A Realistic look at MX-3's

[wytbishop]

There has been a lot of talk over the years about "why didn't Mazda do this or that?" A better brake caliper would have been a big plus and was obviously readily available in the parts bin, but to do that they would have had to use a different steeering knuckle...extra couple of bucks per unit, different caliper...another extra couple of dollars per unit...and that's how it always is. When you're making a car that you plan to build a few hundred thousand of and you can save $5 per car...you save a lot of money and there are a lot of other ways that they chose to save.

That's how it is when you make a car. Unless you're planning on asking a lot more than they asked for an MX-3 in 1992-98'.

[DeadMaker]

Honda crx has double wishbone but still sucks on handle..My friend has a vtec model and i am saying to you from a first experience..

Your friend probably has it set up all wrong... Check out how an ST 90-91 civic Si gets set up for autocross...

In case you don't know crx had one of the worst chassis design can found in that time.IT COULD NOT HANDLE the 150hp vtec made.There are a lot of examples of warped chassis after a couple of years.

[stevesei]

I brought my GS back from a hulk to a fully functional daily driver; A/C, automatic seatbelts, vents, VRIS, and all. I love it, but I have to agree with Ryan on several things:

1. The McPherson supension. Mazda did a good job with this, and it works great up to about 8/10ths cornering. At 10/10ths it falls all over itself, with LOTS of roll, lots or power-off oversteer. I'm learning how to control it while autocrossing, but a straight no-TTL system would be easier to tune and predict.

2. Transmission. What a pain! only 189,000 MILES, not KM and the synchros are shot on 1st and 2nd! Seriously, the gear spacing between 1st and 2nd is poor, especially for autocrossing. Better 1-2-3-4 spacing and a taller 5th would help a bunch, but there is NO alternate 2nd gear set I can find. Help me out here!

3. Engine. The V6 is a little turbine of an engine! It's just too small. The 2.5 would have been a killer option, but I am convinced it would have been TOO good and would have killed both the MX-6 and the RX-7. If the 1.8 was being produced today, it would have 35mpg and 225hp from the factory. Does anyone have a good engine management package in his pocket, including variable cam timing? I guess not. Sob!

What can you say about the 1.6? It IS a grocery getter engine, but durable and sporty feeling; just not fast. The RS, with a 1.8 BP, a GS rack, and 4-wheel disks would be a pretty good autocrosser AND a good grocery getter.

4. Layout: The V6 is a jam-packed, difficult-to-work-on car. The 1.6s are much better. An extra inch or two of wheelbase would have made thing much easier to get to!

All of this is taking into account the fact we're talking about a 20 year-old car. I remember other 92 cars that couldn't get out of their own way, and that handled like total rubbish. the early Fiero comes to mind, not to mention most mustangs sold up to this year; see how fast you go with a 92 VW GTI compared to the MX-3.

Like I said, I love my MX-3, faults and all. It's an emotional thing, but based on enough fact to be rational; sort of like dating a supermodel and finding out she's the girl next door and a good cook to boot!

[Nd4SpdSe]

I am convinced it would have been TOO good and would have killed both the MX-6 and the RX-7.

I've been saying the same thing for years, most people don't see it that way, say it doesn't make sence.

If the 1.8 was being produced today, it would have 35mpg and 225hp from the factory. .

Perfect Example:
B3 1324cc cast iron 4cyl found in the Mazda 121/Ford Festiva
1988: 63hp, 73tq
1991: 73hp, 80tq

30 Years Of Development Later:

Mazda Skyactiv-G, Direct Injected, High Compression, Variable Valve Timing All Aluminum 1.3L:
83hp, 83tq

However:

1991 Ford Festiva @1742lbs : 42mpg (38mpg corrected, but many report 40mpg, some even over 50!)

2012 Mazda Demio Skyactiv @ Approx 2306lbs (Mazda2 weight, should be less with a smaller, lighter motor and trans): 71mpg

[MrMazda92]

I think you are pretty spot on with your first post Ryan.

I disagree about the wiper spray nozzles though... I'm going to be filling mine with window de-icer and finally getting some real use out of it. First I'll have to find the reservoir... Hmm.

