But the doors!!! Will someone think of the DOORS!!!! :stirthepot:

No one can ever forget about the doors. :bowrofl:

MT tends to be wrong much of the time. Car and Driver / Road & Track have it slower so I'm more inclined to take their word.

What's up with the doors? The only thing I noticed about the 11' MX-5 I test drove was that it's a very well built car. I didn't notice anything odd about the doors

The Miata's are known for their superb door quality...........

Known fact, Captain America uses part of a Miata door as his shield.

:iagree:

I cautiously await a turbo version to see how well it does.

So it looks like this car will be a total slug after all.

I'm not really bothered by the acceleration #'s because it appears to be a blast to drive regardless. I guess some folks feel they need to prove something I don't get it. There's always going to be someone out there with a faster car. How fast your car is doesn't prove anything.

A lot of sports cars these days have so much power they aren't as rewarding to drive on a day to day bases. Sure if you have a racetrack in your back yard that's another thing but for daily driving a car doesn't need a 12:1 power to weight ratio or better to be fun to drive. There are plenty of good examples that demonstrate this but some don't seem to grasp this.

I bet this little BR-Z although much slower than most sports cars turns out to be one of the very best sports cars to drive. So if this is the case why would one dismiss a BR-Z just because it runs a ~ 15sec 1/4mile? What if it ran a 14,13 or 12 sec 1/4mile?

Why does it matter as long as its rewarding to drive? Just adding more power isn't likely to increase the fun to drive factor but likely make it's limits less approachable and hence less fun to drive on a day to day bases. People always suggest the MX-5 somehow needs more power but it really doesn't for the same reason.

A lot of sports cars have so much power and such high limits that their not even remotely attainable to approach 99% of the time unless you're at a race track going balls to the wall. Cars like the S2K, MX-5, RX-8, BR-Z,etc have limits not so high that you can actually explore them on a day to day bases. These cars can easily be drifted, ran through the gears, etc without breaking all kinds of laws / causing un wanted attention and so on.

Most sports cars these days have such high limits you can't come close to approaching them during normal everyday use. So as a result they're only really fun on a racetrack. It's nice to see companies build driver's cars vs. cars which are really quick but not much fun to drive on the street.

Just because it handles well doesn't make it a fun car. This car will not be leaving faster sports cars behind on the twisties or the track. I'm sure buyers will eventually regret the lack of power. I would spend a little more and buy a z or spend a little less and get a mustang.

+1

Agree completely. Case in point. Yesterday I drove my Z home via 2222 in Austin -- a twisty road, but quite busy during rush hour. It was fun, but mundane because of the heavy traffic.

Today I drove my normal daily driver -- Mazda 3 -- down the same road with the same traffic conditions. Did I go slower? Yes. Did it feel like I was going faster? Yes. I hate to admit it, but it was just funner in the Mazda under those sorts of conditions.

I love my Z but I'm replacing my Mazda with the BRZ. For my day to day commute in heavy traffic with bursts of acceleration down the twisties, It seems like a good choice.

has anyone thought that maybe it's slower in a straight line because of gearing...

this is true... I seent it

The 0.92g skidpad and 114 ft 60-0 braking aren't all that impressive either, especially for a car supposed to be a "handler". But hey, it exhibits awesome "control".

Really? Those numbers are far from bad, especially at this price point.