Just wondered if I'm totally alone in this opinion, or whether other people share this view? Is the MX5 a girls car? To me it has nothing manly about it. It looks like something advertised on telly for women (made by Tampax or lillets or someone). If Mazda claimed the car had wings it really woudn't surprise me. :)

The MG TF on the other hand, appeals to both sexes. The cars looks appeal to everyone. It manages to achieve what great sportscar design is about. Hell its lasted as a design much longer than the Mx5. So if Rover produces old men's cars (which they don't), then perhaps the press should point out that Mazda makes girls cars?

Yea suppose it is a girly car...the girls I know love their MX-5s...although I did see a geezer in a blue done-up mx-5...his rear wheel was out of alignment you could see the wheel wobbling... :yikes:
Yep the TF is a v.nice car, appeals to both genders...looks like a mini Aston-Marton.

In answer to the original question:

YES!!!!

What utter rubbish.

Any 2 seater convertable is associated with hairdressers. TF included. All of it in jest.

Although I prefer the look of the TF, the 5 unfortunately has the F and TF beaten hands down on handling.

Doesn't Barbie have a miata in pink?

I think any two seater convertible will be labelled a girls/hairdressers car, even the F and TF. Hell, even the MR2 Targas are called hairdressers specials!

But, they are very feminine in their lines, and whilst I have no doubt they can shift (especially BBR Turbos), they're definitely cars for the more camp amongst us males I think!

PS: At the hairdressers round the corner from me, three out of four there have Fs or TFs... Kind of proves its a hairdressers car doesn't it? :p

Yes it's a girls car (hell - in the facelift they redesigned those lovely little chrome doorhandles into great big plastic lumps because the old ones broke fingernails)

But so is an F or TF - the lines are too girly, the car and engine are too small and it looks less manly even than the MX5 due to the short bonnet (what with it being mid engined, and therefore not phallic enough).

There are precisely 3 open cars that a man can drive without looking like a girl.
1. Triumph TR6 - but not a yellow or purple one.
2. a 1980s Aston Martin V8 (have you ever tried the clutch on one? jesus!)
3. a 1930 Bentley with Vanden Plas "Le Mans" bodywork

It is a dreadfully camp thing.... you dont even find that mady poofs driving them, they would rather have a TF............ (no insult to poofs or TF drivers intended)

I like TF's and MGB's.
Miatas are crap.
End of Story.

And cars with headlamp bulges are not girly.

A Lotue Exige is a blokes car, arguable so is the S2000 :cool:

Right.

There are precisely 3 open cars that a man can drive without looking like a girl.
1. Triumph TR6 - but not a yellow or purple one.
2. a 1980s Aston Martin V8 (have you ever tried the clutch on one? jesus!)
3. a 1930 Bentley with Vanden Plas "Le Mans" bodywork

E-type as well. OK maybe that is girly. When I started writing this I intended to contest you about your assertion that driving any but these three was girly. Maybe you're right...

I drive a GT6. Maybe closed cars are more manly. I dunno. All I know is that TR6 is a manly ****ing car. Anything else is arguable.

It is a dreadfully camp thing.... you dont even find that mady poofs driving them, they would rather have a TF............ (no insult to poofs or TF drivers intended)



LOL! I wanted to say the same thing but didn't know how to word it LOL

I'd like to see the ****** that said I was girly when I was driving about in me B.
Or me Spitfire. Or me MK X. Or any other car I have owned.

Did someone say "coat"??

I thought it was cult... :p

lol ^

What else could it be? I'm struggling to think!

Gra and I went out in Rita's TF yesterday. Great weather, roof down and we saw 2 other TF's. Both were being driven by blokes and their passengers were women (Gra refused to wear lipstick and a head scarf btw) :lol: Strange thing stereotyping isn't it? :dddc:

TF is for blokes. Miata is for girls.
New AH 3000 is for blokes. Audi TT is for girls.
New spitfire is for blokes...
erm... come on MGR.

i'd have a MX5 - like others have said most convertables are associated with women as most men (stereotype) like fast cars, most fast cars aren't available in convetables. I'd love a M3 Convertable :guns4: :guns4:

I'd love a M3 Convertable

Now you're talking :cool:

If its anything like a BMW convertable, they just cut the roof off, and dont strengthen the car, thus the 'ultimate drive' is completly ruined. Motoring journalists would agree. The 3-series convert is a complete dog to drive by all accounts... :bgrin:

The Z3 was designed as a convertable, so it's certainly not a case of chopping the roof off.

Well the Tr6 is a very manly sports car. It's straight lines dictate this to some extent. The MG TF also has enough straight lines for it to be neither one thing or the other. But look at an MX5 from side on. Its very curvy. That to me makes it very womanly. It's clearly been styled by tampax!!! It is also dating badly in my opinion. The MG TF has aged well by contrast.

So remember if you know any men thinking of buying an Mx5, tell them it's a girls car, tell them to get a TF instead! :)

M3 drop-top is driven by dr*g dealer*s IMO

Its easy to argue that both cars are more of a womens car, in terms of styling, and being easy to drive, economical, predictable handling, lowish running costs for a sports car. On these critera, both cars would appeal to alot of women who want a sports car thats a slightly soft/ more practical option than an Elise/TVR etc. But ive seen probably nearly as many blokes driving TF's and MX5's as i have women. But then again ive seen quite a few Nissan 200SX touring, and Mk4 Honda Preludes being driven by women, and these are not supposed to be girly cars at all! As for the S2000, well at the Japanese Performance day at the pod last year there was an S2000 owners club there, and 3 of them were owned by women. If you want a car that is nearly always owned by women with very few exceptions then it must be the Pug 206CC.

i think i would rather have the TR6

:o i was at Swansea's classic car show yesterday (it was a heap of :fim: tickets were £5 and it was mostly fairground amusments with thousands of people who couldnt give a t*ss about a classic car) and there were TR6's there. They are so masculine its unbelievable, and they look oh so poweful!!! :naughty: :ss:

Although I prefer the look of the TF, the 5 unfortunately has the F and TF beaten hands down on handling.

Now where did you get that utter tosh from? :)

I've been on several MX5 run track days and there is nothing in it between the 5 and the F, indeed i suspect the TF may even have a slight edge.

Both cars drive differently though, the F/TF takes bends 'on rails' and the 5 looses the rear end big time, but remains controllable in this state.

Ultimately the lap time will be about the same.

For the record, the Elise is normally a lap ahead, the Caterham, half a lap ahead of the Elise and the Z3 (1.9 / 2.0 litre variants) are half a lap behind the F/TF/5.

No idea on the Alfa Spyder, probably somewhere near the Z3 i imagine (power to weight + FWD) likewise with a Boxster or S2000, i expect these two to be somewhere between the 5/F/TF and Elise, maybe half a lap better given their increased power, but similar handling characteristics to the F/TF and 5 respectively, but have yet to be on a track with them and all the others so i cannot cross compare.

There are precisely 3 open cars that a man can drive without looking like a girl.
1. Triumph TR6 - but not a yellow or purple one.
2. a 1980s Aston Martin V8 (have you ever tried the clutch on one? jesus!)
3. a 1930 Bentley with Vanden Plas "Le Mans" bodywork

Dodge Viper? A girly car? I don't think so. AC Cobra? Corvette?

There are more, but I agree with the general idea LB. It has to have a big engine to compensate for the driver's small, err, you know........ :O

Hey!! Just noticed! What's wrong with yellow? :D

Now where did you get that utter tosh from? :)

I've been on several MX5 run track days and there is nothing in it between the 5 and the F, indeed i suspect the TF may even have a slight edge.

Both cars drive differently though, the F/TF takes bends 'on rails' and the 5 looses the rear end big time, but remains controllable in this state.

Ultimately the lap time will be about the same.

For the record, the Elise is normally a lap ahead, the Caterham, half a lap ahead of the Elise and the Z3 (1.9 / 2.0 litre variants) are half a lap behind the F/TF/5.

No idea on the Alfa Spyder, probably somewhere near the Z3 i imagine (power to weight + FWD) likewise with a Boxster or S2000, i expect these two to be somewhere between the 5/F/TF and Elise, maybe half a lap better given their increased power, but similar handling characteristics to the F/TF and 5 respectively, but have yet to be on a track with them and all the others so i cannot cross compare.

You may be correct here that there wouldnt be much between a MGF/5 lap-time wise, but I know which one is the better car....the MX5 - I know, I have one - the F has little feel from the wheel, and doesnt have the overall 'feel' of the 5. I havnt driven a TF, so can't comment on that.

Having driven the F, TF and 5 (MkI and 2.5) on a track, the 5 definately has it. Much more predictable and controlable unfortunately.

Given a blind lap in any of them (if you have never driven either) the TF would probably have it. Given 5 laps to get a feel for them, the 5 would give greater confidence at the limit and end up giving you the quickest lap.

The Elise would definately be the quickest, provided you could keep it on the island.

Having driven the F, TF and 5 (MkI and 2.5) on a track, the 5 definately has it. Much more predictable and controlable unfortunately.

Given a blind lap in any of them (if you have never driven either) the TF would probably have it. Given 5 laps to get a feel for them, the 5 would give greater confidence at the limit and end up giving you the quickest lap.

The Elise would definately be the quickest, provided you could keep it on the island.

The elise is another 10 grand though!!! I am a lotus man, and would love an elise!

It is a dreadfully camp thing.... you dont even find that mady poofs driving them, they would rather have a TF............ (no insult to poofs or TF drivers intended)

Congratulations! you have won a BRG MX5 BBR Turbo with tan leather interior.

Please tick the reply which you truithfully would use:

1) "Er, no thanks I think it's a bit girly"

Or,

2) "Gimme my free car!"

BTW, any one who thinks the Jag E type is a bit girly doesn't know what a phallic symbol is, & couldn't possibly have driven an E type.

true but the fixed head E type is the man's version ;-)

Having driven the F, TF and 5 (MkI and 2.5) on a track, the 5 definately has it. Much more predictable and controlable unfortunately.

What you are talking about isn't better handling, what you are talking about is a controllable tail slide.

Try tail sliding an Elise - it behaves very much like an F (only you are tavelling that much faster). The Elise out handles a 5, but is as controllable on the limit as an F is.

I also have driven a Mk1 5 (1.6), a Mk2 5 (1.8) and a Mk2 5 (Eunos Roadster) with an aftermarket supercharger on a track and i can catergorically say that only the supercharged one would be noticably quicker round the circuit (i felt the 1.6 Mk1 5 was the best all rounder, less likely to 'step out', what it lost on the straights it made up for in the twisties, and it also seemed to be made from better quality materials inside)

A controllable tail slide does not make you travel round a bend faster, if anything it slows you down, you are wasting power and you are loosing traction - QED

What it does give you though is a big grin and once recovered, inspires confidence. A big grin and a lot of confidence does not make it a faster car, all it does is make the driver more reckless.

