2019 Mazda MX-5 Miata gets 181 hp (updated post #16)
#1
2019 Mazda MX-5 Miata gets 181 hp (updated post #16)
A power increase was shown in a NHTSA filing
Even though the current 2018 Mazda MX-5 Miata makes only 155 horsepower, our experience has shown that it's more than enough fun with its modest output. Still, if Mazda were to offer more, we wouldn't turn it down, and it appears that's exactly what will happen for the 2019 Mazda MX-5 Miata. Road & Track dug up a VIN filing from Mazda to NHTSA with information about the Miata for that model year. On one of the pages, it states that the 2019 Miata will have a 2.0-liter four-cylinder making 181 net brake horsepower.
That's a pretty big jump from 155 horsepower, nearly matching the larger 2.5-liter engine in the Mazda3 and Mazda6. It's also close in power to the estimates for the Skyactiv-X spark-controlled compression-ignition engine. But, based on what a journalist on Twitter posted, the 2019 Miata will continue to use a version of the existing spark-ignition Skyactiv-G engine. Apparently it will have a new cylinder head, be able to rev higher, and make more horsepower, though he didn't say how much more.
That's a pretty big jump from 155 horsepower, nearly matching the larger 2.5-liter engine in the Mazda3 and Mazda6. It's also close in power to the estimates for the Skyactiv-X spark-controlled compression-ignition engine. But, based on what a journalist on Twitter posted, the 2019 Miata will continue to use a version of the existing spark-ignition Skyactiv-G engine. Apparently it will have a new cylinder head, be able to rev higher, and make more horsepower, though he didn't say how much more.
#3
I have only driven a Miata once, one of those $50 (I think?) test drive gift cards. It's obviously a car that can be loved, like the S2000, Z3, etc. We need these cars with sticks to stay around. Not everyone wants a self driving automatic iPad lol
#4
I just did a test drive of a new MX5, it’s a beautiful and fun car. The power is adequate but I’m sure more power would not hurt it.
I would certainly buy one for a second car without reservation in regards to its power, shifter and overall driving experience it’s about the most fun car I’ve driven.
However, I don’t believe I’ll ever buy one due to it’s lack of interior room. I’m 6-2 and 203 lbs (+/-) was an owner of both first gen Z3 and S2000 both which fit tight but not as tight as the MX5. My head was one inch from the roof, was great with top down, but top up was claustrophobic. I didn’t have a spare inch in any direction.
Oddly enough that once I was inside the cockpit I was able to drive 100% trouble free.
I think the ideal size owner would be 6 foot or less and 180 lbs.
same day, I drove a BRZ which is not as nice to drive as the MX5 but I fit so much better that I am considering the BRZ instead even though it’s not quite as nice as the MX5.
I would certainly buy one for a second car without reservation in regards to its power, shifter and overall driving experience it’s about the most fun car I’ve driven.
However, I don’t believe I’ll ever buy one due to it’s lack of interior room. I’m 6-2 and 203 lbs (+/-) was an owner of both first gen Z3 and S2000 both which fit tight but not as tight as the MX5. My head was one inch from the roof, was great with top down, but top up was claustrophobic. I didn’t have a spare inch in any direction.
Oddly enough that once I was inside the cockpit I was able to drive 100% trouble free.
I think the ideal size owner would be 6 foot or less and 180 lbs.
same day, I drove a BRZ which is not as nice to drive as the MX5 but I fit so much better that I am considering the BRZ instead even though it’s not quite as nice as the MX5.
#5
Sort of different though in their goals. The Mazda one is leaning more towards performance, whereas the Toyota one is one of the worlds most thermally efficient engines for it's displacement. You'll see it paired with many upcoming hybrids.
#6
....and it's a blast to drive, just as it is, with only 148 ft-lbs. of torque, though the torque tends to be a little peaky for my tastes (you have to take it past 3500 RPM to get any significant response). I agree with rai, though, that more power wouldn't hurt it...or a re-tune of the engine for a lower-RPM torque peak.
#7
....and it's a blast to drive, just as it is, with only 148 ft-lbs. of torque, though the torque tends to be a little peaky for my tastes (you have to take it past 3500 RPM to get any significant response). I agree with rai, though, that more power wouldn't hurt it...or a re-tune of the engine for a lower-RPM torque peak.
Also somewhat low TQ numbers can be misleading due to final drive ratios, whereas the Boxster S gets to 80 MPH in 2nd gear that speed would be closer to redline 3rd gear with the MX5 or BRZ or S2000
Just looking at the specs:
S2000 Torque: 153 lb-ft @ 7500 rpm
MX5 Torque: 148 lb-ft @ 4800 rpm
BRZ Torque: 156 lb-ft @ 6400 rpm
can be argued that the MX5 has good low end TQ (least compared to the S2000 and the BRZ) 2L naturally aspirated engines. I would say that the S2000 at least is misleading because it's VTEC seems to give it a higher peak.
