EVO - MX5 review

[doggfather]

Hi

I have been thinking of building a Westy for a while now and liked the idea of the MX5 kit....

Have just read EVO mag who gave it a bit of a slating....  

Has anybody driven one yet...are they really that bad??

Thanks

M

[oioi]

a different opinion from pistonheads and thoughts of other westie drivers here i havent driven one but as an ex mx5 owner i reckon its a crackin idea

[bill shurvinton]

I did think the comments about it being better to spend the money doing up an old MX5 a bit rough, but se7ens have a very variable history with EVO. A few years ago Caterham supplied a car with a broken de dion tube so it handled like a pig, and there were many instances of the car being send out with suspension in 'journo mode' with a lot of understeer dialled in. It would seem the new owners have learned from this. Not knowing what the brief was from evo I am not sure if westfield sent what they were asked to send, or missed a trick by not setting it up for track work.

At the end of the day EVO is a bunch of guys hooning around and breaking expensive cars that aren't theirs. Up to you if you believe what they write.

[doggfather]

Thanks guys, your informed comments have kept me interested!

[amc_black]

The Westie was being compared to vehicles which are much more expensive and powerful in the majority. When I read the report I was annoyed that Westfield had not supplied a more focused vehicle to compete with the R400/Atom.

The MX5 SDV Kit is a top choice and in my eyes was over-shadowed by incomparable machinery.

[Guest]

Since Westy's are so adjustable, it would be good if the factory and EVO got together with the factory model and tested what was needed to improve the handling.  If I remember correctly the demo car is set up very softly with no ARB's.  I suspect that a big difference could be made for not a lot of ££'s.

[Muttleys V8]

The Westie was being compared to vehicles which are much more expensive and powerful in the majority. When I read the report I was annoyed that Westfield had not supplied a more focused vehicle to compete with the R400/Atom.

The MX5 SDV Kit is a top choice and in my eyes was over-shadowed by incomparable machinery.

Agree with what Andy has said, I could not believe that they put the Mazda Westy against all those other hi performance cars.  It was on a kicking to nothing!!

I have driven the Mazda Westy, not super quick, but for a 8K summer car, on a budget, worth the money and easy to get a charger from the states to make it go quicker!

[MVS]

I tend to agree that it MX5 SDV was not really a comparable car. The Sport 2000 or 2000s factory cars would have shown some of the more expensive machinery up possibly, and would have fitted the test better.

I have my suspicions that some of these magazine 'journos' & editorial/management are in the pocket of some manufacturers, but then I am a suspicious, cynical, Yorkshireman  

[lespaul]

Track video here

Think the test was a little unfair as the cheapest Caterham was over twice the price of the Westfield (I'm sure you could get the SDV to out handle and out perform the 1.6 Caterham for less than the £8k price difference, but thats not the point of the SDV), even a 1.4 Classic costs more than the SDV.

Still nice to see some 7's in the press though  

Darren

[Ian Podmore]

The Westie was being compared to vehicles which are much more expensive and powerful in the majority. When I read the report I was annoyed that Westfield had not supplied a more focused vehicle to compete with the R400/Atom.

The MX5 SDV Kit is a top choice and in my eyes was over-shadowed by incomparable machinery.

I raised this very issue with Julian Turner a few months back, basically saying that it was disappointing as an owner to read negative press reviews about the marque.

The factory don't accept every request from journo's / mags, they do consider them first.  I think in this case though, the use of the MX-5 donor as the £8k wild card with Evo didn't work out very well. Would have much prefered to see a 2000S do battle against the Caterham and Atom.

[pistonbroke]

Dont see much between the two on the track video

Thought the Caterham was a bit tail end happy  

Did it say what tyres where being used and if they where both on the same rubber ?

[nikpro]

Can see the Caterham is using Avon ZV3's and pressume the Westfield would have been the same as they are standard fit by the factory.

[Martin Keene]

When they tested the MX5 SDV, as a first drive, they were very impressed with it. Unfortunately it was outclassed by better, and much more expensive, machinery in this test.

Although that said, I'd agree with what Lespaul said, start with the £8k Westfield, spend say £3-4K on go faster bits like better brakes (no doubt the are thousands of options for an MX5) better dampers, maybe wide track it Westfield make it for the MX5, maybe you might even get a supercharger kit in that £3-4k as well. £12k spent, £4k in your pocket compared to the bog basic Caterham, and I damn sure the Caterham would have it's pants taken down by the Westfield then.

I'd be interested to know if the MX5 SDV for the test was EVO's choice or Westfield's. EVO's I hope, because otherwise it was a missed oppourtunity...

[juansolo]

I'm torn here.  Because on one hand it hurts to think of an MX-5 being sacrificed to make a Westie (I own one of each by the way), on the other I can't think of more perfect SDV...  

Either way, the test is deeply unfair as it was not comparing like for like.  A SDV kit car vs one made of all modern, new parts.  Cost alone shouldn't have put them together as despite looking the same, they're built with entirely different briefs in mind.  One is designed to be cheap as chips for the enthusiast to build in his garage, the other is a focused track car.  Using the R300/SL would have at least been a little more fair, though in all honesty, it would still have killed the SDV for the same reasons.

But then this is Evo...  any written content has to be taken with a very large pinch of salt.

[ljsanders]

It makes me wonder what setup Westfield do to their factory built cars. After all Westfield sell these cars with the intention of driving them on the track and therefore they should be setup reasonably well for that purpose (as well as on the road).

I've just taken my car (which is a factory built speedsport) to Track Developments to get it corner weighted, height adjusted, and camber sorted out because its all over the shot!

Front is higher than the back, one of the fronts has -1 degree more camber than the other, one side was 30lb heavier than the other. Which meant it understeered for England and handled better in one direction than the other.

My previous car I bought as a demo Q plater from WF directly, also built by the factory was all over the shot too.

If you bought a tintop and it was like that, you would reject it so why should WF do the same?

No wonder they get slagged off in the press.

Lee