Miata List Archive

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: miata (David)

Thanks for your great review Luis !

While we all have different opinions I respect that you took the time to
explain the reasons for your opinions. I would love to have a day of
driving all 4 of those cars.

When I watch shows like Top Gear and Fifth Gear I'm green with envy.

David was lucky to get his S2000 cheaper than a Miata, We actually had a
deposit down on the S2000 when it came out, but our MX-5 was 2/3s of the
price for the same options and the S2000 really wasn't worth the price
change over to "upgrade".

I can't wait to see the new MX-5, I'd love to see it with a little more
power (2lt?), lighter (less than 1000 kgs?), and a fraction larger on
the inside (more leg room, seats lower to the floor and adjustable
lumbar support) . I know a few taller drivers who would buy the first
roadster they could comfortably fit in. I'm only 6'2" and i'm hoping I
can find / afford some seats that will give me a little more helmet room
yet fit my lard ass in our NB (and no, I don't want to modify the stock
seats). I don't really consider myself THAT tall, I have friends that
tower over me.

I think it is really hard for some Japanese to fathom the requirements
or a "western" body frame (and we're getting fatter too), when I was 9
my father tried to buy me a kimono in Japan, the sales assistant was
blown away when he said I was taller than she was.

- Dave.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: ftl.realbig.com/pipermail/miata/attachments/20050220/8c3af81b/attachment.html

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


I don't recall anyone mentioning it in this thread yet, so I'll add it:
the S2000 has chain/gear driven cams as opposed to the crummy belt drive
used for the Miata cams. That's a significant advantage IMHO. I have not
yet heard of any significant technical improvements for the next
generation Miata - it seems to be all about adding frills, tacky body
styling, ridiculously oversized wheels and cheap-looking lights :-/
I read somewhere that Nissan makes a 2.0l I6. I wish we could get
interesting engines from Mazda - I'd pay for that kind of improvement.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: cwelbon (Chris Welbon)

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 14:32:27 -0800, Pete Naylor <(email redacted)> wrote:
>
> I don't recall anyone mentioning it in this thread yet, so I'll add it:
> the S2000 has chain/gear driven cams as opposed to the crummy belt drive
> used for the Miata cams. That's a significant advantage IMHO. I have not

All of Honda's other engines have belt-driven cams. Even the older
DOHC VTEC engines (think Integra GS-R) had belt-driven cams. For the
lower MSRP of a Miata (compared to an S2000) I'm more than happy with
belt-driven cams.

> I read somewhere that Nissan makes a 2.0l I6. I wish we could get
> interesting engines from Mazda - I'd pay for that kind of improvement.

Yeah, it's too bad Mazda doesn't make something compact, cool and
interesting like a rotary....

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: cwelbon (Chris Welbon)

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 14:32:27 -0800, Pete Naylor <(email redacted)> wrote:
>
> I don't recall anyone mentioning it in this thread yet, so I'll add it:
> the S2000 has chain/gear driven cams as opposed to the crummy belt drive
> used for the Miata cams. That's a significant advantage IMHO. I have not

All of Honda's other engines have belt-driven cams. Even the older
DOHC VTEC engines (think Integra GS-R) had belt-driven cams. For the
lower MSRP of a Miata (compared to an S2000) I'm more than happy with
belt-driven cams.

> I read somewhere that Nissan makes a 2.0l I6. I wish we could get
> interesting engines from Mazda - I'd pay for that kind of improvement.

Yeah, it's too bad Mazda doesn't make something compact, cool and
interesting like a rotary....

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: carguy (David Bennett)

>
> Yeah, it's too bad Mazda doesn't make something compact, cool and
> interesting like a rotary....

And put it in something small like a Miata

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: miatabill (Bill Kellenberger)

I may be wrong, but I think they told me that my Acura RSX has a chain
instead of a belt.