Andrew Fearon of the North London MX5 Owners Club is a friend of mine, he also is (was) the National Events Co-Ordinator for the UK MX5 Owners Club and we (Essex Roadsters) have participated in a number of joint events with them (as have MGs On Track). Over and over again, the same results come out, normal F vs normal 5 = dead heat. Elise = 1 lap ahead, Caterham = 1.5 laps ahead, Z3 (1.9/2.0) ½ lap behind. Proved at Snetterton, Thruxton, Donnington and Silverstone (i missed the Brands one).

Would like to try them both out on the Nurburgring, a longer track with more bends might produce a different result. To date i have driven my F on the 'ring 4 times now, going again this year. Well worth the trip across Europe to get there, indeed my annual 'fix' at the 'ring is the reason i don't do UK track days any more - nothing compares, i've been spoiled! :)

Finally aaron216Si, i can't comment on overall 'feel', it's too subjective, but on steering 'feel' my F doesn't have PAS and there is plenty of steering feedback (more so than any 5 i've driven, the 5 feels nose heavy in comparison). I give you that the Fs PAS system masks a lot of the communication with the road (this is why i didn't specify it on the options list) and therefore a PAS equipped F can feel a bit vague sometimes (later ones are a lot better in this regard, the Fs PAS system is electronic (known as EPAS) rather than hydraulic and the amount of 'interference' from the EPAS system was dialed down over time). To the extent that a number of my mates drive around with the EPAS fuse pulled and a red light on thier instuments, and another of them has wired in an on/off switch on his dash - and uses it as a parking assist button.

All the best with your 5, it's a great car and a lot of fun. Friends in the MX5 OC love 'em like we F owners love our motors, anything that inspires this kind of loyalty must be pretty special. :)

Dodge Viper? A girly car? I don't think so. AC Cobra? Corvette?

There are more, but I agree with the general idea LB. It has to have a big engine to compensate for the driver's small, err, you know........ :O

Hey!! Just noticed! What's wrong with yellow? :D


Yes Dodge Viper a girly car, even Pamela Anderson has one in her TV series VIP........

my mate recently test drove a TF and a MX-5. He said the TF drove better, but in the end the MGR dealers offered him stupid trade-in for his other car, so he went for the MX-5 as it was a really good deal.


As for is the MX-5 girly, I think this link settles it once and for all :)

http://www.mazdarx8.co.uk/formula/default.asp

Not too sure why it says RX-8 formula when they're all over the MX-5

my mate recently test drove a TF and a MX-5. He said the TF drove better, but in the end the MGR dealers offered him stupid trade-in for his other car, so he went for the MX-5 as it was a really good deal.


As for is the MX-5 girly, I think this link settles it once and for all :)

http://www.mazdarx8.co.uk/formula/default.asp

Not too sure why it says RX-8 formula when they're all over the MX-5

Nuff said.... GIRLY CAR through and through...............:rotflmao:

mx5 is tottally a girls car


Yet im one to talk is a puma a girls car????:confused:

79% say it is.
So's the MGF or is just a hairdressers car?
If not why is the MX5 & not the MGF?

Yes a Puma is a girls car, but its still fun to drive :D Shame there slow.

yeah but i have the 1.7 so it nice and fast, anyway it's not the going it's the stopping that causes the problems as the breaks come streight off the 1.25 fiesta:irked:

Yeah, tell me about it, we have the 1.7 too brakes are poo. Drums on the back lmao. Crap as well on motorway 70mph @ 3,500rpm.

mx5 is tottally a girls car


Yet im one to talk is a puma a girls car????:confused:
You drive one?

Have you spoken to your therapist??

:o

:D

Hell its (MGF) lasted as a design much longer than the Mx5.

When was the last time you saw a G reg MGF??

You may be correct here that there wouldnt be much between a MGF/5 lap-time wise, but I know which one is the better car....the MX5 - I know, I have one - the F has little feel from the wheel, and doesnt have the overall 'feel' of the 5. I havnt driven a TF, so can't comment on that.
I have had the fortune to go on several track days too. I've driven a TF / 5 / S2000 out of the cars you're talking about here. The S2000 was great as much as I'd like the TF to come out on top, I have to say the S2000 was a bettter drive (6 speed did it for me too). The TF was good also, but not powerful enough, although I did like the way you could actually put your foot down when you felt slight understeer and that powered you round the corner like a dream. The MX5, I lost the back end twice, thought it was shocking IMO.

Not fair to compair S2000 and the TF, IMO. It is in another price bracket and more of a Boxster rival.

Not fair to compair S2000 and the TF, IMO. It is in another price bracket and more of a Boxster rival.
Yeah, I know, it was just one of the cars I had a drive of. I'd take the S2000 over the poor mans porsche any day!!

I also got to drive a Noble M12, Ferrari 328, Ferrari 360, Ferrari 575 Maranello. I definately would say the TF is better than those heaps of junk. :D :D

:rotflmao:

What utter rubbish.

Any 2 seater convertable is associated with hairdressers. TF included. All of it in jest.

Although I prefer the look of the TF, the 5 unfortunately has the F and TF beaten hands down on handling.

does that include a lotus elise?

maybe a ferrari F50 too?

why thank you 216si i think so too


(dont leave your computer on):iwstupid:

MX5 girly, girly girly, girly, girly girly

On the subject of hairdressers...

The definition of a 'Hardresser's Car' goes soemthing along these lines:

"Hairdresser's Car = Car which is more about fashion than function"

So it always surprises me when it is levelled at the current crop of Sports cars. I think the styling is the main reason for it, certainly if you take the definition literally then very few of the current sportscars qualify (maybe the Barchetta). If you were making a fashion statement you certainly wouldn't produce a car with a mid-engine configuration, likewise you wouldn't come up with a design that incorporates rear wheel drive.

Some of the modern sports car may not be blisteringly fast, but by and large they all follow function rather than fashion.

Cars that do fit the bill are things like the New Beetle and the MINI One, also the Suzuki Vitara. These cars are all pose and no prowess. :)

It is a dreadfully camp thing.... you dont even find that mady poofs driving them, they would rather have a TF............ (no insult to poofs or TF drivers intended)

No. I know three poofs with an MX5. One is on his second.
I don't know any with an MGTF.
I do know one with a Herald convertible.
New Minis are popular, too.

Did anyone see that piece in Autocar last week, a chat with <insert name here> the designer of the MGF and other cars. He said how much he still liked the F and how much better it looked than the facelifted version.

Gerry McGovern. He's wrong. The TF is lightyears beyond the F. come on, the man has a mullet. Anyone with so little fashion sense can hardly design a car.

And those that like to chop the tops on Heralds... Contact smosquito. it'll be rubber chickens at dawn.

[QUOTE=Scarlet Fever]On the subject of hairdressers...



"Hairdresser's Car = Car which is more about fashion than function"

Thats true, and the MX5 was designed as a back to basics fun to drive soft top sportscar - take a look at an early example, quite spartan.

Regarding the tail happy experiences that some of you have had in the MX5 - this is a rear wheel drive car, (some of you young un's have been brought up on front wheel drive only) and needs real driving skill to drive properly!

Gerry McGovern. He's wrong. The TF is lightyears beyond the F. come on, the man has a mullet. Anyone with so little fashion sense can hardly design a car.

And those that like to chop the tops on Heralds... Contact smosquito. it'll be rubber chickens at dawn.
Funny enough, from the Autocar interview last week (May 18), Gerry McGovern said he is most pround of the MGF in terms of achievement and "it still look spretty cute and better than the facelifted car".

Handbags at bay... :rotflmao:

Daft Mullet versus stupid moustache...
GO GO GO!!!

Anybody here old enough tho remember (or heard of) the original '60s Lotus Elan?

Is that a "hairdressers" car? Nope, I don't think many of you would think it was - and it wasn't.

Not any faster than an MX5, they are virtually the same car. So the MX5 is a copy - is that a bad thing?

Well, as far as getting hold of a good Elan goes you had better have deep pockets, for the initial purchase and for subsequent repairs, robust they are not.

MX5 are relatively cheap to buy, are very reliable and great fun. I always try to have an open mind about all cars, Rover, BMW, Audi, Skoda - even (eventually) the Cityrover.

PS. If because of the above attitude some of you are wondering why I drive a Rover and subscribe to the forum it was because the 200 was the best trade-in deal I was offered against the old 5 series BMW I had.

Normally I wouldn't have considered a Rover - I was biased against them. The 200 plesantly suprised me. It aint a bad car!

LOL! I wanted to say the same thing but didn't know how to word it LOL

I thought that all convertables had a snapon blond attachment for the passenger seat?

I think it's cause most Ladies/feminate types I know will buy a car because it is either:

a) Big enough for the kids/dogs/shopping
b) Easy to park
c) Looks "cute"

I think that the MX5 (and TF) falls into catagories b & c.....

A large convertable such as M3/C70/A4/93 looks better on the set of footballers wives.....

On the subject of hairdressers...

The definition of a 'Hardresser's Car' goes soemthing along these lines:

"Hairdresser's Car = Car which is more about fashion than function"


yeah a puma is a hairdressers car then cos it looks cool as anything but its a little wimpish, dear god if 216si can keep up with me than its very underpowered:_poke:

MX-5 is definately a "birds" car (sorry for not being PC, but let's face it, it is a birds car)

So is the TF, the TT, the Z3/4 et al

Blokes sportscars should be like the TR6, Spitfire and MGB, they just look blokey

Funny enough, from the Autocar interview last week (May 18), Gerry McGovern said he is most pround of the MGF in terms of achievement and "it still looks pretty cute and better than the facelifted car".

I'm with the mullet on this one, even though my F doesn't look much like his design any more! The F hangs together better as a design, despite the exhaust hanging out the back! The basic form of the car is female, a pretty face, a curvacious body with a waist and a (fat *rse!) err, hips. If you give it a masculine nose and add a few angles you don't end up with a better looking car, you end up with a geezer bird! :lol: :dddc:

Also the F doesn't pander to any fashion trends, it is pretty unique looking, with traditional MG elements like the grille and swept in headlights fully incorporated into the modern wedge shape. It has it's faults, the rear silencer is a mess and the high level brake light surround is a bit fussy, but overall it works as a design and hangs together well. The form of the F is utterly modern, the rear light clusters being reminicient of the EX-E prototype and thus it is a stretch to say it shows a linear MG design though, previous MGs of this ilk were front engined/RWD and thus quite different in general, but the MGD design (dropped in favour of the TR7) was mid-engined and pointed the way to the future. The F is a fusion of old and new, and a very successful one at that - just look at the Z3 to see how to get it wrong (the retro elements overpower the design), or the Z4 to see it go wrong the other way (modern look overpowers the traditional form). Z3 and Z4 are opposite ends of the spectrum, the F falls in the middle somewhere.

