Modern Rides

2015 Mazda MX-5 Miata: One last ride with the top down

9/29/2014

Photo: Mazda

Although press photos of the 2016 Mazda MX-5 are already circulating and the company will officially debut the new roadster at the Paris Motor Show next week, buyers must wait patiently until next summer to get their hands on one. In the meantime, we decided to take the "old" 2015 version for a final back road spin on a warm September day. And we were left both charmed . . . and wanting.

There's no question that it's time to retire the old gal in favor of a new model, but positive things first. We can somewhat understand the appeal of the current Miata. The steering was taut and direct. The high-revving 167-horsepower engine, although buzzy, pulled just fine even though we'd like to see the power bumped up to around 200. The brakes were decent. The seats were fairly comfortable despite the thin bottoms and the interior overall fit like a glove, if a slightly undersized one. So there's still some fun factor left.

But this car just doesn't cut it in the modern world, where so many others have become so good. The six-speed manual was notchy and there was enough vibration up the shift handle to massage the palm of your hand at a stoplight. The suspension was somewhat jiggly on back roads and more sound insulation would have been appreciated. The interior dimensions are still too tight for those of us six feet or over. To drive more comfortably, we'd need to amputate the left arm and lose a few inches off the torso.

So if you must have an MX-5 right now, skip the new one, save some money and buy a lightly used version. And if you really want the feeling of an old MG, then buy an MG. As for us, we'll wait and see what the company debut in Paris has to offer.

We like the look of the 2016 Miata and the idea that Mazda has chosen to keep weight down. Beyond that, rumors about the new car are downright confusing. The MX-5 needs more power, but Mazda is said to reduce the new model's powerplant to 130 horsepower, with later plans to offer a larger engine (although no evidence of a turbo). Interior dimensions are said to be smaller when they should really increase to fit the taller drivers. A modern Miata trademark, the power retractable hardtop, has oddly been eliminated. So we eagerly await more information and clarification from Paris.

BY THE NUMBERS
Price: $23,720 (Sport)
Horsepower: 167
0-60: 6.1 secs (AutoGuide, 2014)
Curb weight: 2,480 lbs. (Sport)

TO LEARN MORE

Mazda

Car and Driver

Edmunds

2 Comments

Take Two: Hellcat's heft is a handicap vs. Z/28

9/22/2014

The Hellcat (Photo: Chrysler)

Before we leave the 2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat, we'd like to offer some closure on our contention that the car might be a little porky. We finally took one for a spin around the track at Monticello (New York) Motor Club a short time ago.

As we maneuvered the 707-horsepower Hellcat's long prow through the turns (sort of like captaining the Titanic), our fears were confirmed. This Dodge -- although an extremely nice piece for the money, inside and out -- is indeed a little on the plump side.

To back up our case, we use two pieces of evidence: 1) our track drive shortly thereafter of the comparatively lean and tossable Camaro Z/28, and 2) some dimension numbers that might shock you a bit.

Depending on whose specs you read, there's about a 300 to 600 lb. weight difference between the Chevy and the Dodge. Both the length and wheelbase of the Z/28 are several inches shorter than the Dodge, although the Chevy is still wider by a little over an inch. When you sit in the Z/28, you may notice the power bulge, but the hood and fenders then dip down to give the appearance of a smaller car. Behind the wheel of the Hellcat, you feel like a family of four could set up a dining table on the hood.

As a result, the Hellcat turned out to be no track car. There was little opportunity to use the gobs of reserve power and there was significant understeer as the Dodge plowed through the turns. If we owned this car, we'd want to live near a drag strip or own an abandoned airfield because, to us, the Hellcat is more of an old-school muscle car. Straight-line acceleration, burnouts and horsepower bragging rights are the top priorities.

The problem is that modern muscle machines should also handle. That's one reason why Ford has finally gone to an independent rear suspension on the Mustang and GM has done right by the Camaro's chassis. On the track, the Camaro was a lighter and far more balanced handler around the curves. Plus, the 505 horsepower is more than enough to make the Chevy appealing for street or track, assuming you don't mind losing to the Hellcat owner during those bench racing sessions.

The dimensions speak for themselves, with the Hellcat also bigger and heavier than an original 1970 Challenger. But the real surprise is that this Dodge is also porkier than even the full-sized Buick LaCrosse sedan. The Hellcat is about an inch longer, almost three inches wider and up to 400 lbs. heavier, so you can understand why it's a handful.