At 04:42 PM 2/21/2005, Chris Welbon wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 14:32:27 -0800, Pete Naylor <(email redacted)> wrote:
> >
> > I don't recall anyone mentioning it in this thread yet, so I'll add it:
> > the S2000 has chain/gear driven cams as opposed to the crummy belt drive
> > used for the Miata cams. That's a significant advantage IMHO. I have not
>
>All of Honda's other engines have belt-driven cams. Even the older
>DOHC VTEC engines (think Integra GS-R) had belt-driven cams. For the
>lower MSRP of a Miata (compared to an S2000) I'm more than happy with
>belt-driven cams.
>
> > I read somewhere that Nissan makes a 2.0l I6. I wish we could get
> > interesting engines from Mazda - I'd pay for that kind of improvement.
>
>Yeah, it's too bad Mazda doesn't make something compact, cool and
>interesting like a rotary....
>_______________________________________________
>Miata mailing list
>(email redacted)
>ftl.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/miata

Bill Kellenberger
billandcarol.jetsue.com

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: keith (Keith Tanner)

The Miata is intended to be a cheap sports car, not a technological
showcase. It has never been cutting edge. The basic specs of the NA read
like a Fiat - but those basic parts work. The S2000 is a bit of a "halo
car" for the Honda range.

The next generation Miata will be receiving a completely different engine
than the current one. I'm waiting for the official announcement, but if
it's the Duratec 2.3 then there's a lot of potential there. Cosworth makes
roller-barrel throttles for them and produce 260 hp with their highly tuned
variants!

Mazda used to sell a miniature V6 in the MX3. 1.8l, I think. The public
ignored it. I guess maybe they're listening to the market.

Keith

At 03:32 PM 2/21/2005, you wrote:

>I don't recall anyone mentioning it in this thread yet, so I'll add it:
>the S2000 has chain/gear driven cams as opposed to the crummy belt drive
>used for the Miata cams. That's a significant advantage IMHO. I have not
>yet heard of any significant technical improvements for the next
>generation Miata - it seems to be all about adding frills, tacky body
>styling, ridiculously oversized wheels and cheap-looking lights :-/
>I read somewhere that Nissan makes a 2.0l I6. I wish we could get
>interesting engines from Mazda - I'd pay for that kind of improvement.
>_______________________________________________
>Miata mailing list
>(email redacted)
>ftl.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/miata

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: cwelbon (Chris Welbon)

On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 16:49:00 -0600, Bill Kellenberger
<(email redacted)> wrote:
> I may be wrong, but I think they told me that my Acura RSX has a chain
> instead of a belt.

That's true. I'd forgotten about that. And that means the current
Civic Si does too.

But the point remains: chains are expensive. And as Keith said, the
Miata is supposed to be affordable fun, not a halo car (like the S2000
is for Honda and the RX8 with its "interesting" engine is for Mazda).

And anyway......I'd rather push my Miata if (BIG if) a belt broke,
than drive one of those Hondas.... :)

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: ian (Ian McCloghrie)

On Feb 21, 2005 Keith Tanner wrote:
> Mazda used to sell a miniature V6 in the MX3. 1.8l, I think. The public
> ignored it. I guess maybe they're listening to the market.

I don't really see the point to a 6-cylinder that's less than 2
liters. Compared to a similar displacement 4-cylinder it's heavier
and has 50% more valvetrain parts to break, for roughly the same power
and torque.

As for belts vs chains -- when you've got an interference engine, I
can see the point to a chain. For a non-interference one like the
Miata, what's the big deal?

--Ian

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: keith (Keith Tanner)


>And anyway......I'd rather push my Miata if (BIG if) a belt broke,
>than drive one of those Hondas.... :)

That brings up one thing - most Honda engines are interference engines. If
the chain/belt breaks, it's very messy. I expect quite a few Civics have
been junked due to this. It's a good reason for a chain. On the Miata's
non-interference engine, if the belt breaks then you simply have an
unscheduled timing belt change to do.

I'm a big fan of Honda's engineering. I once owned a 1993 Civic CX. It was
the base model - the only two options were a passenger side mirror and
floor mats. I put the radio in myself. The quality of engineering in that
car was spectacular, particularly when you consider that it was the
cheapest one you could buy. Great little engine that was efficient and
willing, even if it didn't make much power. I wish I still had it. Mazda
doesn't have the same level of expertise in engines (Honda IS the world's
largest producer of engines, after all) but they're good at making the
relatively mundane work well. Teri at Flyin' Miata is upset because we sold
the turbo Protege5 and bought an M3. She liked to drive the Protege more!