The TF junked all the MG styling cues - to some extent this is a compliment to the F i suppose, the only MG styling cues it has (other than badging) are the modern form that the F bequeathed to it. Basically, stylistically the TF's only link to MG history is the F, therefore in a backhanded way you could say that the F defined a new set of MG styling cues. The items that set the TF apart from the F stylistically are fashionable angles and the first genesis of a new corporate look, one that shares more with the Chrysler Voyager than it does any MG of the past. The TF headlamps are also 'next gen' inspired, they could very easily have designed them or the bumper to retain the MG swept in look (that incedentally the R25, R45, R75 had at the time), but they flushed them out and thus lost a lot of MG history - ironic really when you consider that consequently the only thing that links the TF to the marque is it's name!! :dddc: (again) ;)

I find it odd that current MGs are looking more like the TF, and thus the Rover's are being dragged in the same direction, when the TF doesn't look like an MG at all! ;) :dddc: (once more - anyone would think i was trying to be provocative! :lol: )

I suspect that whilst the F still looks fresh even today, the TF will date as fashion trends change - we shall see i suppose... :dddc: (here's that carrot again! :lol: )

The TF is a more focused machine, i've said it before and i'll say it again, given the F was top of the UK roadster pile when it was superseeded and the TF has a more sporting character (and therefore a slightly different market), i think both cars could have carried on in tandem. Maybe even with the F wearing a Rover badge, i mean, Rover have made some unusual vehicles in the past, the BRM concepts, the 200 coupe and the 200 cabrio, why shouldn't they have a luxury roadster? Especially one that shares styling cues with the R25/45/75 that was being sold at the same time. (Ooooh, that'll upset the MG purists! :lol: )

I can see a stripped out carbon fibre/alloy interiored MG TF with the 135 and 160 Ps engines selling alongside a luxury leather/wood interiored Rover F with the 120 and 145 Ps engines...

It was never going to happen of course, it was cheaper to redesign the F and give it shocks and springs than it was to pay Dunlop their revised price for the Hydragas units given the amount of cars they were selling - thus the TF was born, Dunlop were shafted and the F was laid to rest.

I heard a rumour that MGR only needed to sell 20,000 TFs for the revenues to cover the redesign work - in other words 20,000 Fs at Dunlops' revised Hydragas unit price (x4 per car) was enough to justify the redesign costs! Blimey, how much were they asking!!

The TF has more than paid for itself then. Nice to hear an MGR success story for a change. :)

For the record, i like the TF and the direction MGR are taking thier cars, but it is a break with tradition (maybe a necessary one?) and this doesn't sit quite right with me. Who'd've thought that with an F that looks like mine i'd be a traditionalist at heart eh? :lol:

Couldn't be bothered to read through 4 pages on this thread so I apologise if someone has already said this...

The MX5 may look like a girls car, but looks are decieving.

The MX5 was in development for 7 years or so (so I've heard.) and has one of the most sorted suspensions out there.
It's RWD and just loves rear-end, sideways, oversteer antics in a controllable way.

They are supposed to be a hoot to drive and as they are very light it doesn't take much to get them to go just as well in a straight line.

I wouldn't dream of taking on an MX5 unless it was a very straight and wide road because a well driven MX5 would leave me for dust round the twisties.

Also Pumas are very underrated.
The have very revvy engines with a fantastic chassis, so although they aren't quick in a straight line they are very nimble and again supposed to be a great drive.
The FRP (Racing Puma) may only have 150BHP but it's not much slower than my Ti in a straight line and has soooooooo much grip it will corner like it's on rails.

All of the above cars make most standard cars (Let alone Rovers) look like barges.

Respect where respect is due :)

MX-5 is definately a "birds" car (sorry for not being PC, but let's face it, it is a birds car)

So is the TF, the TT, the Z3/4 et al

Blokes sportscars should be like the TR6, Spitfire and MGB, they just look blokey

When I were a lad the Spitfire (ie when they could be bought new) was regarded as a "hairdresser's" car, the MGB a bit flat cap, string back gloves & leather patch elbows.

Wouldn't mind one now though - how times do change.....

BTW, read an article on the TR6, one of the owners had kept one from new for over 30 years, the owner was now over 70 years old and SHE was still driving it! Blimey!

A bit before my time, but I have always thought they looked like a man's car, in fact I'm sure you can see meat and 2 veg dangling from underneath a TR6!!

When I were a lad the Spitfire (ie when they could be bought new) was regarded as a "hairdresser's" car, the MGB a bit flat cap, string back gloves & leather patch elbows.

I thought MGB's still were....:) when I was getting my GT6 rebuilt a guy at the garage insisted on having his rebuilt MGB GT resprayed in BL Baby sick orange cause that was what was on the origanol car, had to have correct BL style Imperial bolts e.t.c. e.t.c. a bonifide anorac and he wasnt the only MGB owner like it......though I am sure there are normal people who own them ;)

I think the spitfire still is considered a bit of a girly car...men buy GT6's (or plant the Straight Six from vittese/2000 in the spitty shell :) )

after rambling on I meant to say that though the TR6 is certainly a blokes car I think they are a bit over priced.....(compared to other triumphs..)

Though I dont think we should start on the TR7....more a t@ts car than a girls car :)

I used to have a spitty :D

1.3 in black with a white interior (White bucket seats anyone ;) ), slow as ****e and the twin carbs went out of tune once a week.
But I loved it, until it rained when I would have been warmer and dryer sat on the bonnet than inside the car.
And when it was cold I had to scrape the ice off the inside of the windscreen ;)

Also Pumas are very underrated.
The have very revvy engines with a fantastic chassis, so although they aren't quick in a straight line they are very nimble and again supposed to be a great drive.
The FRP (Racing Puma) may only have 150BHP but it's not much slower than my Ti in a straight line and has soooooooo much grip it will corner like it's on rails.

All of the above cars make most standard cars (Let alone Rovers) look like barges.

Respect where respect is due :)

The standard 1.7 engine aint really that revvy, its a bit boring. 1st 2nd and 3rd gears are very low so make car feel really fast around town. Handling is brilliant though :D Its grips very well and has a tendancy for the back end to step out. Tis fun when you know it does it, but not the first time you try it lol. The car is very small though, i hate being a passenger in it. It has a good grin factor but really needs more power than the pretty pathetic 125bhp. Now if it had 200bhp i'd certainly have one for my own car.

Puma's plastic quality and build quality is worse than Rover 200's parts wear very quickly.

I love taking the puma for a spin once every week or so though, as they are such fun (in small doses)

BTW wasn't the MX5 voted by the motoring industry as the best all round drivers car ever! At the end of the day the MX5 design is old, the engines are pretty old and not that powerful. But just like a puma you get a grin factor when driving it.

The MX5 is now a cult car, and rightly so! The image it has (which btw most people also associate the F & TF with) is unfair. Yes more women drive them, but thats near enough the case for any convertable! At the end of the day its a cracking car. Technically it has the F me thinks, but ultimately i would have a TF cos they look better and i am rover biased :rotflmao: A nice K2000 engine in a TF would be ideal :D

I think the reason why you see more women in convertibles is that Hubby is out working in the rep mobile to pay for it!

For example, my sister and her husband came into a little money, he went out and bought a BMW M coupe (mad bread-van thingie, yeah, I know, not a convertable but the principle is the same) Sis used to use it most of the week to go to Tesco's!

They sold it after 10 months, lost £700 in the deal, not bad - an M coupe for £70 a month.

BTW, I got the old dear in a TR6 age wrong, I looked in the mag last night - she was 80 not 70!

[QUOTE=lard]I thought MGB's still were....:) when I was getting my GT6 rebuilt a guy at the garage insisted on having his rebuilt MGB GT resprayed in BL Baby sick orange cause that was what was on the origanol car, had to have correct BL style Imperial bolts e.t.c. e.t.c. a bonifide anorac and he wasnt the only MGB owner like it......though I am sure there are normal people who own them ;)QUOTE]

I think that's called 'restoration' and imo is the right way to treat a classic car unless you're doing a full custom job. Why not keep it as it was made? iirc that red/orange colour is called Blaze?

MX5 is ****** mint !

1.8i (original flip up light version anyway !)

fast as a Vi, engine mounted the right way with rear wheels drive, looks the tits and goes like a fast thing. also the handling is sublime !

also they used a normally aspirated version of the 323 turbo engine in it so you can bolt on a turbo kit for about 1500 quid

also you reckon the TF looks like a mini aston, like buggery !

theres a front nose you can get for the Mk2 MX5 that makes it look like a mini dodge viper !

The MkI 1.8 MX-5's are not really as quick as they seem. Not up to VVC standards, as even the MkII 1.8 VVT engine is not that quick.

They do feel it though.

The 323 trubo kit does not just bolt on as it is designed for the engine being the other way around. You would also need the correct ECU as well, so £1500 is somewhat of an under estimation as to the costs. Also the 323 turbo kit is also a low pressure kit and not that powerfull. Something like the FM2 is a better solution. It does have a very strong engine though, that will take over 250bhp at the wheels without internal modifications.

You can get the Brodie Britain Racing turbo kit for it though. Because the engine was designed in the first place to take a turbo it's a sensible and more importantly reliable upgrade.

An object lesson in designing for high power and then downtuning for reliability. The exact opposite of the K series!

You can get the Brodie Britain Racing turbo kit for it though. Because the engine was designed in the first place to take a turbo it's a sensible and more importantly reliable upgrade.

An object lesson in designing for high power and then downtuning for reliability. The exact opposite of the K series!

never a truer word spoken :lol:

Most little two seat drop top sports cars look girly!

About the only two drop tops I can think of that are definately 'mens' cars are the Triumph TR6 and Stag!

Most little two seat drop top sports cars look girly!

About the only two drop tops I can think of that are definately 'mens' cars are the Triumph TR6 and Stag!


What about the AC Cobra? Cobra................M :drool: mmm.

A big meaty TVR Tuscan, Tamora, Cerbera etc, can never be called a girls car. They are simply pure muscle and brute power over what can best be discribed as interesting handling!
Out of all of the current 2 seater sports cars, i have to say that the Honda S2000 is the most girly of the lot, not in terms of styling, but ive seen alot more women driving them than blokes. its more like 60/40 with MX5's, TF's and MR2's, but most S2000's seem to be driven by women!

just cao a car is drivin by women doesnt make a girls car


a girls car has to be limp wristed and no power can you realy say that about a s2000

I agree Girls cars are all show and no go.
S2000 simply doesn't apply.
It's got a fantastic engine that screams like an F1 car when on song and it revs to 9000rpm.

Not a girls car.

