Find Reviews by Make:
Mazda’s latest concept only weighs 2,194 pounds, and it’s got a grin to prove it.
51 Comments on “Whats Wrong With This Picture: A Light Car Is a Happy Car Edition...”
Read all comments
The Miata is too much of a chick car. Very popular with most women I know, some own it too.
I tried to test drive the original version, I barely fit in it, with the top down, and I doubt I could sit more comfortably, there seemed no more room to recline etc. And it really felt unsafe and tiny.
A convertible, to feel safe, has to have some heft. A 2,000 lb ugly Yaris feels far more safe (and probably is) than this open sardine can.
Lightening a car by removing the roof and the windshield makes the effort somewhat moot.
And I’m not so impressed with the end result of 2194 lbs. That should be the starting point.
Mazda needs to drop the damn s!@t-eating grin on it’s cars. I can’t buy a new Miata because of it. I just can’t. It’s too goofy.
Looks like the Stay Puffed marshmellow man from ghostbusters.
@BDB
The front of all the new Mazdas look like anime characters.
-ted
Very English. I like it. But if someone does intend to drive it, better wear a helmet.
If Miata’s are such chick cars, why do they keep dusting my ass in autocross???
The front of all the new Mazdas look like anime characters.
Yeah, Acura seems to share the same affliction. I really hope this isn’t the design direction Japanese cars are moving towards.
I’m not sure if those roll hoops will pass the broomstick rule.
@BDB:
You nailed it… Couldn’t agree more. Same to zerofoo.
The Yaris feels safer than the MX-5? Yeah, probably safer from spike shaped hail-stones. The MX-5 has more crush space, better accident avoidance, a more predictable rear end, and doesn’t actually scrape its doorhandles on the ground when you drive it on its doorhandles. (Fun fact: you can grind the bumper of the Yaris against the ground while cornering. Can’t do that in an MX-5).
Seat space is a matter of opinion. Many six footers are marginally comfortable in an MX-5, but some fit. Not much worse than a Z4, whose headliner ends two inches from my (much lower than six foot) eyebrows.
Give this one a perspex windscreen and throw in a pair of aviator goggles for free, and it’ll be perfect.
This is a total FAIL!
my 6 year old MR2 Spyder comes in only 21 pounds heavier (stock), and it has a top, side windows, side mirrors, and a windshield. One would think that 6 years later, Mazda would be able to find a way to reduce weight, not add it.
To dismiss a Miata as a chick car is to reveal that you’re not really a car person.
Agree with Niky — a pair of goggles and a daring spirit would go very well with this Mazda concept.
Does anyone else here recall how the original NA’s alloy wheels had the 8th spoke removed to save unsprung weight?
“azda needs to drop the damn s!@t-eating grin on it’s cars. I can’t buy a new Miata because of it. I just can’t. It’s too goofy.”
Fully agree, it looks ludicrous, esp on the 6 where it looks out of place too, reminds me of a whale shark dumbly trying to feed itself with plangton
From this angle the thing really looks like a slot car to me.
I’m actually a fan of this. The car looks genuinely happy. It’s like it’s waiting for you to jump in and go drive like a hooligan.
Is that a CAI or intercooler piping?
The piping in the smile seems like the car got some lettuce in the teeth
Looks like an absolute blast.
Girl car huh?
OK
Anyway, I understand the added lbs. from safety gear, etc., but my 90 miata weighs the same and it has a windshield.
I kinda like having a windshield…. YMMV, depending upon how much you like your teeth and eyeballs
Ah, the Miata. It’s really three cars in one…
For chicks, its a very cute, cheap, practical-as-you-can-get 2-seat convertible. Thus the “chick car”
For old guys, its their MG-B withouts the breakdowns or Lucas-prince-of-darkness. Thus the “old-school roadser”.
For the autocross crowd, its a lightweight, subperb-handling car designed for absolute psychopaths to drive on a budget. No power but astounding handling and you just drive around with the go-faster-pedal mashed to the firewall at all times….
I love this concept, it makes a focused psychopath car even more focused and psychopathic.
Wake me up when they get it below a Ton. If you’re building a concept, no reason you can’t get below that magical number.
Its not a bad weight. Also I love anime, this cars look is ok with me. I’m concerned about the power. 125hp? Atleast give me 170hp ala Integra GSR.
That is a goofy grin. I kinda like it.
mmm tasty more please
Using the lower-powered 1.8 liter on this concept instead of the regular 170hp 2.0 liter makes it a pointless exercise. A fully loaded Miata with power retractable hardtop, full interior including leather and climate control, and probably even with the automatic transmission, would kill this thing on anything except maybe a parking lot autocross course. The lower weight doesn’t even begin to make up for the lack of power.
“Seat space is a matter of opinion.”