Keith

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: miata (Mr. Photo)

Bill Kellenberger wrote:

> I may be wrong, but I think they told me that my Acura RSX has a chain
> instead of a belt.
>
> At 04:42 PM 2/21/2005, Chris Welbon wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 21 Feb 2005 14:32:27 -0800, Pete Naylor <(email redacted)>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > I don't recall anyone mentioning it in this thread yet, so I'll add
>> it:
>> > the S2000 has chain/gear driven cams as opposed to the crummy belt
>> drive
>> > used for the Miata cams. That's a significant advantage IMHO. I
>> have not
>>
>> All of Honda's other engines have belt-driven cams. Even the older
>> DOHC VTEC engines (think Integra GS-R) had belt-driven cams. For the
>> lower MSRP of a Miata (compared to an S2000) I'm more than happy with
>> belt-driven cams.
>
HAHAHAH woooh! That's a hoot! Having owned a number of
high-performance Hondas (motorcycles specifically) with timing
chains.. I'll be shocked if those S2000's make it 20,000 miles if
40,000 before the tensioner fails and they start rattling like a box of
silverware. Thing is.. most of those S2000 owners won't even notice it
until the thing breaks and the whole thing comes to a grinding halt.

Compared to *ANY* manufacture except Honda I'd tend to agree with you
comparison. :)


--
- David
Bremerton, WA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Photography: fotoveloce.com
Blog: fotoveloce.blogspot.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.2.0 - Release Date: 2/21/2005

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: miata (Mr. Photo)

Keith Tanner wrote:

>
> Mazda used to sell a miniature V6 in the MX3. 1.8l, I think. The
> public ignored it. I guess maybe they're listening to the market.

Hm.. speaking of the MX3 V6. Anyone ever try to get any power out of
one and taking this to the next step, anyone try to stuff one in a Miata?


--
- David
Bremerton, WA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Photography: fotoveloce.com
Blog: fotoveloce.blogspot.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------



--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.2.0 - Release Date: 2/21/2005

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: carguy (David Bennett)

>>
> HAHAHAH woooh! That's a hoot! Having owned a number of
> high-performance Hondas (motorcycles specifically) with timing
> chains.. I'll be shocked if those S2000's make it 20,000 miles if
> 40,000 before the tensioner fails and they start rattling like a box
> of silverware. Thing is.. most of those S2000 owners won't even
> notice it until the thing breaks and the whole thing comes to a
> grinding halt.

You're gonna be very disappointed then cause they have been running
trouble free for a long time and a lot of miles now. That isn't even a
complaint that has raised it's head on the forums at all!

Bout the only issues you hear of are a #4 lean condition and some
synchro issues. Sound familiar?!

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: matthew.king (Matthew King)

Nah, the usual trick was to throw it out and swap in a 2.5 V6. Same basic
architecture, much more power.

I believe there were attempts, but no success, in fitting it to the MX-5.
Didn't translate to RWD well at all.

At 11:06 AM 22/02/2005, Mr. Photo wrote:
>Keith Tanner wrote:
>
>>
>>Mazda used to sell a miniature V6 in the MX3. 1.8l, I think. The public
>>ignored it. I guess maybe they're listening to the market.
>
>Hm.. speaking of the MX3 V6. Anyone ever try to get any power out of
>one and taking this to the next step, anyone try to stuff one in a Miata?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: ftl.realbig.com/pipermail/miata/attachments/20050222/14717548/attachment.html

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


David Bennett wrote...

> >Yeah, it's too bad Mazda doesn't make something compact, cool and
> >interesting like a rotary....
>
> And put it in something small like a Miata

And get fuel economy on a par with the competition.

And earn a reputation for reliability/longevity like a Nissan/BMW/etc I6.

Chances are good that I wouldn't buy a Miata with a rotary engine. On the
other hand, the current buzzy little I4 with belt driven cams is not
really good enough. It is okay in my 1990 model that I picked up really
cheap, but we're now 15 years on and Mazda have done nothing of interest
with the engine. This is a niche where the engine character really
matters.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Bill Kellenberger wrote...

> I may be wrong, but I think they told me that my Acura RSX has a chain
> instead of a belt.

>From what I've seen, the trend seems to be back to chain driven cams.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: matthew.king (Matthew King)

The sceptic in me heard that's because it's easier to make a chain last the
life of the warranty period. After that it's more expensive to replace, but
that's your problem, not theirs...