Ok i might have meant that the wrong way. The S2000 has an excellent engine, and yes its not your typical girly car based on the judgements you make of what defines a girly car. All i really meant to say, is that out of the limited numbers of S2000's i have seen both drivng around and at shows, the majority of them were owned by women, certainely more so than MX5's, MR2's and TF's, which i still reckon is at worst a 60/40% split in female/male owners.
I heard that the S2000 engine is actually partly hand built and as it uses different and more expensive internal components than the Civic Type R engine, this is one of the reasons that the Honda is expensive. Maybe MGR can do a similar thing if they can make either a 200bhp 1.8K or a 215bhp K2000 engine for the TF X-power model. It just needs a motor that is 200bhp or more but one that will be reasonably robust, with proper maintainence. I think if they could extend the service life of the K2000 to a 20'000mile or more strip down, or else just make a reliable 200bhp 1.8K that if it had strong expensive internals, could also run to high mileages before major work is required this would do the trick.

I don't think its a girl's car, but i do think it looks cack. Certainly nothing on the TF. The new one (or is it a facelift?) will no doubt look better.

My mate's just bought one of these! I'm assured it's not girly at all....:D

I'm off round to get him to cut my hair this weekend as he's after opening a hairdressers soon.... ;) :lol:

I'm sure it'll be very nice and TBH I'm looking forward to seeing what it's like for real! :D

oooh what a topic. go easy cause im new

Right ive recently driven both the 1.8ssport mx5 and the 160TF (i got the TF btw). The MX5 is a better handling car. At least i thourght so. It also has a better interior (by miles). I watched every mx5 i saw over a month or so and saw 2 blokes driving them. Its deffo a womans car. That doesnt make it a bad one. The TF imo is more masculine and definatly grips better and is faster in the real world.

The spitfire a mans car? your having a laugh thats only cause you see it as a classic. Its what you used to get the lasses and posers driving. Its a nice car but deffo for women. The TR6 is lovely and i nearly got one instead of the TF. However the concourse TR4 in the garage put me off another rebuild :)

oooh what a topic. go easy cause im new

Right ive recently driven both the 1.8ssport mx5 and the 160TF (i got the TF btw). The MX5 is a better handling car. At least i thourght so. It also has a better interior (by miles). I watched every mx5 i saw over a month or so and saw 2 blokes driving them. Its deffo a womans car. That doesnt make it a bad one. The TF imo is more masculine and definatly grips better and is faster in the real world.

The spitfire a mans car? your having a laugh thats only cause you see it as a classic. Its what you used to get the lasses and posers driving. Its a nice car but deffo for women. The TR6 is lovely and i nearly got one instead of the TF. However the concourse TR4 in the garage put me off another rebuild :)

TR4? You are a lucky man - & I'm a green with envy one!

BTW, I went to a local garage last Friday which was advertising Spitfires - took one look & left - all of them total sheds.

You can get the Brodie Britain Racing turbo kit for it though. Because the engine was designed in the first place to take a turbo it's a sensible and more importantly reliable upgrade.

An object lesson in designing for high power and then downtuning for reliability. The exact opposite of the K series!
Not exactly fair - the K series is a very strong unit in its designed capacity, 1.4. I don't pretend to know much about Mazda's engines, but I'd wager it was not designed to be a 1.4 and then stretched to 1.8, that does kinda remove some on the inherant strength in the engine.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not sayign the 1.8 K is weak by any stretch of the imagination, just that you can't go around bolting turbos onto it without a lot of work!

Apparently the MX5 1.6&1.8 engines have all the extra inbuilt strength of the 323 Turbo engine which is the same block and major components. Mazda simply converted the engine to NASP for the MX5, but as the original unit was designed for turbo application from the start, the MX5 engine has oil jets to cool under the pistons and other features commonly used in turbo engines. The biggest change is probably the higher compression ratio in the NASP engine. I agree that the 1.4K is the strongest and possibly the most tunable. Certainely it would in theory be a better prospect for turbo/supercharging than a 1.8K, even if ultimatley it would be limited in power output being a 1.4. The 1.6K being 1mm oversquare i have always thought would be the best NASP K series engine, especially for high rpms. However at 8000rpm+ i understand that the bigger bore over the 1.4K can lead to liner instability and movement, which is the ultimate limit regarding the max rpm it can run and bhp it would produce. I think the 1.6K can make 240bhp though, so its not that bad at all really!
Im a fan of Jap engines, and some of the toughest engines have to be Jap units like the 2.6 straight six Skyline GTR engine. It can run up to 9000rpm, and power outputs over 1000bhp have been seen on this engine. Also the 3.0 Toyota Supra engine is amazingly strong. Its a heavy lump, but ive heard that the std bottom end can take power outputs of 750-800bhp no problem, if you can find a monster turbo big enough that is! Thats pretty amazing stuff!

Mates now turbo'ing his 1.8 Eunos.

Expected output is to be 250bhp at the wheels. This is going to be limited at this via boost as the kit can go higher.

Good luck to your mate Steve, im sure he will have no problems running at 250bhp. I did read a feature on a Mazda 323 Turbo that was running 310bhp in the Japanese Performance mag that my mate buys. It had a hybrid turbo, and aquamist water injection and some other fancy engine bits on it. There was alos an MX5 in one issue that i think had around 265bhp, and that was a 1.6!

Thought i may as well put my ten pence worth in!

MX-5's ROCK!! I will gaurantee anyone who says otherwise hasnt driven one.
Theres a reason why EVERY motoring press herald it as the best handling sportscar. And what on earth does everyone mean "they're a bit slow". I'm sorry but 146bhp in a hatch (oh, that'll be more than most MG's) is considered fairly powerful, let alone something that weighs as much as a baked bean tin.

Get to the turns and even a 1.6 will wipe its **** with most hot hatches due to its low c of g.

Doesnt everyone find it a bit ironic that these cars are viewed as hairdressers cars (all show and no go) BY people in ZR105's and 1.4's with big spoilers? Cars which yes, looks great, but ulimately are seen of by an ordinary hatch?

Doesnt that make THEM a hairdressers car by definition? ANd i'm sure none of you would dream of having your beloved 105's called that!

I've had a 1.8 mx5 and an MR2 Turbo. How on gods green earth can you call a 280bhp, rear wheel drive mid engined car, girly?

I think anyone who refuses to own or drive an MX5 or similar because its "girly" must have a few masculinty issues.

And to all those people out there with ANY 2 seater sportscar? I'm with ya, so :flipa: to anyone that thinks we're girls!

Thought i may as well put my ten pence worth in!

MX-5's ROCK!! I will gaurantee anyone who says otherwise hasnt driven one.
Theres a reason why EVERY motoring press herald it as the best handling sportscar. And what on earth does everyone mean "they're a bit slow". I'm sorry but 146bhp in a hatch (oh, that'll be more than most MG's) is considered fairly powerful, let alone something that weighs as much as a baked bean tin.

Get to the turns and even a 1.6 will wipe its **** with most hot hatches due to its low c of g.

Doesnt everyone find it a bit ironic that these cars are viewed as hairdressers cars (all show and no go) BY people in ZR105's and 1.4's with big spoilers? Cars which yes, looks great, but ulimately are seen of by an ordinary hatch?

Doesnt that make THEM a hairdressers car by definition? ANd i'm sure none of you would dream of having your beloved 105's called that!

I've had a 1.8 mx5 and an MR2 Turbo. How on gods green earth can you call a 280bhp, rear wheel drive mid engined car, girly?

I think anyone who refuses to own or drive an MX5 or similar because its "girly" must have a few masculinty issues.

And to all those people out there with ANY 2 seater sportscar? I'm with ya, so :flipa: to anyone that thinks we're girls!

Testify Ste !

GIMME A HALLELUIAH !

Praise the loooooooooord!

I drive a Caterham because the MX-5 was too girly for me. And I'm gay!

Thought i may as well put my ten pence worth in!

MX-5's ROCK!! I will gaurantee anyone who says otherwise hasnt driven one.
Theres a reason why EVERY motoring press herald it as the best handling sportscar. And what on earth does everyone mean "they're a bit slow". I'm sorry but 146bhp in a hatch (oh, that'll be more than most MG's) is considered fairly powerful, let alone something that weighs as much as a baked bean tin.

Get to the turns and even a 1.6 will wipe its **** with most hot hatches due to its low c of g.

Doesnt everyone find it a bit ironic that these cars are viewed as hairdressers cars (all show and no go) BY people in ZR105's and 1.4's with big spoilers? Cars which yes, looks great, but ulimately are seen of by an ordinary hatch?

Doesnt that make THEM a hairdressers car by definition? ANd i'm sure none of you would dream of having your beloved 105's called that!

I've had a 1.8 mx5 and an MR2 Turbo. How on gods green earth can you call a 280bhp, rear wheel drive mid engined car, girly?

I think anyone who refuses to own or drive an MX5 or similar because its "girly" must have a few masculinty issues.

And to all those people out there with ANY 2 seater sportscar? I'm with ya, so :flipa: to anyone that thinks we're girls!

Still looks like it's been designed by Tampax though! The TF on the other hand has straight lines. Its more neutral however the definition of a man's sportscar has to be the TR6.

Do me a lemon, its an MG with nose job, and THAT wasn't strainght in any shape or form. I really like both shapes and time permitting i'll have an MGF (not a TF, dont like all this "new edge" nonsense)

TR6? Kinda groovy and a right classic, but surely a proper mans sportscar is a TVR Griffith 500 though? As tim would say, MORE POWER!!! ARGH ARGH ARGH ARGH!!!!!!

Caterhams rock too addict, i built meself a locost and IMO its the most fun you can have without a hooker and some narcotics!!!

250bhp at the rear wheels from a car which has 140ish bhp at the crank standard?

A car will lose about 25 - 30% power throught the transmission etc before it gets to the rear wheels so as standard the car will have about 98 - 105bhp.

250bhp at the rear wheels? thats a 138% - 155% power increase (330 - 350bhp at the crank) - dream on!

Even if it happened the rear wheels would wrap the car around the axle like the lid off a sardine tin - provided the engine doesn't grenade first.

Assume your talknig about ol mateys MX-5 turbo?

Theres a lot of the blighters running round japan with this sort of power, as its essentially the same engine out the old 323 turbo, the bottom end is mega stiff and its a fave with american lightweight series.

They have just released the MX-5 turbo but we wont be getting it over here, 170bhp as standard, and thats basically the same engine as the 1.8 but loses the VVti system.

Cant see the car wrapping around the rear wheels though? Seen cars with twice that power and lighter and they didnt do that.

So he is using a special bottom end? Provided he is willing to spend ££ on the engine mods and water injection, etc, etc - hmm, keep us posted!

The sardine comment was a cartoon inspired joke - may be he will need anti filp bars like the top dragsters have though?

You ever seen a TVR with a flip bar?

