Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

click to open in a new window

th_b00_MYnewMX5photochopWEB.jpg

The above is the new MX5 as Mazda designed it.

Wheel's don't fit the guards, the car has no chin. It has a receding jaw and thus looks weak.

It also reminds me of those amphibious vehicles with the way the front is.

Below is a little photochop work. Looks more in proportion to me this way.

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

arg why would they change it. jeremy clarkson summed it up well in saying that it was a great little car because over the years the recipe never changed as it didn't need to.

the front is not nice to look at in my opinion

9449.jpg

i still think that any MX 5 is shit, and the people that own it think its a performance car. eg one guy trying to take me on in one LMAO. *** the mx 5, mazda should work on the next series of the RX-7 :P. that would be yummy

i still think that any MX 5 is shit, and the people that own it think its a performance car. eg one guy trying to take me on in one LMAO. *** the mx 5, mazda should work on the next series of the RX-7 :). that would be yummy

Hmmm, no, MX-5 IS a performance car. While the dude that tried to drag you would never have succeeded, on the track an MX-5 is brilliant - it's light, low, short and wide. I'd go as far as saying that it would be faster than a GTST on a reasonably twisty track.

Always lacked decent stonk even the turbo (what are they the SP models or something).. although nearly every motor journalist praised it for it's brilliant handling characteristics.

I'd love to see a rotary in it.. the engine being lightweight and with for more power available than it's current little NA and turbo mills.

But toatlly aggreed.. the new looks are like what the bug-eyed rex was to Subaru!!

a mate of mine has one which has an AVO turbo kit on it

it ran a high 12 with shitty tyres and dying clutch

there are also a coule guys who have 13B turbos in them as well

they are animals they have the balls that they always needed

the ones i know werent bullet roadsters

they were just pac performance jobs

they first proto type bullet was a 13B turbo but never went into production due to emmisions issues

they came with either a N/A V8 or a supercharged V8

they werent really MX5s either they were full custom chassis with rear half MX5 shell and custom front end

krzysiu... one of the boys at work owns an MX-5 which could make you eat your pants... think 900kg and 180rwkw :P courtesy of a 13b

I also added a chin. The car they've created has no jaw! What's up with that? Silly designers.

The bullet roadsters are insane. But their price is also insane... Bullet roadster or second hand boxter S, or even a second hand exige... I know which I'd buy.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...