At 12:11 PM 22/02/2005, Pete Naylor wrote:

>Bill Kellenberger wrote...
>
> > I may be wrong, but I think they told me that my Acura RSX has a chain
> > instead of a belt.
>
> >From what I've seen, the trend seems to be back to chain driven cams.
>_

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Chris Welbon wrote...

> But the point remains: chains are expensive.

Sorry, but that simply isn't true.

> And anyway......I'd rather push my Miata if (BIG if) a belt broke,
> than drive one of those Hondas.... :)

You keep replacing those belts and pushing your car as the case may be -
I'd rather drive a new Miata with chain driven cams.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Matthew King wrote...

> The sceptic in me heard that's because it's easier to make a chain last the
> life of the warranty period. After that it's more expensive to replace, but
> that's your problem, not theirs...

The chain will generally last the life of the engine. Plenty of people
wind up paying the dealer for new belts outside of warranty - so as a
sceptic you'd have to wonder if that wasn't part of the motivation for
switching to belts in the first place. Now that people have experienced
the joys of broken belts and associated maintenance costs, we see the
chains coming back.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: keith (Keith Tanner)


> On the
>other hand, the current buzzy little I4 with belt driven cams is not
>really good enough. It is okay in my 1990 model that I picked up really
>cheap, but we're now 15 years on and Mazda have done nothing of interest
>with the engine. This is a niche where the engine character really
>matters.

I don't think I'd lay the blame on the belt-driven cams. That little Civic
motor of mine had a belt and it was a sweetheart. I'll agree that the
Miata's engine is the weak point right now. I was driving a Mazdaspeed this
morning and it's a nice, nice little car. Solid, good ride. Crap engine,
though, and who the heck thought that gearing was clever? Mazdas have
almost always had more chassis than engine, though. It's a refreshing
change from critters like the SRT-4.

Keith

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: abefm (Abraham Mara)

Sounds a bit over the top to me. Get me an engine with a nice power curve,
a few more ponies, better gas mileage, overbuilt to support hot rodding -
long before you change some part on the inside that I'll never see and won't
make any difference to the actual performance of the motor. That's just
buzz and hype. And I'll certainly take non-interfearance when I can get it.

The "Niche" that cares about tech bits is not the miata group - it's the Z4
group. Great, if you want satalite navigation. But I want a cheap
sportscar that packs a wallop.
-Abe.

-----Original Message-----
From: (email redacted) [mailto:(email redacted)] On Behalf
Of Pete Naylor


Chances are good that I wouldn't buy a Miata with a rotary engine. On the
other hand, the current buzzy little I4 with belt driven cams is not
really good enough. It is okay in my 1990 model that I picked up really
cheap, but we're now 15 years on and Mazda have done nothing of interest
with the engine. This is a niche where the engine character really
matters.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Mr. Photo wrote...

> HAHAHAH woooh! That's a hoot! Having owned a number of
> high-performance Hondas (motorcycles specifically) with timing
> chains.. I'll be shocked if those S2000's make it 20,000 miles if
> 40,000 before the tensioner fails and they start rattling like a box of
> silverware. Thing is.. most of those S2000 owners won't even notice it
> until the thing breaks and the whole thing comes to a grinding halt.

The early V4s had tensioner troubles - the worst that comes of it is noise
though. Since then Honda have gotten much better. Still, nothing beats
gear driven cams like the VFR used to have. Noise is actually one of the
reasons given by manufacturers when trying to justify use of belts - it's
a weak excuse though, because there are plenty of engines out there with
virtually silent cam chains.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Keith Tanner wrote...

> The Miata is intended to be a cheap sports car, not a technological
> showcase. It has never been cutting edge. The basic specs of the NA read
> like a Fiat - but those basic parts work. The S2000 is a bit of a "halo
> car" for the Honda range.

I agree with that - and I'm glad the Miata is priced the way it is.
However, using chain to drive the cam(s) is not a cutting edge technology
- it is old, affordable, and far better for the consumer. Lanchester
balance shafts aren't exactly high-tech anymore either.

> The next generation Miata will be receiving a completely different engine
> than the current one. I'm waiting for the official announcement, but if
> it's the Duratec 2.3 then there's a lot of potential there.

Yes, that'd be a very good fit for the Miata I think. Unfortunately I
wouldn't be surprised to see them use the 2.0 instead, and that engine is
still buzzy :-/ Time will tell.