Ere, having said that, me grandads got flip bars on his "scoot 150" electric chair, rock on!

Shoudlnt need a special bottom end for that power, and yes, it will cost him about 3 grand to see that kind of power. Can thin of better things to do with 3k though.

I can vouch for the MX-5's capability to reach 250bhp at the wheels from the 1.8.

A very good friend and colleague has just fitted the FM2 kit to his MkI 1.8 Eunos. It has 250bhp at the rear wheels and could go further, but would then start to be on the edge of reliability without internal work.

Currently, apart from a T28, intercooler, ecu and modified injectors and rail, the whole engine is running on standard internals. No requirements for NOS, water injection, forged bottom end or anything else is required.

It is no pipe dream and is done. US cars are known to be over 300bhp at the rear wheels once fully forged.

Cant believe this thread is STILL doing the rounds........

the main argument seems to be the power you can get from it???

well as the great kevc once said "i'd rarther be slow and manly than fast and girly" :bgrin:

the question was is the MX5 a girls car and the answer remains the same...................


YES IT IS.......

the question was is the MX5 a girls car and the answer remains the same...................


YES IT IS.......

And this from a bloke who appears to be doing rude things to his bike's pillion................ :naughty:

mmmm, not sure what i am supposed to be doing apart from leaning on the seat and posing, Oops i mean having my picture taken, i would be enthralled to know what you think i am doing.......he he he

The only person I know who has one is male and gay and the car is yellow and only used for occasional posing cos its discs are always rusty, 'bout sums it up

Now the new MINI convertible. THAT will be a girl's car!

Now the new MINI convertible. THAT will be a girl's car!and the current version isn't?

Having owned a MX-5 and driven loads of F's and TF's i can honestly say the MX-5 totally out handles them, such a great car to have at leist once in a life time.
What convertable has one the most awards?

Japanese innit?


That says it all.......they've got it licked.

Japanese innit?


That says it all.......they've got it licked.

Yep, you can't really say bad things about the Japs as they have it sorted.

Having taken a spin out in my best mates newly acquired mx5 I have to say I'm very impressed with the handling, although saying that it's a special edition one with a strut brace on the front standard so it should hold the road well! :D

yup, its definitely a girls car.

It may be one of the best small convertibles and has won many awards, but it doesnt stop guys look as though they're wearing a skirt as soon as they sit in one (and I dont mean scottish guys with their kilts :p)

5 is a great car, but so is the F / TF. Comparing them is very difficult as although on the face of it they cater to the same market, they do so in very different ways.

Had a Mk1 5 for about 3 weeks in 1996 (1.6), and a Mk2 for a fortnight or so some years later (1.8). My opinion on the cars are that they are a lot of fun, quick, comfortable and well screwed together. They also are a real handful (particularly the Mk2) and as such is a car that you really need to drive rather than travel in. The 5 has a nasty habit of popping out the rear end when it feels like it, especially if the roads aren't perfectly bone dry. The car once in this state is perfectly controlable however and if you are on the ball it doesn't take much skill to reign it in safely. If this is what you call handling, and is what you get a kick out of then by all means get a 5 - you'll love it.

Me?

Well, i like my corners to be fast, clean and drama free. This is why i prefer the F / TF. It all comes down to this simple preference as far as i am concerned. Both cars have lots of plusses and minuses stacked against each other and to be honest they all tend to cancel each other out. You can debate which car is best till the cows come home, but there will always be some people who prefer the F to the 5 and vice versa - it's a pointless debate in my opinion.

If you want a fun sports car that does nice controllable tailslides - get a 5

If you want a fun sports car that takes corners like it's on rails - get an F / TF

QED.

Oh, and the 'girls car' thing? All small 2 seater roadsters have this or the hardresser tag associated with them. None are exactly 'macho' machines - they are fun vehicles and as such appeal to both genders - what's the big deal with that then?

Just my 2 cents on the subject. :)

I seem to remember everyone calling the MR2 and CRX Del Sol girls cars too, until the turbo's and VTi's reared their heads on these shores and it dawned on people that they were seriously quick cars. A dose of The Fast and The Furious seemed to help their images along somewhat too.

Mr. Fever if I may reprint

[QUOTE]Oh, and the 'girls car' thing? All small 2 seater roadsters have this or the hardresser tag associated with them. None are exactly 'macho' machines - they are fun vehicles and as such appeal to both genders - what's the big deal with that then?[QUOTE]

Macho smacho. We all want cars that look good. Hairdressers are beside the point. Maybe I will do a poll... Do you want an MGB or not? Do you like MGB or not?

The Bullet Supercar was / is an aussie MX5 (although much modified ) with a 290kw supercharged lexus V8 motor (as you would).
It was big news here a few years ago but seemed to die a death (probably choked in it's own tyre smoke).
Here's a link to an article on it.

http://www.fastlane.com.au/Custom_Shed/AEC_Bullet.htm

I suppose being a hairdresser helps with owning one as top down motoring can get messy.

The 5 has a nasty habit of popping out the rear end when it feels like it, especially if the roads aren't perfectly bone dry.

Can't say I agree with you on that one, yes if the road is a bit damp you CAN provoke it to flick the tail out and if you push it to its limits it WILL slide - but having attended track days regularly in my '5, I'd say the handling is still very predictable and you have to be deliberate and determined to actually kick the tail out into a corner and there hasn't been a sudden onset of oversteer as you feel the g forces load up. However I absolutely agree that once past its limit the '5 is just sooooooo easy to control and to maintain the slide, now if only if it had more power it'd be even more fun.

Also, the tyres make a huge difference, the standard Michelin Pilox SX's that came with the car have a reputation of being "showroom" tyres in that they grip extremely well until its limit and then let go sudeenly once u get past. I've been using Yokohama A539's and now Dunlop Direzza DZ101's and they've been absolutely perfect... slides are always very gradual and they give you plenty of time to counter-steer and make you look like you know what you're doing :)

Admittedly the F/TF has a higher limit and I've no doubt it proabably will get slightly better lap times given the same conditions, though my concern is that all cars do have a limit and I'd much rather have a car that's predictable at the limit and beyond then an "all-or-nothing" arrangement. Horses for courses and this of course and I'm in no way bashing the MG for it.

As for the 'girl's car' question, well, I've managed to pull a few chicks in the '5. How many blokes have the guys driving Monaro's and V8 Falcon's pulled in their testostorone-oozing MEN'S CARS?

they are only labelled hairdresser cars by those who have no idea of their capabilites!! Phenomenal handling, make great track day cars, not really what id call girly attributes!

As for the 'girl's car' question, well, I've managed to pull a few chicks in the '5. How many blokes have the guys driving Monaro's and V8 Falcon's pulled in their testostorone-oozing MEN'S CARS?

my point entirly what is the point in driving a poor car that all the men love cos its butch and malsculan, when you could have a much better car that women love????

ppl that need a car to attract the opposite sex have problems imo :minxy:

hows the girlfreind si :lol:

don't have one mate, but then again i don't buy a car to try and impress one do i ;) , it's going to do nothing but attract the wrong type of woman :ts:

hgf you are spot on they are girl cars how can you feel like a man in a car like that get a mans car :sick:

coming from a guy in a zr :lol:

yep oh they are very nice cars but not my cup of tea sory:fim:

thats a fair comment :D

ppl that need a car to attract the opposite sex have problems imo :minxy:

Hahaha no worse than ppl that need a car to attract the same sex!

Seriously though, I buy a car because I like to drive it, not because it reassures me of my manhood - plenty of more novel and fun ways of doing that (burping competitions eg)

MX-5's ROCK!! I will gaurantee anyone who says otherwise hasnt driven one.
Theres a reason why EVERY motoring press herald it as the best handling sportscar. And what on earth does everyone mean "they're a bit slow". I'm sorry but 146bhp in a hatch (oh, that'll be more than most MG's) is considered fairly powerful, let alone something that weighs as much as a baked bean tin.

Get to the turns and even a 1.6 will wipe its **** with most hot hatches due to its low c of g.



Does EVERY motoring press herald the MX-5 as a better handling sports can than a Lotus Elise? Let's face it, on public roads only a fool would push the handling on a modern car and take any more risk than necessary, any 2 seat convertible with standard doors to allow elegant mini-skirted entrance/exit has to be in the hairdressers category, they are for posing, not driving. Led by the SLK as driven by top stylists.

Here's a go at top my top 15 femi-mobiles:
1. Mercedes SLK
2. Porsche Boxster
3. MX-5
4. MR-2
5. MGF/TF
6. Suzuki Vitara
7. RAV 4
8. Jeep Wrangler
9. Freelander
10. Tigra
11. Puma
12. Z3
13. Peugeot 307cc
14. Z4
15. Ford Ka.
16. Renault Clio
17. VW Polo

As for me, my 2 cars would be considered to be flat cap and grandad cars - I am very pleased and proud to say.

Does EVERY motoring press herald the MX-5 as a better handling sports can than a Lotus Elise? Let's face it, on public roads only a fool would push the handling on a modern car and take any more risk than necessary, any 2 seat convertible with standard doors to allow elegant mini-skirted entrance/exit has to be in the hairdressers category, they are for posing, not driving. Led by the SLK as driven by top stylists.

Yep, I'm a fool by your book (and pretty damn proud), I push the car reasonably hard on public roads - having said that, the handling prowess of a '5 is such that you won't need to be anywhere NEAR its limits and still have a lot of fun (also, ever heard of good steering feel, and ever tried using a proper short-throw gearbox that you want to shift just for the hell of it?). Following your logic, the same could also be said of some ZR and ZS drivers who indulge in driving a car closer to its handling limits? And they're not copping any flak in this thread because their cars have tin tops?

Need I mention again how great the '5 handles on track? I say this not because I want to show off, but I couldn't find a better compromise between road and track use that gives classic rear-drive handling and yet comfortable and just practical enough to handle the daily commute. I'm in no position to afford a track only car and a daily driver, I see the best of both worlds in the form of the MX-5 - why would I need something which I'd have to clamber over high sills or small/no doors to get into, just so you could call me "hardcore"?

As for the pose value - what's wrong with that? Hey, if stylists like driving my car, then great, always nice to know someone who's in good authority on style approves of my choice. If i'm gonna stop choosing a car I like simply because somebody calls me a poseur, that'd make me a pretty insecure person won't it? Moreover, what if I really am posing? What does that prove? That I'm less of a driver than the guy in a ZS because he has a sensible car with 5 seats, boot space and a roof?

Yes, posing is certainly a function, but I don't see how posing AND driving are mutually exclusive.

I couldn't agree with you more mate.

Yep, I'm a fool by your book (and pretty damn proud), I push the car reasonably hard on public roads - having said that, the handling prowess of a '5 is such that you won't need to be anywhere NEAR its limits and still have a lot of fun (also, ever heard of good steering feel, and ever tried using a proper short-throw gearbox that you want to shift just for the hell of it?). Following your logic, the same could also be said of some ZR and ZS drivers who indulge in driving a car closer to its handling limits? And they're not copping any flak in this thread because their cars have tin tops?