Yes, we like this new Dodge very much, but it is no track car. It needs to go on a diet. Until it does, we'll opt for a Z/28, even with a price tag that's $15,000 more.

Two interesting things we learned about the Hellcat:
1. Badging is so subtle that most of a pack of aggressive automotive writers walked right past the car without realizing what it was. (Look for the chrome "SUPERCHARGED" letters on each side.)
2. There are two separate ignition keys: one for you to put pedal to the metal and one for the valet that dumbs down the horsepower.

2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat: Too porky?

9/15/2014

The Camaro (Photo: GM)

We just finished reading Motor Trend's October issue comparo of the 2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat and the 2014 Chevrolet Camaro ZL1, and there are few surprises. MT, of course, has given top speed honors to the Dodge as the new leader in the American muscle car renaissance. "Never before has 580 hp felt so slow," says the magazine when putting up the Chevy against the 707-horsepower Challenger.

But what really surprises us is the idea that the Camaro could hit 0-60 in just .2 second (3.9 vs. 3.7) less than the Mopar and outhandle the Dodge in lateral acceleration (.99g average vs. .94). The Camaro tips the scales at 4,051 lbs. and the Dodge adds about another 400. Do the math and one might conclude that the Challenger is downright porky (almost up there with a Mercedes S-Class). But does it need to be?

In a recent piece comparing the current Challenger with a 1970 model, Hemmings noted that the earlier version weighed in at just 3,402 lbs. Yes, we know all about the addition of air conditioning, airbags, backup cameras and other assorted technological gizmos that have made cars heavier, but we just wonder whether Chrysler could do a better job of engineering the Challenger to the point where it just isn't a muscle car, but . . . ummm . . . a sports car. Maybe someone at Dodge should be consulting the folks at Subaru, Toyota and Mazda, all of whom have managed to turn out superb lighter-weight handlers in the form of the BRZ, FR-S and MX-5. (Imagine stuffing the Hellcat powerplant into a Miata?)

We have driven the ZL1 and are still waiting our turn for the Hellcat. The Camaro is one refined ride and Chevy has done extraordinary things with the chassis to make the ZL1 a real handler without taking away any of the Bad Boy attributes. The question is whether modern muscle car buyers want the Chevy's combination of power and handling or will settle for the old-school, straight-line rocketry of the Hellcat. Only the sales figures will tell the true story.

2015 Kia Cadenza: 'Audi-esque' ride for around $35K

9/7/2014

Photo: Kia Motors

Not long ago, we posted the idea that average, everyday new cars were getting nearly as good as the luxury models, save for the technological bells and whistles. Well, the near-luxury Kia Cadenza goes (mostly) to the heart of our argument.

We drove this model shortly after a spin in the ethereal Mercedes S550, so you can imagine we were already somewhat spoiled when we slid behind the Kia's wheel. The Cadenza, inside and out, looks and feels like a car worth more than its under-$35,000 base sticker. On smooth roads, power delivery from the 293-horsepower six was ample and satiny, with the shifts from the six-speed automatic barely noticeable . . . as if the car possessed a CVT. The ride was rock-solid, stable and very refined, almost European in nature. "Audi-esque," we would call it.

But when we hit the back roads and twisties, this was no Audi. Wind buffeting from the awkward sunroof was quite high. There was considerable jiggle from the rear, a case where stiffness was a liability. It's clear that Kia engineers are still trying to figure out the best balance between performance handling and high comfort, something the Germans learned years ago. (Although it must be said that the Cadenza isn't sold as a performance sedan.)

Still, if you want a softer luxo-highway tourer on a relatively modest budget, this may be the car for you. (It's little surprise that Motor Trend named the Cadenza best full-sized sedan for 2014.) For top-notch ride and comfort, and an overall feeling of quality at well under $40K, skip the A3 or CLA250 or Avalon or LaCrosse and head right down to your Kia dealer.

BY THE NUMBERS
Price: $34,900
Horsepower: 293
0-60: 6.3 secs (Motor Trend, 2014)
Curb weight: 3,670 lbs

TO LEARN MORE

Kia

Car and Driver

Edmunds

<<Previous

2015 Mazda MX-5 Miata: One last ride with the top down

Take Two: Hellcat's heft is a handicap vs. Z/28

2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat: Too porky?

2015 Kia Cadenza: 'Audi-esque' ride for around $35K

Author

Archives

Categories