OV9

GG. wrote: ↑Wed Jun 13, 2018 11:11 pm That would be why I’d spend ever so slightly more on a 2005 on 987 with a vastly better interior and to my eyes greatly improved exterior styling too.

I would also go for a 987 - preferably a 987.2 in 2.9 form, but even the 987.1 2.7 is only 10-15bhp short of the 986 3.2S and has far less chance of an expensive IMS failure.

Can we up the budget and get a 996 ?

For the £11.5k of that BBR that was posted you could also have a BMW Z4M with that fantastic 343hp M3 engine. That would tempt me if I wasn't keen on a Boxster.

Has anyone suggested an MX5?

David_Yu wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:27 am Even Mazda never intended the MX5 to be a the last word in hardcore drivers' cars, just a reliable MGB/Frogeye Sprite.

I don't believe that is entirely correct, Mazda could have built the car way cheaper if that was the case.

Orange Cola wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:39 pm

David_Yu wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:27 am Even Mazda never intended the MX5 to be a the last word in hardcore drivers' cars, just a reliable MGB/Frogeye Sprite.

I don't believe that is entirely correct, Mazda could have built the car way cheaper if that was the case.

The concept was always a light, simple, reliable pastiche of the "classic English sports car", not a hardcore driver's car like an Elise.
And to be fair, they got that so, so right, as sales into the millions shows.

David_Yu wrote: ↑Fri Jun 15, 2018 9:17 am

Orange Cola wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:39 pm

David_Yu wrote: ↑Thu Jun 14, 2018 9:27 am Even Mazda never intended the MX5 to be a the last word in hardcore drivers' cars, just a reliable MGB/Frogeye Sprite.

I don't believe that is entirely correct, Mazda could have built the car way cheaper if that was the case.

The concept was always a light, simple, reliable pastiche of the "classic English sports car", not a hardcore driver's car like an Elise.
And to be fair, they got that so, so right, as sales into the millions shows.

Then why did they go to the trouble of the expensive double wishbone suspension on the front axle instead of using McPherson struts which would have been more than fine and far cheaper for that design brief you quoted? Why bother with an LSD? In fact, why bother with RWD at all? You don't need any of that to meet the design brief on a car priced at the less expensive end of the range. It's got kit on there which just isn't found on other performance models of similar or more cost. You do it because you want to make something that's a decent steer, that's why.

It always had to be rwd to capture the modest grip throttle steerable excitement of the old British sports cars. Lsd wasn't standard.

Of course they wanted to make it a decent steer, they wouldn't want to make an exact replica of something from the 60s would they? They started a brand new ground up platform so could make it a little bit more fancy where most tended to just adapt existing ones.

Have you considered a 2005 VW Sharan people carrier instead of an MX5?