Need I mention again how great the '5 handles on track? I say this not because I want to show off, but I couldn't find a better compromise between road and track use that gives classic rear-drive handling and yet comfortable and just practical enough to handle the daily commute. I'm in no position to afford a track only car and a daily driver, I see the best of both worlds in the form of the MX-5 - why would I need something which I'd have to clamber over high sills or small/no doors to get into, just so you could call me "hardcore"?

As for the pose value - what's wrong with that? Hey, if stylists like driving my car, then great, always nice to know someone who's in good authority on style approves of my choice. If i'm gonna stop choosing a car I like simply because somebody calls me a poseur, that'd make me a pretty insecure person won't it? Moreover, what if I really am posing? What does that prove? That I'm less of a driver than the guy in a ZS because he has a sensible car with 5 seats, boot space and a roof?

Yes, posing is certainly a function, but I don't see how posing AND driving are mutually exclusive.

I've nothing against posing, but the MX-5 doesn't do that better than others.
It's just my opinion, but after years of being a daft driver, one day I realised that I should really be trying to drive as safely as possible, something to do with working a diagnostic imaging dept in the NHS. I say again though, it's my opinion and I don't evangelise (much). I have to say though there is a world of difference between a place that has everything going the same way, run off areas, gravel traps, tyre walls and the other place with lamposts, walls vehicles coming the other way, pedestrians, bicycles, appalling surfaces. Especially without helmets, firewalls, rollbars and fivepoint harnesses. In my experience of these places, the MX-5s tend to get in the way a bit, as do the MGZs.

I'll shut up now. I'm glad you enjoy your car, but I couldn't have one, nowhere for the kids. Please be careful, and on your track days keep an eye on the mirror.

hgf you are spot on they are girl cars how can you feel like a man in a car like that get a mans car
Get a mans car???!!
LMFAO
Ok does owning an eg civic vti which runs 7 seconds to 60 and low a 15 1/4 milecount as a mans car? Stripped out to go on trtack, but i guess that makes it a girls car too?!
Dont wanna dis zr's but everyone ive encountered cant keep up, mine is a 93 k reg, and it is still outperforming things with much bigger displacement that are much newer

On that thought il go and buy an mg, a real mans car hmmm..... ; )

Just because a car is a 2-seater and doesnt have a thumping great engine up front doesnt make it "girly" or "poofy". I agree with the comments that someone who needs to buy a car to pull girls with or to "prove his manliness" is a bit shallow.


It's sad that even in 05 we still label ppl purely on what they drive. I'm a 16-year-old batty boy, so according to these unwritten rules i should be ordering a Mini cabrio or a Suzuki Vitara for when i am 18. No. I want a Triumph Acclaim as a first car. I also would like a ZS when i can afford one. I also like Japanese performance cars! Shock Horror! Why do i wan't them, because i like the looks (well maybe not the Acclaim's) and they are all fast. (Acclaim - a 7500rpm 70bhp 1300cc saloon, pretty quick for an early 80s small car)

See how stupid this sterotyping is?

My hairdresser has a Toyota Celica and is looking to get a new one on plate change..........

Not a girls car, but men shouldnt be seen dead driving one. Go Volvo.. a mans car :D

At the risk of sounding like a raging homosexual, (i can assure you i am not), I rather like the MX-5 in its original guise (i.e the '89 to '95 cars). They have enough power, handle fantastically, and coupled with a roll bar, LSD and nice meaty exhaust/induction upgrades, they make fantastic fun track cars, I would buy one today if only it wasnt so impractical. (and small)

The newer ones have become more girly, more easy to use day in day out and as such have lost the point, they are a fashion statement without a doubt, a handbag on wheels.

I challange you to drive a mkI on a wet day and not come away smiling.

Besides which the styling on the MkI was based on the lotus elan, which is gorgeous. Both cars look so simple but it works for me. Obviously not in the same league as bigger power, "proper" rwd sports cars, but for little cash thrills they cant be beat (you can get a clean '89 / '90 example for £1500, check ebay)

**one point tho - emma peel drove an elan in the avengers, so girls car from the start??

[QUOTE=AndyC]I think any two seater convertible will be labelled a girls/hairdressers car, even the F and TF. Hell, even the MR2 Targas are called hairdressers specials!

There are a couple of two seaters that spring to mind that i have never seen a woman/girl drive, and are definatly male cars....




...Honda S2000
...Atom:cool:
...Exige

[QUOTE=AndyC]I think any two seater convertible will be labelled a girls/hairdressers car, even the F and TF. Hell, even the MR2 Targas are called hairdressers specials!

There are a couple of two seaters that spring to mind that i have never seen a woman/girl drive, and are definatly male cars....




...Honda S2000
...Atom:cool:
...Exige

Erm.....

S2000: Vicki Butler-Henderson
Atom: Not a two-seater
Exige: Not an open top

hehehehe

Erm.....

Atom: Not a two-seater


Oh yes it is! (Google image search - can;t be rsed to find a piccy)

How about the Lotus elise 340R then?

Oh yes it is! (Google image search - can;t be rsed to find a piccy)

How about the Lotus elise 340R then?

My bad!

For some reason i was thinking about Gordon Murray's Rocket, not the Ariel Atom.

Just because a car is a 2-seater and doesnt have a thumping great engine up front doesnt make it "girly" or "poofy". I agree with the comments that someone who needs to buy a car to pull girls with or to "prove his manliness" is a bit shallow.


It's sad that even in 05 we still label ppl purely on what they drive. I'm a 16-year-old batty boy, so according to these unwritten rules i should be ordering a Mini cabrio or a Suzuki Vitara for when i am 18. No. I want a Triumph Acclaim as a first car. I also would like a ZS when i can afford one. I also like Japanese performance cars! Shock Horror! Why do i wan't them, because i like the looks (well maybe not the Acclaim's) and they are all fast. (Acclaim - a 7500rpm 70bhp 1300cc saloon, pretty quick for an early 80s small car)

See how stupid this sterotyping is?

Actually , most of us sad old gits had pretty 'strange' tastes when we were sixteen, but usually ended up buying what we could afford. :D

I think my 'other' car is reasonably macho, but also great fun to drive, and it sounds awesome !

im sure mx5 are great fun but they do look a bit girly ,like all the mr2's

Right.



][/CODE] . When I started writing this I intended to contest you about your assertion that driving any but these three was girly. Maybe you're right...

I drive a GT6. Maybe closed cars are more manly. I dunno. All I know is that TR6 is a manly ****ing car. Anything else is arguable.E-type as well. OK maybe that is girly E types being girly??? Are you mad? Ever heard the phrase penis extension when reffering to the Etype Jag?

If you look at the spec sheet the MX-5 is a proper sports car, no question.

very stiff chassis
double wishbone all around
front engined rear wheel drive
limited slip diff

They look nice and drive very nice. I've never heard of them braking down, they don't rust etc. Unfortunately for me, the 1.8 is a little on the slow side, and its too small to fit in properly and I'm not too big.

Maybe its time to think that all these "hairdressers and girlies" are actually driving the proper cars and having alot more fun than the rest of us in the "mens" cars??

acctully you will find a proper sports car is mid engined rear wheel drive. being as the cars main weight is the engine putting it in the middle of the car make it more stable

Is the MX5 a girls car?

TBH I can't see how that could be answered.





It does scream 'I like men' though :)

acctully you will find a proper sports car is mid engined rear wheel drive. being as the cars main weight is the engine putting it in the middle of the car make it more stable

I beg to differ on this one. All Formula One race cars prior to the 60s were front engined and rear wheel drive, no-one would dispute the sports car status of the Aston DB4GT Zagato (even though the rest of the Astons could be called GTs), the Monte Carlo Mini was especially successful in rallying which is a recognised sport, as is the MG ZR, need I remind you of the Porsche 911? Heck, the Merc/McLaren SLR is a classic front engined, rear-drive car, with an AUTOMATIC gearbox!

I think the proper way to define a car's sporting potential is on how well it encourages the driver to drive in a sporting manner, chassic dynamics, while important, is only one part of the equation.

Moreover, a perfectly balanced, 50:50 weight distribution makes for completely neutral handling, with good tyres (eg the Dunlop Direzza DZ101s I've got), the car is so adjustable on all parts of a corner with the throttle - admittedly the '5 is not fast, but it handles so well it lets you do fun things (ie going completely sideways like a nut) and just balancing it with an oppy lock and throttle at a far lower (hence more controllable) speed than higher performance cars, and probably have more fun cos you get to do it more often, the car just encourages you to chuck it into a corner.

Test drove the MGF before I made my choice, it may hug a corner better on track, and the VVC may be faster. But in day to day condition it felt more like a hatch (notchy, imprecise gearchange, pretty long travel too compared to the '5), lack of steering feel (nice, small steering wheel though), high seating position. There's nothing like the rival bolt action of the MX5 gearshift.

Drove a friends Integra Type R once too, now I won't hesitate to label that a proper sports car, yes you drive it differently to a RWD, but it's still tons of fun pointing it into corners and shoot, and is SERIOUSLY fast. The steering is so sensitive you drive with your finger tips. That and the V-TEC scream too.

So to me, a sports car is any car that encourages you to really drive it, how it's driven and where the engine is doesn't really matter if it's done well.

And I've said this before, anyone who bases his/her purchasing decision on what others might think of him/her, has a serious insecurity problem. Maybe they really should go for an E-type for the reassurance :) (not dissing the car, a fine piece of work that is)

Colin Chapman revolutionised the race car layout a long, long time ago and racing has never looked back. The front engine layout places a pendulous mass out front at the end of a long moment arm and is something an engineer would like to remove. Caterhams notwithstanding (another Chapman config the 7 had the driver well toward the rear wheels effectively counteracting the pendulous action of the engine out front), front engine doesn't cut it as a race car.

Now as for Sports cars, what is a sports car? It's a toy race car, a road car that mimics some characteristic of a race car. Not many road cars are genuinely like race cars, they can't be. Road cars have to last years, be economical and practical (ie FIA firewall/rollcage not an option). Road car safety kit adds weight, and road regs compromise things badly. Most of all, a race car setup would not last five minutes on rough public roads. A road car setup would be laughed off the track. An Elise is closer to a race car than many things, the practicality is compromised by high sills necessary to give the required rigidity. In other cars the roll cage is also used to stiffen things up.

