technically less true for U.S, Jap market... Europe got really cucked on the NC. I just don't get how anybody falls for Mazda marketing on selling the world's most generic car for 50 years.

>>28492447 (OP)
>fwd
>not convertible

>>28492464
>don't care
>don't care

such a stupid Mazda cope. There's way cooler convertibles. It's like cheaping out on a squire mini-strat instead of going for like a sonic or mustang (guitar), save for a Camaro or Mustang or something with real pep instead of paying out 4 to 10 Gs (which, yes, some NC owners are stupid enough to ask for their maybe 2k car) on the nothing-mobile.

Post your car that you own

>>28492477
Saturn Sky - do not have image available. It is a Red Line. It's quite fast, much faster than an MX-5. Much cheaper for the power level, too.

saturn is for ghetto blacks lol

>>28493501
You're not buying a decent Redline for much less than 8K. You can absolutely get a decent NC Miata for around 5.

>>28493560
calling any NC decent or worth 5k is an insult to my wallet.

>>28493556
believe what you want but I'm white and know a lot of white fellas with Saturns because they-- especially S-Series-- were really good cars. Much better than any shoddy Honda or Toyota of its day.

>>28493501
>do not have image available
makes sense, car guys never take photos of their cars

>>28493613
haven't gotten around to moving the files about from phone to computer. Have a few that I'd be willing to but will take some time to find.

You're embarrassing yourself.

>>28493707
*your

>>28492447 (OP)


Where is Saturn now?
Why can't any USM make the Saturn again?
Why can't anyone except Mazda make a Miata?
Why don't more manufacturers understand that 'the world's most generic car' is a winning formula, and do it even better, if they can?

>>28493752
this mindset is ridiculous. Saturn died because of a shared stupidity on GM and the average consumer's part, and second is that "world's most generic car" is what I've now seen sold for ridiculous amounts by sellers who think they've got hot shit. I don't give a fuck about "winning formula", I care about the soul of it. The MX-5 is another dead-inside Japanese fuckshit vehicle.

>>28492447 (OP)
>a convertible has worse MPG
No shit Sherlock

>>28492468
Have you seen all these cars you mentioned? The real alternative to MX-5 is something like an old 4-cyl Z4

>>28493970
> Saturn Sky

bruh

>>28493967
you mean the convertible with 3 fewer seats, barely a fifth the trunk space, and a smaller displacement engine?

You're full of shit dude. Quit the Mazda cope.

>>28493984
And worse aero. I don't own any Mazdas btw.

>>28493989
OK, still a Mazda cope -_- never claimed you got one just that you're spitting copes on their behalf.

>>28493991
I own a convertible from another manufacturer and it gets worse MPG than the sedan or wagon version.

>>28493995
I'm referring to the shitty EUDM MX-5 engine btw not the 2.0, which is still a shitty thing.

+ NC MX-5 came out like 15 years after the SW. It had time to catch up MPG.

>saturn bro trying to have a dick measuring contest with a bunch a weeaboos
bro not even foxbody mustang fags are this gay get a grip dude

>>28493999
I just hate the MX-5 desu

>>28493996
>shitty EUDM MX-5 engine btw not the 2.0
Lol, I though all of them were 2-liter. No wonder they are that slow.
>NC MX-5 came out like 15 years after the SW. It had time to catch up MPG.
From what I see, 2.0 NC (no data for 1.8 because EPA is American and no Saturns were tested to Euro standards) has same or better fuel economy than the SW in the city, but worse on the highway. Which is kind of expected from a convertible. I don't know shit about these Saturns, btw, but I picked MPFI versions, because TBI are probably worse.

>>28494065
lol no

Saturn SW got better fuel economy everywhere

More Mazda cope lfg

>>28494069
oh and yes this is consistent throughout the lifespan of the MX-5. Ten years in Saturn had an SW that went from a minimum of 24 MPG to a minimum 26. And 2001 wasn't even their best year. Mazda kept consistently lower the whole time, even up to some of ND lifespan.

I don't know where your EPA source went wrong (probably in European units lol) but as per usual Saturn's vehicles are better than the shit Japanese can make and people are just uncannily thick to it.

