Thanks again for advice, steering more towards the MX5 as i do like them, i will be in the market for a mk1 or mk2, looking probably around the 2k mark (possibly 3k if i could make it stretch depending on the insurance as always).

IIRC I read about the early 1.6 engines being a much more free revving fun engine than the 1.8 which was then replaced with a little more watered down engine which was less powerful etc?

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

Thanks again for advice, steering more towards the MX5 as i do like them, i will be in the market for a mk1 or mk2, looking probably around the 2k mark (possibly 3k if i could make it stretch depending on the insurance as always).

IIRC I read about the early 1.6 engines being a much more free revving fun engine than the 1.8 which was then replaced with a little more watered down engine which was less powerful etc?

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

I'd be looking at a 1.8 Mk2/Mk2.5 if I was you.

 

Beware the later Mk2.5  MY 2001-2005 can have rust isues too. I've seen rust bubbles forming on 2004 plate cars around the lower rear sill areas, but what can't be seen are the front chassis rails unless you take the underside engine cover off or better still get it up on a ramp to check before purchase.

 

Sadly it's true they all rust, but if caught early enough or it's been treated well by previous owners there are plenty of good ones out there still. Beware though there are some tarted up dogs as well, I've seen them all.

 

I see you're in Littleover, I'm just down the road, Stenson Fields. Anytime you want a chat or if you find one and I can help just ask.

As you are very young Jack and concerned about insurance costs, find a nice Mk1, the insurance must be a lot cheaper than the later cars. Mk1;s with a lighter body and 1600 engine do feel nice and light. Put it on a diet and the power to weight ratio jumps up.

I've just bought a Mk3.5 (59 reg) 1.8 MX-5 roadster. They are fantastic cars regardless of age IMO. I haven't picked it up yet but taken it on a few test drives and also took the 2.0 demo out.

Obviously the 2.0 is more powerful the 1.8 but once your sat inside with the lid down I couldn't tell the difference really. Such great fun to drive.

As with all cars there are some good'ens and some lemons. More lemons it seems. When shopping for my girlfriends first car last year for both learning and then driving we looked high and low for something as cheap as possible for her but half decent. We ended up getting a Daewoo Matiz from an old man off his drive and despite what people say about them it is a fantastic car. It's in great condition for 9 years old, goes ok, runs perfectly and hasn't had any problems.

Although I'm a little biased now, if you're looking for pretty solid reliability and mod potential the mazda is the car for you I'd say. Just make sure the bodywork and underside are in good shape as well as the engine/servicing.

Edited 14 June, 201411 yr by austenw90

IIRC I read about the early 1.6 engines being a much more free revving fun engine than the 1.8 which was then replaced with a little more watered down engine which was less powerful etc?

 

 

 

Early Mk1's 1.6's were 115bhp and the only engine available.  Mazda then introduced the 1.8's at 130bhp and then a year or so later re-introduced a poverty spec 1.6 at 90bhp alongside it.  The Mk2 was basically a re-bodied Mk1 with an updated interior and the same engine etc. but, after initial introduction they put a Variable Valve Timing top end on the original block to get about 140bhp.

My wife had a Mk2 MX5 for about 3 years, I took it out whenever the mood took me. What I will say is that the 140bhp is more than enough to have fun, the car is light and nimble. The most impressive thing about it was the reliability, in 3 years it only ever had oil changes and one set of brake pads. This was at 12/13 years old with over 90k miles on the clock. Most reliable car we have ever had. 

as seems to be the majority opinion go for the MX5. My sister has had 2. A 2002 and currently a 2010 model. Neither have given any problems and I actually prefered the older 2002 model which gave a more characterful classic sports car experience in terms of interior with white dials etc. the later models while driving superbly and looking great, suffer from too much 'modernisation' to the interior,dashboard etc thus losing the character.

It seems that the Smart was a problematic car from the word go.  Seems that they had too many problems to continue building them.

 

From Wikipedia :

 

 

Sales of the Roadster and Roadster Coupé met expectations, however warranty claims resulted in a halt of production of both models in November 2005