The MX-5 is a road car, totally and utterly. It drives a lot better than most road cars, but it's like a normal road car (say hot hatch) has 30% of a race car character, an MX-5 has 36%. Forget it, not worthwhile, the only place to really wring it out is on the track where there is no risk. Ask any pro. Race cars and road cars are chalk and cheese. Push your car hard on public roads and you are taking inappropriate risks. If you want to go fast round corners do it on a track, and do it with a car and driver that won't be a pain in the butt for everyone else. In my experience the MX-5s tend to get in the way with uneducated drivers not using their mirrors as they crawl around at a snails pace, frightened of a tyre-wall restyle. But I suppose if they paid their money they are entitled.

To answer the question in the thread topic, is the MX-5 a girls car. Ask the owner, if the owner is a girl then the answer is yes. In the UK I believe that the great majority of MX-5s on the road are owned/driven by women.

To interject in the earlier argument about four wheel drive. Definitely not drivers preference, as drive to the front wheels compromises the steering feel. It's nice to share some of the load around four pieces of rubber when you want to deliver power under less grippy conditions, but that's about it. Four wheel drive will win races on the loose, but rear drive will deliver the fun factor.

Roodosutaa im sorry i dont know you, but i think you have confused my post with something else. Im not arguing that the mx 5 is a fun car to drive, but you can't possible argue that f engined rwd is a better set up thatn mid engined rwd. with all the cars weight over the front wheels it leaves considerble wieght distribution problem's as you said in your post the car has to be tottaly balanced at all time's. With cornering the cars weight is naturally being transfered from wheel to wheel, depending on the corner, with the engine in the middle, it makes all four wheels take the enoras weight of the engine instead of the front two. Now im not saying the mgf is a proper sports car it just doesnt have the power, but if we were just looking at the set up it has potensal than the mx5 :)

The MX5 is still a girls car though, and i cant believe that this thread is still going...........LOL

It is a dreadfully camp thing.... you dont even find that mady poofs driving them, they would rather have a TF............ (no insult to poofs or TF drivers intended)

Yup...a poof here and I'd rather a TF / F anyday to an MX-5!!!

My mum's retirement present to herself is an MX-5...does that help???

(BTW - still trying to convince to get a TF)

front engine doesn't cut it as a race car.

As far as I'm concerned a race car is a car that is raced. Just because it doesn't comform to the optimum layout doesn't mean it can't be a race car. Besides no one mentioned race cars here. Plenty of sports cars cut if perfectly well on track with an FR layout. Like you say though, just because the engine is in the front doesn't mean it has to be too far forward. What's the difference in the engine being either side of the CofG (and with it being to the rear means the back of the car has the inertia and will want to oversteer, and lifting off causes it to turn more. how is that better)? Of course you're also forgetting the gearbox in the middle (closer to the centre than it would be in an MR car) and the diff at the back, again closer to the centre than it would be on most MR cars. BMW do a pretty good job of getting an FR car to have 50% weight distribution. That doesn't automatically give a car neutral handling either. The CofG and the neutral steer point need to be at the same place too. So you can have a 60/40 and still have "neutral" handling.

Ask any pro.

That would be me then, see my post above.

P.S. a longitudinal engine with a transaxel gearbox (ala ferrari 360) is essentially the same as a front engined rear wheel drive car with a shorter propshaft. Having a transverse engine with gearbox to one side all over the back wheels is not the same thing and not always better than FR.

That would be me then, see my post above.



OK then, ask Colin Chapman. The point is that mid engine is the better configuration.

OK then, ask Colin Chapman. The point is that mid engine is the better configuration.

Indeed.

I guess that's why he built the Elite, Elan S1/S2/S3/S4/Sprint/Plus2, the Elite2/Eclat/Excel and his company later betrayed him by building an Elan in front wheel drive :) Yep. NONE of them are sports cars. Neither are TVRs or Marcoses which, to this date, have NEVER made a proper sports car. The point is, as someone has already mentioned, for a ROAD car (as this topic should adhere to), practical issues such as packaging, foolproof safety factors, cost, etc FAR outweigh ultimate track performance. Colin Chapman's first attempt at a mid-engined road car was a bread van with windows you can't open and a removable laundry tub for a boot. I'd rather have an unregistered Type 47 which I have to put on a trailer to move it around than drive a Europa on the road as a daily driver.

Ever heard of the FRONT mid-engine configuration? Most modern front engined rear-drive cars are using this format ie mounting the engine as far back against the firewall as possible, the RX-8 is a prime example, as is the Corvette, and heck, even the MX-5 and almost all Beemers.

John: the comment in regards to car buyer insecurity wasn't directed at you but rather at those who love to generalise, i'm sorry i haven't made that clear. With regard to the weight over the front wheels, please refer to my comments on chassis configuration in the last paragraph. If you compare the longitudinal sectioned view of say, an M3 or an MX5 and compare it with that of your MGF, a Boxster or an MR2 Spyder, you'd be able to see that the drivetrain are contained within the wheelbase, the only difference is, the whole drivetrain is concentrated just above or slightly forward of the rear wheels, the front-engined cars have the engine, transmission, propshaft, diff evenly spread down the length of the wheelbase and the cabin space is more rear biased.

Somebody spoke of the pendulum effect, and I believe mid-engined cars suffer more from this due to the weight concentration AND more extreme weight transfer on throttle application (having said that, modern chassis control electronics have done wonders to cure this). Yes a skilled driver can overcome or prevent losing control in the first place, but I don't claim to be a driving expert, I attend track days regularly but at times I do put the car into a slide or even a spin - and I'd go for a car that's forgiving on my mistakes and allows me ample time to easily correct the wheel towards the slide, even if it's ultimately half a second slower a lap, than something that goes all-out hugging the apex and THEN lets go and put me into a spin. However I beleive the smaller mid engined cars like the MGF and MR2 are pretty safe cars to drive because they're underpowered for their chassis' capabilities (coming from an MX5, I should know what that's like :)), with the MR2 which I've driven a bit mroe twitchy in the wet.

Don't get me wrong, I won't harbour any fantasy that in absolute terms or an extreme competitive situation, a front engined car will perform better than an equally well designed mid-engined car, given the same conditions. But my understanding of this topic is on the MX-5, which is probably one of the best compromises for a fun, sporting ROAD car given its price/fun factor. You pick the right tools for the job and shouldn't use a lightsabre to carve up your roast beef ;)

Having said that, I won't say no if someone offers me a Dino 246GT or an Esprit S2 (non-turbo), cos they just look horn. Or an Ariel Atom, or The Rocket. At least those two are purer in their design, no compromise at all, if i'm gonna have the "ultimate" performance configuration.

it clearly is a girl's car. but i'n a girl, and i havn'r got one....perhaps it's more of a 'hairdressers' thing?:naughty:

Just because it doesn't comform to the optimum layout doesn't mean it can't be a race car.

Thats all well and good but given the choice id rather have somthing designed to do the job in hand. instead of something thats as just as capabile.


Roodosutaa i do understand your argument, You pick the right tools for the job and shouldn't use a lightsabre to carve up your roast beef.

yeah i get your point exactly, for normal road use the mx5 is a good car with its front engined rwd platform. and unless it was put on a track you probably wouldnt tell the differnce between the two cars.


But please bear in mind im not slagging off the mx5 at all (i dont slate cars till i drive them). I was just stating givin the same viarbles ie: power weight ratio. And if the only differnace between the two cars was where the engine was poistioned id take the mid engined car, on its track potionsal alone.


And to answer the original question, no the mx5 aint a girls car.

I disagree...no matter what the statistics are re performance or engine configuration or whether it is classed as a sportscar...whether it has all the characteristics which give it sportscar pedigree.... the MX5 MUST be a girlie car...I have yet to see one in my area being driven by anyone other than a blonde female. I am not making a generalisation. I am merely reporting the facts as they are where I live! However, I see plenty of F/TFs driven by both sexes though...in fact, I have seen more male drivers of F/TFs than female....!

I disagree...no matter what the statistics are re performance or engine configuration or whether it is classed as a sportscar...whether it has all the characteristics which give it sportscar pedigree.... the MX5 MUST be a girlie car...I have yet to see one in my area being driven by anyone other than a blonde female. I am not making a generalisation. I am merely reporting the facts as they are where I live! However, I see plenty of F/TFs driven by both sexes though...in fact, I have seen more male drivers of F/TFs than female....!

Well... what can I say, besides "good for you"! :)

Not having noticed the male/female proportions of MX5ers in the UK the last time I was there, I'd say the opposite of what you said is true round my way (we do get factory sanctioned turbocharged versions of the '5 prepared by Prodrive - perhaps that might have made the differnece, perhaps not). Far less MGs here though, not helped by the pricing and perceived unreliability/poor residuals etc over here. Perhaps that may be the case for the '5 in blighty, who knows.

But until the day your area becomes the world centre for a true cross-section of mx5/mgf owner demography, your opinion remains, well... an opinion in a sea of opinions on an internet forum.

John: ah... jsut relax. I've never taken offence from your posts, if it's a constructive argument/opinion, I'd say keep them coming mate! :D

John: ah... jsut relax. I've never taken offence from your posts, if it's a constructive argument/opinion, I'd say keep them coming mate! :D

Yeah unlike alot of my peers on this forum i can see past mgr sometimes mate :)

Ermmmm.... excuse me, but did you read what I said? I said that in MY area that is what seems to be the case...I NEVER intimated that I was giving a totally balanced and statistically correct opinion. It was MY opinion, based on what I have observed....and as it is an open poll and open thread, open to ALL forum members, I gave MY opinion...that I....yes, I see the MX5 as a totally girlie car.

i really dont think he ment to offened andie

I've got use of a MK1 MX-5 1.8 at the moment as I've landed up with the task of selling it for someone. I have to say I'm impressed with it.
I know it's perceived as being "girly", but it is great fun to drive. The handling is fantastic, very entertaining on our local country lanes. No power steering though, so girly driver's would need to spend some time down the gym to be able to park the thing.

Bl00dy hell, is this thread still alive, and yes is the answer to the question........

Parked waiting on Sainsbury's last night,four TF's came and went, all driven by ladies!!Personally I don't think its the MX5 itself, I just think a bloke driving one looks girlie. Anyway, my brother in law has just bought one, so I would say it's more of an Ar$eholes car!!

Parked waiting on Sainsbury's last night,four TF's came and went, all driven by ladies!!Personally I don't think its the MX5 itself, I just think a bloke driving one looks girlie. Anyway, my brother in law has just bought one, so I would say it's more of an Ar$eholes car!!

The MX-5 is the automotive equvalent of a floral hanging basket.

The MX-5 is the automotive equvalent of a floral hanging basket.

Its a great little sports car which is fun to drive and reliable. They are also well built, a little under powered but all in all a great little sports car and IMO a better drive than the MGF, which always gives me a feeling of sitting on it rather than in it. A personal perspective of course....

Is the MX-5 a girls car?

Nope, I think they also sell them to men too!

Is the MX-5 a girls car?

Nope, I think they also sell them to men too!