(https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2015_Mazda_MX-5.shtml

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2001_Saturn_SW.shtml

Review through this bro, not even remotely true what you said.)

>>28494072
the miata never got good gas mileage that's not the point
my fucking challenger gets better gas mileage than a miata (and your saturn btw)

>>28494069
>2000 Saturn SW
>NC MX-5 came out like 15 years after the SW
I replied to you only because I thought once in a while a namefag can participate in a normal argument.
>your EPA source
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=21640&id=10152&id=11114&id=12090

>>28492447 (OP)
I fell for the Mazda shills and it fucking sucks holy shit. Damn thing is falling apart and it's only 2 years old. There's little shit that you don't even realize a car company can get wrong, like the doors are off alignment. I have to pull hard as fuck to open them and they slam on me if I try to prop them open to get out. Probably 20 shitty quality things like that. Sun visor just snapped off recently. Shit that is inexcusable for a 2 year old car.

>>28494085
the point is that there is no point. The MX-5 is a car without personality and without purpose.

>>28494097
if the saturn S-chassis was so good then they should make another one
OH WAIT
YOU CAN'T

>>28494090
dude wtf are you talking about? This source proves my point. Better gas mileage city & highway most years & weighs less despite having 5 seats and like 5 times the trunk space.

apparently a "namefag" or whatever your retarded ass needs to use for a guy who likes Chinese Democracy can actually read his sources?

>>28494100
Every car has its time, unfortunately for all of society the MX-5 has had forty years too long.

>>28494102
>cherry picking the 95hp single cams
bruh come on

>>28494094
Thank god some people can actually see some sense. Fucking hell, "cheap plastic" complainers are some of the most retarded people on this planet. Like... why do you think gas mileage got so much higher in the 80s/90s? Cars got made out of lighter materials because it's better for performance and efficiency. I just don't get how supposedly the smartest species in the known universe can be so ridiculous.

>>28494105
I did not pick that. My preference was for the 2000 model year, which only had DOHC. That got better fuel efficiency. Unfortunately Mazda-lovers don't seem to understand much of how things work, so they'll complain about their own sourcing -_-

>>28494104
imagine having barely double digit horsepower and basically getting the same fuel economy as a modern world class sports car with its own racing series lmao

>>28494108
i mean the saturns retard, you KNOW they had two engine choices, right?
at least the twincam sl can actually barely keep up with a miata, the singlecam is dogshit slow and the only reason it gets better fuel economy than the mazda is because it barely moves

>>28494109
> """sports car"""

Right, the NC MX-5 totally compares to stuff that can actually run from 0-60 in 5 seconds or less, right?

Get real pls?

And yes, that is what 15 years of technological separation will do. A shitty generic millennial-mobile bought because girls look cute with the roof down in it can finally achieve actual fuel economy numbers comparable to a still better 90s to early 2000s vehicle, which is still lighter despite having more than twice the seating and thrice the space. Ridiculous.

>>28494110
I was also referring to the Saturn, retard. And in 2000 there was no SW1. There was only DOHC, which kept with the MX-5, was lighter than the NC, got better fuel economy, and had way more seating and space.

Get real pls?

>>28494111
>Right, the NC MX-5 totally compares to stuff that can actually run from 0-60 in 5 seconds or less, right?

it compares favorably to the 6-second class which is stuff like the V6 american muscle cars, nissan fm platform, and the gt86, all of which get around the same fuel economy

you're trying to defend a car that makes less than 100 hp against a car that approaches 200 hp
even i'm not that stupid and i'm the pentastar shill

>>28494115
the NC wasn't available in 2000, the Non-VVT NB Miata of the time gets better fuel economy than your Saturn by 4 points. the VVT version does even better.

NEXT

also,

>fwd gm trash

lol enjoy your w-body malibu faggot

>>28494119
I'm not defending anything because the Saturn's quality speaks for itself. The MX-5 is not a sports car at all. A sports car has a personality, otherwise all those shit BMW 4-doors are sports cars, which they are NOT.