> Mazda used to sell a miniature V6 in the MX3. 1.8l, I think. The public
> ignored it. I guess maybe they're listening to the market.

I ignore V6s myself, so I can't blame them. Why move up from 4 cylinders
to 6 if you're only going to get half the benefit?

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: Larry (Larry Alster)

In general chains stretch and make noise. In the past they didn't have
tensioners like a belt does.

Many years ago timing chains gears were designed to have plastic teeth in an
effort to quiet them down. Problem was the plastic teeth broke off when the
chains developed some slop. Nasty things happened when the pistons and the
valves assumed the same position.

I think belts are fine.


Larry

White Knight 1991 Crystal White #99 CSP
Silver Bullet 1992 Silverstone #17 EM FM I+ Turbo
Honey B 1992 Sunburst Yellow
Whooosh 2004 Titanium MazdaSpeed MX5

LowCountry Miata lowcountrymiataclub.net
Masters Miata
RAGS 074

----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Tanner" <(email redacted)>
To: "miata-list.miata.net" <(email redacted)>
Sent: Monday, February 21, 2005 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Miata] Mazdaspeed Miata vs. S2000 & The Next MX/Miata


>
>> On the
>>other hand, the current buzzy little I4 with belt driven cams is not
>>really good enough. It is okay in my 1990 model that I picked up really
>>cheap, but we're now 15 years on and Mazda have done nothing of interest
>>with the engine. This is a niche where the engine character really
>>matters.
>
> I don't think I'd lay the blame on the belt-driven cams. That little Civic
> motor of mine had a belt and it was a sweetheart. I'll agree that the
> Miata's engine is the weak point right now. I was driving a Mazdaspeed
> this morning and it's a nice, nice little car. Solid, good ride. Crap
> engine, though, and who the heck thought that gearing was clever? Mazdas
> have almost always had more chassis than engine, though. It's a refreshing
> change from critters like the SRT-4.
>
> Keith
>
> _______________________________________________
> Miata mailing list
> (email redacted)
> ftl.realbig.com/mailman/listinfo/miata
>

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Ian McCloghrie wrote...

> I don't really see the point to a 6-cylinder that's less than 2
> liters. Compared to a similar displacement 4-cylinder it's heavier
> and has 50% more valvetrain parts to break, for roughly the same power
> and torque.

I think the breakpoint is around 2.0 also. Even at lower displacements
though, the benefits are the same: better flow, less vibration and
increased smoothness. You might be surprised in these days of all
aluminum engines at the small difference in weight between an I4 and an
I6 (or a H4 and H6 for that matter). While peak torque and horsepower
might not be significantly different, availability through the rev range
would be very different indeed. Honda make an H6 and I think it is
wonderful.

> As for belts vs chains -- when you've got an interference engine, I
> can see the point to a chain. For a non-interference one like the
> Miata, what's the big deal?

The belts still break more frequently than a chain, and even when that
doesn't result in catastrophic damage, it is uh... inconvenient to say the
least. Changing the belts out on a regular schedule isn't exactly the way
I like to spend my time or money either - I'd rather be driving.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Keith Tanner wrote...

> I don't think I'd lay the blame on the belt-driven cams.

No - not at all. The belt-driven cams are a maintenance/reliability
weakness; the buzziness results from the cylinder configuration (and the
lack of counter-rotating balance shafts).

> That little Civic
> motor of mine had a belt and it was a sweetheart. I'll agree that the
> Miata's engine is the weak point right now. I was driving a Mazdaspeed this
> morning and it's a nice, nice little car. Solid, good ride. Crap engine,
> though, and who the heck thought that gearing was clever? Mazdas have
> almost always had more chassis than engine, though. It's a refreshing
> change from critters like the SRT-4.

I think you're right on the money there Keith. I may be the only early
Miata owner who doesn't really want more power though. The handling is
wonderful and I like the fact that it has just enough power to generate
oversteer. I like that I can wind the engine out all the time and really
feel like I'm squeezing the last bit of oomph out of it. I like M3s,
540is, S2000s etc but they all have a lot more power and a lot more
traction - the reality is that I couldn't drive any of them the same way
on the back roads in my area without becoming a real menace to other
drivers. The only time that I want a little more power is when I have a
passenger - the extra weight kills my fun. I wouldn't be opposed to a
little bigger engine - but I'm more interested in getting it to really
sing - smoothly and without vibration - than getting big horsepower. I
think the 1.8 Miatas seem less willing to rev than the 1.6s - hopefully
whatever larger displacement engine is put in the next generation Miata
will be better tuned for a satisfying sporty character (as opposed to just
being bigger and more powerful but less rewarding).

