rapidly turn into a write off once the clam and lights are damaged (very expensive to buy)

[TubbyNorman]

No one has yet mentioned occupation, as only hair dressers drive MX5's ( and maybe NA's also ?)