Also, only the LK0 was sub 100hp, which was only in the SW for 2 years. After that, only the LL0 and L24 were there, and both made at least 100hp. The LL0 did 124hp.

If it "compares favorably" to anything, it's because you're going with the down-model stuff. A real V8 American sports car, turbo six from Germany, hell even turbo 4 from Japan will beat the ever-loving fuck out of that dumb NC. Even the S2K does that easily.

>>28494128
cope

>fwd
>general motors
>sub-100 hp

>>28494126
IDC about the NB nearly as much as NC. The NC just sucks dick. The NB's just another no-soul trash-mobile. Even still, SW is still significantly better all-around. Nearly same fuel economy, weight, power, and better seating + accommodations.

>>28494128
>no true scotsman
>false equivalency
>moving goalposts
>sub-100hp gm fwd shitwagon

>>28494130
FWD is not inherently bad, you just don't know how to drive it, I like GM, and, again, only the LK0 did sub-100. The LL0 and L24 both made at least 100, LL0 doing 124.

The real cope is having to rely on spewing dumb shit to justify claiming cope.

>>28494131
>sub 100 hp
>gm
>fwd

>Also, only the LK0 was sub 100hp, which was only in the SW for 2 years. After that, only the LL0 and L24 were there, and both made at least 100hp. The LL0 did 124hp.

yeah i'm sure all 124 of those horses make it through the torque converter lamo

>>28494135
>FWD is not inherently bad
wrong

>>28494134
> "Any [good sports car layout] will beat" - Not a fallacy, just true. The NC was a slow POS.
> "A sports car has a personality, otherwise [BMW rant]" - Not a fallacy, just true. If slow, generic cars can be "sports cars" because you define the category by "compete with the 6 second cars", then a lot of shitty sedans can be "sports cars"
> "If it compares favorably[...] down model" - Not a fallacy, just true. V6 "muscle cars" are 100% down model, GT86 is down-model of Supra, etc.
> Not sub 100 hp, LK0 made less than 100, LL0, L24 did not.

>>28494137
> Not sub 100
> GM is pretty cool
> FWD is not inherently bad

It being FWD means the losses are minimized. Yeah, over 100 probably would get to the front wheels. Even assuming 20% losses we're getting right at 100, and 20% is very unrealistic for a FWD vehicle and a manual transmission.

>>28494139
I'm sorry you think that :)

But you can very easily make FWD cars fun & fast, so truthfully just git gud.

>>28494135
>real cope is having to rely on spewing dumb shit
you mean like you're doing by comparing a slow forgettable fwd economy car with less than 100 hp to a 180 hp manual rwd roadster by deliberately cherry picking cars that weren't even sold in the same century together?
i agree that's cope.

>>28494146
> Slow forgettable FWD economy car
One of the fastest in its class -_-
> Less than 100 hp
L24, LL0; 100hp, 124hp
> Manual
S-Series came in manual, too
> Cherry-picking
Me saying I don't like the NC is not cherry-picking. I am allowed to have a different opinion of a car by generation without being fallacious or deceitful. For example, I prefer the gen 1 SC over the gen 3 SC2.
> Weren't sold in the same century
S-Series run:
1990-2002
NC MX-5 run:
2005-2015

Three years apart.

Get real pls?

>>28494140
>180 SCCA Solo National Championships won by Miatas.
>Saturn S-series SCCA race victories: 0

>>28494155
There was some participation here and there actually.
https://soec.org/saleen-saturn-win-world-challenge-cups/

It's not a secret that Saturns aren't really designed for racing, dude. That's not a flex that shitmobile-mcnowheelbase turns faster. The MX-5 has also had four generations since the 80s to do that with. So, as I usually say...

Get real pls?