Not if you actually tried it. I tried a Miata of a few years ago, maybe the new one has more room, but that one was ridiculously tight for my 6′ 1″, 200 lbs body (with legs a little longer than my height corresponds to). I’m sure I could tolerate driving a few blocks or a few miles, but not a trip of any length.
” Not much worse than a Z4, whose headliner ends two inches from my (much lower than six foot) eyebrows.”
I have not tried any Zs, but would be very surprised if they are that tight, and given that m any who buy them are fairly big and tall people too.
And the comparison with the Yaris: The closed car has a huge advantage over a convertible of the same weight. It is simple mechanics-structures calcs. There is no way an open tin can can compete with a closed one of the same size in strength and esp. torsional rigidity. Even ultra-expensive convc like the RR Corniche would wallow and twist. That’s why most serious makers’ convertibles are 400-600 lbs HEAVIER than their equivalent coupes and sedans, see the MErc E class of the 90s etc.
The sad thing is, this is a Miata that I could drive! At 6’4″, the windshield frame on the standard Miata is level with my eyes…
“That’s why most serious makers’ convertibles are 400-600 lbs HEAVIER than their equivalent coupes and sedans, see the MErc E class of the 90s etc.”
Actually, most convertibles are heavier than their coupes because they took a coupe and chopped the roof off of it and therefore had to add several hundred pounds of bracing to make it not “wallow and twist”. The Miata is designed to be a convertible from the start, the entire car is designed to not need additional reinforcements for the lack of a roof from the beginning. If Mazda made a pure hardtop version of the Miata it would be a heavier car than the convertible version.
“Using the lower-powered 1.8 liter on this concept instead of the regular 170hp 2.0 liter makes it a pointless exercise … The lower weight doesn’t even begin to make up for the lack of power.”
Good point, but imagine yourself sitting in the passenger seat of this thing, telling all this to the driver as you fly through, say, the Corkscrew. You’d say your piece, then a few seconds later, the grinning driver would shout over the roaring wind: “WHAT?”
Point is, some things could be awesome even if the numbers don’t make sense. Everything changes when you take away the windscreen.
Autosavant :
Miatas are designed as roadsters from the get-go so ridgidity is inherent in the chassis, not added on later. There would be no weight savings in a hardtop version. I’ve driven a 2006 miata and Yaris. The Yaris has the steering feedback of a Daytona 500 arcade machine.
I’m guessing most of the NC’s weight is in the high strength steel used in the chassis. Someone I met who preps track miatas mentioned the front frame rails are far stiffer than even the S2000.
I like the idea of “ultralight” sports car and I mostly like the result but I’m having trouble picturing Mazda actually selling it without a windshield. I’m having particular trouble picturing Mazda selling it to me without a windshield.
Stick the windshield back on, put the original engine back in and send it to showrooms.
I like the Mazda front-end better than the Chevy slack-jawed grin or Audi’s jaw-dropped look of astonishment.
Well you could do that just by removing the windshield and putting a racing suspension package on a regular Miata and selling it that way. I’m not saying it isn’t fun to drive, or even that it isn’t even MORE fun to drive than a regular Miata… I’m just saying they went through all of that trouble to lower the weight to *improve performance* then they sabotaged the whole thing by using the lower powered engine.
“Miatas are designed as roadsters from the get-go”
True,
” so ridgidity is inherent in the chassis, not added on later.”
Also true.
” There would be no weight savings in a hardtop version. ”
There would definitely be significant (%-wise) weight savings if you designed a separate and identically dimensioned COUPE.
“I’ve driven a 2006 miata and Yaris. The Yaris has the steering feedback of a Daytona 500 arcade machine.”
I have driven mid-90s corolla rentals that were plenty fast but also had an awfully light and imprecise steering feel. It is no coincidence some call the Lexus Flagship the LS 460 the “Buick LS 460”.
“I’m guessing most of the NC’s weight is in the high strength steel used in the chassis. Someone I met who preps track miatas mentioned the front frame rails are far stiffer than even the S2000.”
This of course could change the above. If you use different materials, you sure can do better. But again, if Mazda used the same better parts in both a Miata and an independently developed Miata coupe, the coupe would be 100s of lbs lighter, because of its superior strength (closed can vs open can).
It is the same with other vehicles/vessels, a containership with its cut decks is far inferior to a similar oil tanker.
Nothing wrong with that picture at all. It’s comforting that the Miata engineers are still more obsessed with vehicle weight and handling rather than engine power.
Just say no to 4,000 lb “sports” cars.
Like some others, I’m having a hard time dealing with the appearance of the front. And like some others, at 6’3″ when I went roadster shopping there were a couple of cars that got scratched off my list as too small to be comfortable: the Miata and the S2000. I ended up with a Z3 (just barely).