I agree with you on the stock tune as well... Honestly, I think the K8 has far more potential than most people are willing to consider. I haven't been messing with you guys when I say I want to build one... I really do. Maybe you could help me out with that, I have a feeling you would enjoy the challenge as much as I.

The interior is utterly amazing, but you did leave one thing out I feel is important. Road noise is the one downside I find about the interior of the car, it simply doesn't stop a thing from reaching your ears. Other than that, you and Mark have it dead on about the seats being comfortable and the view/visibility both in and outside of the car.

I also find the Prelude and MR2 attractive cars, although the 240 never appealed to me. Part of that could be that for every 3 Civics I see, there's a 240 thrown in... Not as annoyingly overpopular, but I definitely see them around. 3rd would be the Blue Subarus with the whale tail and fartcan... The new Civic? I think so...

[Dark_Rider2k3]

I also agree about it being an MX-6/RX-7/Miata killer. They didn't need it competing with their top guys, hence the downgraded stuff. This was made to simply be a more sporty looking grocery getter.

[Josh]

Ryan,

I agree with just about everything. I think that with the modern tech in steel, if Mazda reproduced this car in modern metals it would be more rigid and lighter.

I feel that for a 2400lb car the brakes are more than adequate. The RS drums.... SUCK for sure. after a couple small upgrades to the brakes (ss lines, GS master cyl, Hawk pads, and V/S rotors) the cars braking over OE was greatly improved.

Although you are correct on the Honda duel A arm design, I like the McPherson strut better! Truth is I went from driving my RX-8 with full MS coils and swaybars, to riding in Tunes67's restored OE GS on 15's, and it astounds me at the feel and driving differences. Although the duel A arm is a better design the driving feel is comparable, even to that of new cars (at least in a straight line )

[MrMazda92]

I think a KL MX-3 would have killed MX-6 sales as well. The Miata and the RX-7 are another story entirely... "Roadster" and "Rotary" mean more to some people than the car itself. The idea of standing out in a crowd, that's what they are looking for(they being the majority, not the niche group who actually care about performance)

I agree wholeheartedly on the MX-6 though, the MX-3 would have obliterated the sales of the 6.

[DeadMaker]

Josh with your awd mx3 you can't have any complain about handling..I am sure it can it be compared with rx8 or s2000 isn't that right?

[Josh]

Yah, I dont have any complaints about my car really at all. Other than I wish I had done my swap with 4Tec drive train rather than the GTR. With my new drive shaft and 2 way LSD in the rear it should be fun in the twisties.

IMO - the GS should have come with a 2.5 and the RS should have some with the BP would have gotten almost the exact same fuel economy in both and had more power to boot.

[DeadMaker]

Yea exactly..No need for a bore b6 version in the market..But in the other hand we are lucky that we have the choice of DIRECT swap in b and k series..So in that way you can tune your car in a monster with OEM choices.

[Nd4SpdSe]

I liked the braking system. GS discs with just upgraded pads and rotors I was extremely happy with. I did a run witht he Ottawa crew the first time when my car was totally stock, it was white-knucked driving and I heated the rotors so bad they turned blue, but never warped. I barely remember what it was like back then, but loved the new setup.

I could just imagine back in the day, I betcha engineers knew how easy it was swappable and even the guys on the line, watching the K8 go into the Mx-3 and the KL go into the others, I'm sure there was plenty of lightbulbs going off at the Mazda plan in those days. Surprised the president or chief designer didn't get one made for himself, lol.

[Ryan]

I don't mean to say the braking design doesn't do its job, it does, its just a crappy design.... maintenance wise, primarily, I guess.

[MrMazda92]

I'll say, and that cursed grating. The rattle clips are a joke, no matter what I do my brakes are noisy.

[Sleeper6]

I'll say, and that cursed grating. The rattle clips are a joke, no matter what I do my brakes are noisy.

Really? I never have a problem with noise from my brakes but I guess that may have more to due with what your putting in there. All I run is delco pads and cheapo rotors but I keep everything lubed.

Also on a side note, maybe this is just a result of the 2.5 swap or just from driving the 1.6l around but I noticed a major increase in pedal pressure with the new motor. Im thinking a vacuum difference at the booster but Ive always been appreciative of my brakes and found the tires to give way before the pedal.