>>28494152
>Me saying I don't like the NC is not cherry-picking.
comparing the nc to a car sold alongside the nb is
making all kinds of cope and false equivalencies to meaninglessly compare the two are
most people are in agreement the nc is a little fatter and heavier than previous models but that's because it's based on the rx8 platform instead of being a clean-sheet like the na and nb. the nb1 with the non-vvt is considered the car with the best n/a power to weight ratio of all miats and the mazdaspeed turbo version is even faster. the nc abides by more modern emissions and safety standards and is more fun to drive, cleaner, and safer to drive fast than the saturn.

the SW's lack of rear strut tower bracing makes it unsuitable for any kind of motorsports work so everything you're saying about it is irrelevant, it couldn't hold a candle to a Miata on a track or twisty road.

>>28494162
>It's not a secret that Saturns aren't really designed for racing, dude.

and the miata is, therefore the miata is superior
mic fuckign dropped nigga don't @ me

>>28494165
> "comparing the nc to a car sold alongside the nb is"
No, it's not. In fact, claiming that's cherry-picking is ridiculous in itself. The NC was a newer car, so what's its excuse for being shitty?
> "making all kinds of cope and false equivalencies to meaninglessly compare the two are"
Never did either, you just think I did because it serves the convenience of your worldview.
> "most people are in agreement the nc is a little fatter and heavier than previous models but that's because it's based on the rx8 platform instead of being a clean-sheet like the na and nb."
And that says I can't dislike that... why?

"the nb1 with the non-vvt is considered the car with the best n/a power to weight ratio of all miats and the mazdaspeed turbo version is even faster."
> Yeah, and even then it was a generic POS -_-

> "the nc abides by more modern emissions and safety standards and is more fun to drive, cleaner, and safer to drive fast than the saturn. "

Big doubt there, that Saturn has a real frame and roof, dude. That Mazda will fall to pieces in a real accident. I've seen a Saturn wrecked sideways into a tree be able to drive away.

You're kinda full of shit dude :/

>>28494167
Calling such a shitbox with a pitiful motor "designed for racing" lol... might as well call a Squier mini-strat designed for concerts. Ludicrous!

>>28494162
>Paul Boorher took second place in the Touring 2 driver’s championship piloting a Saturn SC, which helped that company capture the maker’s championship by having its drivers win points in all 11 races.

so as i said, no Saturn S-series ever had a race victory and only managed to barely eke out a manufacturer points win finishing 2nd against "sports cars" like the oldsmobile achieva lmao

>>28494176
And as I said, the Saturn was not designed for racing but still got a manufacturer win. You're not convincing.

>>28494172
>>28494175
Saturn S-chassis: 0.77g skidpad
NC Miata: 0.90g

>0-60
2000 SW2 MT: 9.0 s
2013 Mazda MX-5 Miata: 7.5 s

lmao absolutely fuckin rekt

>>28494177
>And as I said, the Saturn was not designed for racing
the 2000 SW never raced
you're taking credit from a 1995 SC

>>28494180
> The 124hp car is slower than the 170hp car???
Mindblowing.

I think you just don't get it at all. The MX-5 is a shitty commuter and a shitty sports car. It's yet another consequence of millennial genericism being the determining factor of our current market. A sad time to live in, indeed.

>>28494182
The SC|2| was not designed to race either :/
(There was an SC, which was from 1990-1993. SC1 and SC2 designations were made going forward.)

I did not specify which one, and yes, I am. They're a very similar car, you know?

you may not like it
but this is what peak automotive performance looks like

>>28494186
nah, this is

>>28494185
>They're a very similar car, you know?
in the same way that a dodge magnum and a dodge challenger are similar
they're really not when you get right down to it. the torsional stiffness and length of the body matters a lot even if the cars are mostly all the same parts

>>28494186
>>28494188
these are the same picture

>>28494190
The 1995 SC2 and 2000 SW are nearly the same length. Only SC models (see, the '93 thing did have an impact!) had the shorter wheelbase. And you neglect to remember the Saturn was not a standard unibody, it had a real steel frame there. The Saturn could have its hood, doors, trunk, bumpers, and fenders torn off and still be functionally fine. Hell, I've seen a guy cut a giant hole in his roof and the car's still been solid for 10 years.

And no, those are not the same picture. One is a Mazda POS, the other is a GM Kappa platform, front-mid engine, partial space frame, and low as hell. +much better looks.

>>28494184
>The MX-5 is a shitty commuter and a shitty sports car.