For old guys of the old school, in the old days, there were two kinds of “driver’s cars”: Detroit iron muscle cars that had blazingly fast acceleration (but were either speed-limited or dangerously scary at high speeds by terrible aerodynamics) or “sports cars” that did not have blazingly fast acceleration but had comparatively better handling and had brakes that would produce more than one stop from speed in succession. These cars included the Porsche, the various Brit cars (Austin Healy 3000, Triumph, MG) and various Italians including the Fiat and Alfa-Romeo Spider. What this latter group had in common (in contrast to the muscle cars) was very light weight that made them entertaining to drive. Thanks to today’s engine technology, it is possible to get roughly twice as much HP from the same displacement as it was back in the day of multiple side draft carbs (e.g. 150 HP from the 3-liter 6 in the Austin-Healy 3000 vs. 300+ HP from the BMW twin-turbo’ed, direct injected 3-liter 6), so today’s sports cars enjoy straight line acceleration that would leave most of the muscle cars in the dust.
But if its driving fun in the real world that you’re after in an environment with speeds below 70 mph, then its hard to beat a light, nimble car even if not heavily powered.
Then, of course, there’s the Caterham 7 . . .
my 6 year old MR2 Spyder comes in only 21 pounds heavier (stock), and it has a top, side windows, side mirrors, and a windshield. One would think that 6 years later, Mazda would be able to find a way to reduce weight, not add it.
Your MR2 wouldn’t meet modern crash requirements. It’s safe enough, but ten years is a long time in chassis engineering circles.
My only real concern with the Miata (and the S2000, and just about anything in this class) is the passenger space. I can’t come close to fitting in this car, and it’s a challenge for anyone under six-four. There are a lot of taller people out there** and it’s sad that the lightest semi-affordable sportscar we can buy is the Z.
I like this car. It’s nifty. And the grin suits it. Unfortunately, it’s a chick car by virtue of the fact that only chicks can fit in it.
** and by the numbers, tall people earn more money
I’d hate to be the passenger – all you can do is hang on, eat bugs, and pray you don’t roll. If the sporting intention is to lose weight and keep the open cockpit motif, why not boot the passenger’s seat and gear, saving probably another 100 lbs?
We have a Miata in our family. My wife loves it, I love it. My kids love it. Oddly enough, it weighs the same as this slick show car.
I’d definitely rather drive this than an Aerial Atom.
Anyway, don’t let yourself be put-off by a car that you think your friends think is a chick car. Drive one. You’ll love it. You’ll love the repair bills (i.e., wear-n-tear items). You’ll love the insurance costs (i.e., State Farm thinks it’s a chick car too.)
You’ll also love the fact that you can drive it at 7/10ths and feel like your breaking the law. I tried that with my friend’s Cayman S and you can’t get it to 7/10ths.
Plus, you can buy used Miata’s all day long for $5k to $10k in very nice shape.
Mazda has done several of these M Speedster concepts over the years. Neat cars with lots of go-fast bits on them.
At 6 feet, 200 pounds I fit just fine in my first-generation Miata. The second-generation car is a little too tight (the steering wheel hits my thigh.) The third-generation car has lots of room (relatively speaking.)
The purists will say that the NC has lost something over the NA and NB, and maybe it has, but it’s still more fun than just about anything on the market. The grin is silly, but it doesn’t look as bad in person. A Miata is one of those cars that every enthusiast needs to sample at least once. I did, and now I own one.
The only thing wrong with that picture is that I’m not in it. I love that concept.
Autosavant :
September 17th, 2009 at 2:51 pm
Not if you actually tried it. I tried a Miata of a few years ago, maybe the new one has more room, but that one was ridiculously tight for my 6′ 1″, 200 lbs body (with legs a little longer than my height corresponds to). I’m sure I could tolerate driving a few blocks or a few miles, but not a trip of any length.
I have not tried any Zs, but would be very surprised if they are that tight, and given that m any who buy them are fairly big and tall people too.
The Z4 and Merc SLK feel absolutely claustrophobic compared to a Miata, for some reason. I don’t know why, but they do. And the Z4’s interior plastics aren’t any better than the spartan stuff in the Mazda… I know the Miata isn’t comfortable for some 6 footers, but there are many Miata owners over the magic number.
Want a cramped little vert? The Peugeot 206 is probably the worst I’ve ever seen… but I’ve never had the guts to sit in a Micra convertible.
And the comparison with the Yaris: The closed car has a huge advantage over a convertible of the same weight. It is simple mechanics-structures calcs. There is no way an open tin can can compete with a closed one of the same size in strength and esp. torsional rigidity. Even ultra-expensive convc like the RR Corniche would wallow and twist. That’s why most serious makers’ convertibles are 400-600 lbs HEAVIER than their equivalent coupes and sedans, see the MErc E class of the 90s etc.