Last edited by rai; 03-02-18 at 12:36 PM.
Trending Topics
#8
Wouldnt thermally efficient also mean they translate more of the energy into more power and efficiency? As in getting more out of each atom of fuel? I could be wrong though.
#9
I'll leave that for someone who knows the topic better than I. What I meant was both engines while being of the same displacement, have different traits/biases. The Miata using an existing spark-ignition Skyactive-G (vs the new Skyactiv-X spark-controlled compression ignition) engine, updates the cylinder head, allowing it to rev higher and make more power for this upcoming model year. The new Toyota one is meant to be married to a hybrid system and includes a larger valve angle and a heat recovery system that reduces energy losses in the coolant and exhaust systems. There are laser-clad valve seats for improved air/fuel mix, mixing port and direct injection depending on load for better fuel efficiency and reducing friction loss. From what I understand the '169'horsepower it produces is capped so torque rises across the entire rev range. This all adds up to more economical hybrid units, and due to the better thermal performance, allows more power to be drawn from the battery under acceleration. I see what you're getting at though, and I'm sure future Toyota powertrains will implement new tech that improves the power density.
#10
That does not mean that you can keep providing and burning more fuel in the 2.0-litre Dynamic Force and always get 40% of that power out. You may be able to burn more fuel in that engine (by forced induction perhaps) and get more than 169 hp, but efficiency starts to drop below 40%. For example, a supercharger places mechanical drag on the engine to spin the compressor, so some efficiency is lost to mechanical drag; increasing the redline would also increase mechanical friction due to the higher speed of the pistons. But spin the engine too fast or pump in too much air, and the operating temperature increases to the point when the engine reaches its maximum operating temperature. One way to reduce operating temperature is to burn richer (pump in more fuel than absolutely necessary); this reduces efficiency (increases fuel consumption).
Mazda has not yet said how it intends to increase the power output of the MX-5 but we can speculate on how Mazda could increase the breathing ability of the engine (pump in more air and you increase the amount of fuel that can be burned). But thermal efficiency of the engine very likely drops much below 29%: burning more fuel does not give you a straight line increase in power output.
#11
I don't mean to hate on Mazda, but Honda had a 2.0 liter naturally aspirated 4 cylinder that came out in 1999 with 240hp. 20 years later and the best you can do is 181hp for your flagship car????
I know Miatas have never been about the hp, but IMO they should at least offer a "base" car and a "Mazdaspeed" car that will run a mid to low 13 second quarter mile time. That isn't even fast in this day and age, but I think they could reach that goal with a real naturally aspirated 4 cylinder screamer with 240-260hp, aka S2000 territory. The light weight chassis of the current Miata is superior to the S2000, if Mazda could come up with an engine like the S2000's, man it would be game over in the sports car market.
Main thing I think Mazda is afraid of doing is making the Miata too expensive. If it has the muscle/grip, I'd say price it above $40k. A special engine along the lines of that S2000 engine would be worth the price increase IMO.
I know Miatas have never been about the hp, but IMO they should at least offer a "base" car and a "Mazdaspeed" car that will run a mid to low 13 second quarter mile time. That isn't even fast in this day and age, but I think they could reach that goal with a real naturally aspirated 4 cylinder screamer with 240-260hp, aka S2000 territory. The light weight chassis of the current Miata is superior to the S2000, if Mazda could come up with an engine like the S2000's, man it would be game over in the sports car market.
Main thing I think Mazda is afraid of doing is making the Miata too expensive. If it has the muscle/grip, I'd say price it above $40k. A special engine along the lines of that S2000 engine would be worth the price increase IMO.
#12
That engine, though, if you remember, had one of the silliest torque-curves I ever saw. It was basically motorcycle-RPMs or nothing. In its first year, redline was 9000, peak HP at 8600, and peak torque at 7600.
#13
Furthermore, to get any real motive force you'd have to drive it like you stole it. How fun is that in daily stop and go traffic??
#14
Besides you are doing it wrong if you primarily drive your S2000 or Miata in stop/go traffic or commuting all the time. Its a fun 2nd car, they are IMO a bit to impractical, noisy and a bit unsafe(nothing like being at eye level with the lug nuts on a semi truck) driving the grind to work every day. These cars are a bit like a motorcycle, if you live in a gridlocked city/suburbs, spend all your time commuting and don't have any time/fun empty roads to drive on, what's the point????
#15