No, moron, YOU don't get it.
The Miata is not just about being a fast sports car. It's about the enjoyable feeling of driving a roadster. It's supposed to have an old-school muscle car like feel to it but smol. You buy a Miata for the same reason you buy a Viper or a 911: it has a specific way of driving that is unique and perfected. Its rawness is for you to explore and push the limits of your own ability, not to be merely coddled by a car that is "easy" to drive fast. And yet, the faster you go the more it begs to be pushed faster.

Let me be honest, I have a love for the Saturns as well, I grew up with a beautiful dark green SL2 my father owned, but i'd never contend that a fwd GM piece of shit is better than a Miat. Not because either are bad cars, but because they have completely different purposes.

>>28494192

Dude, just no. You know what gives you "classic muscle car feel"? You know what gives you a "unique driving experience"?

Not a generic MX-5, not something with no soul. A Pontiac Solstice GXP feels like an old muscle car, because Pontiac knows how to make muscle cars. Mazda couldn't make one if they tried.

You know what feels cool to drive? A car that can actually get places, like an S2000 or a Z4.

An SW2 is objectively better at most things than an NC MX-5.

I'm glad you like the Saturns though :)

>>28493965
>it da consooomer fault they wont buy car made of plastic held together with chewing gum

What about the Sky Red Line?

>all this seething over the miata existing
>eternal cope that dead american brands are actually good, actually!
They're dead for a reason, and the miata is the best selling sportscar for a reason. No matter what you do or say, Pontiac is dead because they made soulless recycled slop. No matter what you say, the Miata is a success for being the last truly affordable sporty car with a gloriously expansive after market. Facts dont care about your feelings.

>>28494359
>miata is the best selling sportscar
No it's not. Both the corvette and mustang outsell it.

>>28494370
White countries don't sell the mustang or corvette anon.

>>28494359
If you described your miata as a sportscar to any random joe on the street they would laugh at you

>>28494404
I don't even own one. I just recognize it's a good car. Unlike Saturn, which you can't even buy any more. Lol. Lmao.

>>28494373
>it's an asshurt eurocuck
LOL. Anyway, the mustang is the top selling sports car globally.

>>28494482
that's a muscle car

>>28494485
>nooo you don't understand the miata is the top selling car in the 2 door, 2 seat under 2745.77lbs, convertible, has less than 200 hp, higher 0-60 than 5.5 seconds category!!
>you can't just compare it to better cars that's not fairrrr!
Lmao.

>>28494426
>I don't even own one
No one ever accused you of owning a car

>>28493589
LMAO
LOL

>>28494370
>>28494404
>>28494482
>>28494519
>>28494777
hey you forgot your username

>>28495014
believe it or not, not me. You can tell because I'm a GM guy, so I think Fords are a bit gay in general... still less gay than a Miata.

>>28494359
The reason is GM mismanagement. The MX-5 is a success because millennials have no soul.

And calling an interpretation of facts pure "facts" is portentous. I hope to god you've not got a college education, otherwise I'll know the system's failing us.

>>28494353
vehicular perfection <3

>>28494426
HOLY SHIT, YOU CAN'T BUY THE SAME ECONOMY CAR FROM 30 YEARS AGO? MASSIVE FUCKING SHOCK TO THE INDUSTRY!

>>28493965


This is a perfect example of 'narcissism of small differences'.
What does a lightweight roadster even have anything to do with a defunct sedan badge? There's a whole universe of different cars you could hate on or compare apples to oranges. Why not compare golfs or civics or whatever? What is it about the existence of the miata specifically that makes you feel so threatened? This is such a random overlap.
*Every* maker was making lighter cars in the 90's. If GM kept the badge alive today you can guarantee they'd be exactly as bloated to shit as everything else on the road today. If more carmakers had the heads in gear they'd be making more cars more like the miata too.

>>28492447 (OP)
>American car
>"Muh bigger engine"
>Explodes since american
>"Muh massive hatchback"
>no friends/women
>"Muh burgers per feet"
> Repair costs nuke any money saved

le heckin japanese win again reddit