As said… that’s because a convertible needs bracing because they’re not designed to be open-topped. The RR Corniche is a vert built in the very worst way… take a long car and cut half its structure out.
That said… the first generation Miatas did a whole lot of twisting… they had the torsional rigidity of wet spaghetti… which didn’t make them any less fun to drive.
That factor, by the way, is why “ultralight” for the NC Miata equals “stock” for the NA… because the NA Miata (and the aforementioned old MR) aren’t nearly as rigid or as safe.
Still, it’s perfectly possible to make an ultra-rigid car without a roof. Just look at your Caterham Super 7, Ariel Atom or Lotus Elise… which get along fine and dandy without one (though, yes, the hardcore Exige version is a tin-top)… It’s all in how you build the car and where you route the structural members… I remember Pagani as claiming that due to the way their car is designed, they lost no structural rigidity when making an open-topped version… and the NC is a [b]very[/b] well built car. Roof up or roof down (on the PRHT), no scuttle shake, even in hard cornering… unlike the old Miata, where you could hear the creaking between the top and the windshield as you drove down even a fairly level road.
Of course, you could make a coupe as rigid as the Miata weigh less, all other things being equal… but the Yaris is hardly equal to the Miata.
My first gen Miata weighs the same as this ridiculous concept… and makes 120 more horsepower. That’s what I call a superlight speedster.
Blame the ever-encompassing crash safety regulations that require thicker A pillars for rollover protection, multiple airbags and generally stronger structures. Sure, you can have your 1 ton roadster, but it’ll need to be rendered in aluminum, carbon fiber and other lightweight materials. Expensive lightweight materials.
Oh, and it’ll probably have all the crashworthiness of the original Miata, which will explain why it will never be street-legal, because it can’t meet current crash standards.
You’re better off buying an Ariel Atom or building your own 7 variant.
The regular Miata NC Miata is more practical than the MR2 Spyder, especially with the PRHT, and still amazingly light, but this thing is stupid.
The MR2 Spyder was very roomy (more than any generation Miata), and the only real thing it gave up to the NC Miata in safety was side airbags, which are a very significant feature to me in a small convertible, but a de-minimus wieght issue. The MR2 Spyder had a cutting edge high-strength steel chassis that, while introduced six years earlier, is probably on par with the NC.
The real reason the MR2 Spyder was able to weigh so much less than the Miata is the same reason a FWD car can weigh less – combined transmission and differential (transaxle), no driveshaft, and the chassis did not have to be reinforced to deal with driveshaft torsional stress.
The MR2 Spyder was impractical since it didn’t really have any storage space (I owned one), but it was less impractical than a car with no windshield.
It’s FAT! No PHAT, but FAT.
As a soon to be ex-owner of a 1999 Miata sport package and AC delete I’m not impressed with the weight of this car.
When I first saw the concept I was very exicted and decided that if it ever saw production I would buy one. At the time I read that it would be a Atom and 7 competitor. At almost 2200lbs it’s not. My 99 weights about 2250lbs and has more power!
My favorite part about the car is the lack of the windscreen. For a short period I even considered cutting it off the 99. I like the idea of pulling up to work driving on 4 wheels and wearing a helmet.
Put the 2.0L out of the current MX-5 in this car and it might be a winner. Drop another 200-300lbs out of it and charge less than 25K and I’ll buy one.
why is it smoking a doob?
At least weight reduction is part of Mazda’s corporate design philosophy. Two thumbs up for that!
Looks like a kid with a orange peel stuck between their teeth and lips. To goofy looking for me.
Chick car? If you know any girls that would put up with being a passenger in this car, much less buy one, I’d like their number. Can you imagine picking up a girl in this? “Here’s your helmet, love. It’ll keep your hair dry…since there’s no roof.”
“Chick car? If you know any girls that would put up with being a passenger in this car,..”
I have not researched this, but I do know plenty of young women that own Miatas and absoluitelyu love them.
I don’t doubt that they are a ton of fun to drive, but not for long trips, the kind of few miles, fair weather Sunday afternoon drives on twisty country roads at 50-60 MPH.
I may be able to fit well in the new model if they gave it an inch here and there, but I still would view it as very unsafe, esp. due to its being a convertible. I knew a yougn woman who, like a lot of other women, loved the Merc SL series. When she was a resident in a nearby hospital, she asked me to help her shop for a car, and we did see a small convertible at a TOyota dealership. DId Toyota make a Paseo (Tercel 2 door) convertible ever? If not, it must have been a Celica? ANyway, her comment is that even she, about half my size and probably no more than 5 3″, would not drive a convertible that small (but she would drive a corresponding sedan). She ended buying a new black Golf back then (96), even tho I warned her about their Reliability reputation in the USA.