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Larry Alster wrote...

> In general chains stretch and make noise. In the past they didn't have
> tensioners like a belt does.

The only cam chains I've seen without tensioners were on pushrod V8s. In
that case the chain is so short that the tensioners really aren't needed.
Actually, in that case you really shouldn't be using a chain at all - the
cam and the crank are so close that you should be using gears.

> Many years ago timing chains gears were designed to have plastic teeth in
> an effort to quiet them down.
>
> Problem was the plastic teeth broke off when
> the chains developed some slop. Nasty things happened when the pistons and
> the valves assumed the same position.

Some were well implemented, others weren't.

> I think belts are fine.

They wear out and cause problems long before even the worst of the
domestic chain driven cam implementations. They generally complicate the
water pump replacement process too. I'll never buy a vehicle with
interference heads and belt driven cams - not a chance. I try hard to
avoid belt driven cams altogether. In the case of my 1990 Miata I made an
allowance because it was a cheap old toy which I regard as disposable. I
think anyone who plonks down $25k for a new car with belt driven cams is
being ripped off.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: ian (Ian McCloghrie)

On Feb 21, 2005 Pete Naylor wrote:
> Actually, in that case you really shouldn't be using a chain at all - the
> cam and the crank are so close that you should be using gears.

You can use a gear -- a friend of mine put one on his Mustang (5.0
pushrod motor). It was *incredibly* loud, sounded like a blower on
steroids.

> They wear out and cause problems long before even the worst of the
> domestic chain driven cam implementations. They generally complicate the

Chains are simple to make work in a pushrod motor because of the short
length. They're much harder to make work in an OHC motor because
they're huge, and they also add a bunch more rotating mass to the
motor. That said, they seem to have worked the bugs out of OHC heads
with chains (and made them sufficiently quiet that luxury car buyers
will buy them), so I suspect belts will be going away.

Seriously, how common are timing belt failures? Anecdotally, I only
know one person who's ever had one fail (on a Dodge Stealth/Mitsu
3000GT), and that was caused by an inept dealer mechanic.

--Ian

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: pete (Pete Naylor)


Abraham Mara wrote...

> Sounds a bit over the top to me. Get me an engine with a nice power curve,
> a few more ponies, better gas mileage, overbuilt to support hot rodding -
> long before you change some part on the inside that I'll never see and won't
> make any difference to the actual performance of the motor. That's just
> buzz and hype. And I'll certainly take non-interfearance when I can get it.

The timing belt issue does affect you - it isn't about performance it is
about maintenance hassle and reliability. As for the nice power curve
etc, we all want that (personally I think a 2 liter I6 would be terrific,
but a modern I4 with chain driven cams and balance shafts would also be
fine). We haven't seen any real improvement to the Miata in those
measures since 1990. It is still essentially the same old engine and that
is very disappointing. I don't know that I've heard of any significant
improvements in suspension either. Why would anyone buy the new Miata?
For the tacky oversized wheels?

> The "Niche" that cares about tech bits is not the miata group - it's the Z4
> group. Great, if you want satalite navigation. But I want a cheap
> sportscar that packs a wallop.

I wouldn't know about that Abe - I haven't taken surveys of Z4 owners like
you have. I have hung out on this list a while and it seems that the
Miata owners here do in fact care about the details of their cars that
give them the sporting character they love - so maybe it's just you that
would be happy with a 5 liter single cylinder Miata with drum brakes and
major engine work required every 3000 miles.

This read-only message was archived from a public mail list.
Mail From: miata (David)

> Nissan makes a 2.0l I6. I wish we could get
interesting engines from Mazda

That's the first I've ever head anyone complain about the timing belt.
Never realised it was an issue.

Wouldn't a belt have less rotating mass? So as long as it doesn't slip
it would be better?

Erm, Nissan have had a 2lt inline 6 for 15 years (or longer?), so what?

- Dave.