Yes, they make great presents.

And they have a neat little space on the bootlid for a rainbow flag.

:rolleyes:

Yes, they make great presents.

And they have a neat little space on the bootlid for a rainbow flag.

:rolleyes:

Gay people have good taste too it would seem.....

Just read the last page or two only of this thread. It's a topic that has been done to death on other car sites too. The answer obviously is yes and no.

FWIW, most of the two seaters I now see locally be they MGFs or what have you are driven by females. Shows good taste in my books and single career type females have alot more income and purchasing power than when I were a lad. Where I work there's a tasty Solar Blue (? great colour anyway) MGTF driven by and even tastier looking female. Attractive combination.

Is this thread STILL alive!?!?!?!

I've been talking to my friend who's a councillor for couples and sexual problem (he gets some weirdo's in, but thats another story)

Anyway, his proffesional opinion is that people who think MX-5's are girls cars have repressed homosexual urges that they are trying to deal with?!?!?!

My old one didnt even come close to the power of my turbo but it makes you grin like a big kid, and unless you've driven one you simply wont understand why.

Is this thread STILL alive!?!?!?!

I've been talking to my friend who's a councillor for couples and sexual problem (he gets some weirdo's in, but thats another story)



It's amazing what the council tax is being used for these days.

See I think the main problem is that the phrase hairdresser and girlie car came from the media and the label has stuck, and we know which motoring journalist is to blame, once he shoves a label on something it sticks.

Very same label has stuck with BMW owners (thanks to Sniff Petrol) and Porsche Boxster owners being called a poor mans Porsche (thanks to same journalist)

I also own an Alfa and get continious mick taking about breaking down they do forget it's been heavily modified like my MX5.

Im my area I see as many men as women in the MX5, same goes for MGF's, MR2's or any convertible for that matter.

At the end of the day, if you love driving your car, and you enjoy it, who cares what other people think and label it a girly car.

I usually put that to rest at traffic lights or round some good corners!

At the end of the day, if you love driving your car, and you enjoy it, who cares what other people think and label it a girly car.

I usually put that to rest at traffic lights or round some good corners!

I have just given in to the sunny days and purchased an old L reg flip up headlight MX-5 for my daily commute. It was an impulse purchase and unusual for me but for a 56000 mile car with full impeccable history for £2.5K I had to do it, I reckon I can sell it for a profit around the end of september when I get bored with it.

After one week I can say it is totally effeminate/very gay, but really nice to enjoy the sunny days without a roof, and most of the other MX-5 drivers are ladies who smile at me as I pass - really annoys the wife!

I would rate its much lauded drivability as quite good, but nothing really special and as I have always said for 95% of all driving conditions can't be explored anyway.

I would rate its much lauded drivability as quite good, but nothing really special and as I have always said for 95% of all driving conditions can't be explored anyway.

So can I ask what, to you, makes drivability really special?

I have to say that i always thought they were a girlie car, but my opinion changed when i got together with my current girl friend who has one. Having now driven it, they are great fun to throw around corners, and a pretty quick in a straight line to.

As some one said above, most other drivers of them are women, but they always wave and smile. Its like walking around a supermarket with a baby - instant magnet for women. (stands by to get flamed for that one).

All in all, i dont really care what people think of me when i drive it, i have fun while driving it so i couldnt really give s sh(t.

All in all, i dont really care what people think of me when i drive it, i have fun while driving it so i couldnt really give s sh(t.

The best way to be in my book!

So can I ask what, to you, makes drivability really special?

Why? Don't you know?

Why? Don't you know?

Sorry?

You seem to think I am challenging you, I asked you to explain what YOU felt made a good drivers car. To most the MX-5 is a little gem, to you its OK. I was wondering what you look for thats all?

You really are very defensive Dun old boy....

Sorry?

You seem to think I am challenging you, I asked you to explain what YOU felt made a good drivers car. To most the MX-5 is a little gem, to you its OK. I was wondering what you look for thats all?

You really are very defensive Dun old boy....

No, not at all. However I refer you to my previous 'contrary' remark. You are argumentative for the sake of it. I think you 'protest too much'.

Me, I just can't be bothered. It's too hot.

No, not at all. However I refer you to my previous 'contrary' remark. You are argumentative for the sake of it. I think you 'protest too much'.

Me, I just can't be bothered. It's too hot.

Yes, I remember the remark, it was wrong then and its wrong now, but as Vicky Pollard would say "Wot Eva"

but as Vicky Pollard would say

How appropriate.



You are the internet manifestation of a BMW driver.
On the road I would patiently allow you to cut in at the lane drop as the the one car length would clearly be very important to you.
So, please, be my guest and have the last word.


Cue denial below:

girly car or not i bet mg wished they had the cabability to produce its like

my boss at work has one as a spare car, but still think it and the F is a girly car, do like them though :D

Of course it's a girls car. And having spied the lovely ladies I have seen at the helm in them I would be extremely happy to be in the passenger seat too. :naughty: :naughty:

in stndard form yes

it changes when you put the Vielside kit on it tho

Definately a girl's car, but aren't all convertables?

Definately a girl's car, but aren't all convertables?

What? The Austin Healey 3000 a girls car?

in stndard form yes

it changes when you put the Vielside kit on it tho

Yeah, then it turns into a puke magnet on wheels!!

I'd rather be a girl to some, than a riceboy to everyone.

Veilside kit on a '5, now I can't think of a bigger sacrilege. Hmmm i wonder how Veilside would design a kit for the Big Healey? Should be a sight.

i totally agree with the point above from Roodosutaa its boy racer vile

Is the MX 5 a girls car? (http://showthread.php?p=952016#post952016) Yes! MR2 would be the equivalent male ;)

edit MR2 TT or Revision

Yes! MR2 would be the equivalent male ;)

edit MR2 TT or Revision


please say your joking :yikes:

Definately a girl's car, but aren't all convertables?
Er no i thought that until i saw a Z8 which i don think women should be allowed 2 drive.

Z8's are just the ugliest cars on the road

No way a Z8 is worse than a Z4. At the very least the Z8 makes an attempt to be cohesive. The Z4....dear oh God!

Is this thread still alive!

Pah, its not a girls car, boys car or anything, its a DRIVERS car. Why? Cuz unless you've driven one you won't know why.

No way a Z8 is worse than a Z4. At the very least the Z8 makes an attempt to be cohesive. The Z4....dear oh God!

Z4's? Surely Not? Granted the base model lacks a bit of poke but more endowed versions are pretty quick.

Definately a girl's car, but aren't all convertables?

Absolutely, whenever I see an AC Cobra i Think "woo hoo, mincer alert".

MX5, Z4, S2000... ewwww, not nice... i personally dont like them....

The MX-5 maybe a girly car, but so is the MG F/TF. The MX-5 is better built, more reliable, better balanced and better round corners than the MG F/TF. That's why it completely trounces the MG in sales. The MX-5 is what the MG should've been. There is no compelling reason to by an MG F/TF over an MX-5.

I owned an MX-5 and have driven a TF. I preferred my MX-5 in every way, especially it's handling and the ease of putting the hood down - two catches and done. No zips or stuff!

It may be girly, but it's the best in its class!

Stewart (let the flaming begin)

The MX-5 maybe a girly car, but so is the MG F/TF. The MX-5 is better built, more reliable, better balanced and better round corners than the MG F/TF. That's why it completely trounces the MG in sales. The MX-5 is what the MG should've been. There is no compelling reason to by an MG F/TF over an MX-5.

I owned an MX-5 and have driven a TF. I preferred my MX-5 in every way, especially it's handling and the ease of putting the hood down - two catches and done. No zips or stuff!

It may be girly, but it's the best in its class!

Stewart (let the flaming begin)

Many here might not agree with a lot of that! :lol:
I for one don't agree with most of it! Then again it's all down to personal preference. :toastie:

I like both. I have to say the MX-5 would be my choice though. I had one on loan from my sis-in-law a while back and my neighbour had an F. The F was a '98 S plate and the MX-5 a '94 M plate with over twice the mileage. On wet mornings I would jump into a bone dry MX-5 while the neighbour had to replace the wet towel on the driver seat!
I did enjoy my drive in a 160 Trophy when it was launched though!

yeha i think its a girly car n a hairdressers car

yeha i think its a girly car n a hairdressers car

The MX5 I hope? :lol:

The MX5 I hope? :lol:
Loaky disproves that the TF is a hairdresser’s car by looking like he needs a visit to the hairdressers.:lol:

The hairdresser round the corner from my house drives a ZR!

The MX-5 maybe a girly car, but so is the MG F/TF. The MX-5 is better built, more reliable, better balanced and better round corners than the MG F/TF. That's why it completely trounces the MG in sales. The MX-5 is what the MG should've been. There is no compelling reason to by an MG F/TF over an MX-5.

I owned an MX-5 and have driven a TF. I preferred my MX-5 in every way, especially it's handling and the ease of putting the hood down - two catches and done. No zips or stuff!

It may be girly, but it's the best in its class!

Stewart (let the flaming begin)

i think you will find that in the F/TF's life it outsold all MX5 varients in the UK,and you cant use the sales total as an indicative figure as the F/TF was not sold in as many countries as the MX5

Loaky disproves that the TF is a hairdresser’s car by looking like he needs a visit to the hairdressers.:lol:


I thought us TF'ers were supposed to stick together! :_poke:

Though on a humerous note, you wouldn't believe I get free haircuts would you! :lol:

Though on a humerous note, you wouldn't believe I get free haircuts would you! :lol:
Do they use a guide dog?

Do they use a guide dog?

Haha nope, I like to keep a fair bit of hair up there, keeps my head warm in the winter months of topless driving! :D

Glad to see the thread I started is still going strong :)

Haha nope, I like to keep a fair bit of hair up there, keeps my head warm in the winter months of topless driving! :D

what do you do about getting a nip on if your topless?

I would never buy a mg tf/f ever, thats for one reason and we all know what that is.

The mx5 in that respect has proved itself more reliable.

instead you drive a rover 800 !?!?!?!? :lol: enough said

I would never buy a mg tf/f ever, thats for one reason and we all know what that is.

i dont know what that reason is? ive had a tf before and it was reliable? not sure what your point is? have you owned a one and had a bad experience?

The MX-5 is a mid life crisis mobile, but then again I drive a coffin dodger mobile:twak2:

the mx-5 is a hairdressers car. Im not saying that every bloke that has an mx-5 is gay, but quite a few are. The f/tf i suppose is a bit of a haridressers car because its a soft top, but not like the mx-5.

Oh i belive the tf160 just about beats the mx-5 on 0-60.

I dont trust the K series engine at all (lest we forget the recent tf 160 hgf thread) and for all you guys may say that might have been down to poor maintainence, read the thread.

I would like to see any evidence of hgf on either the 1.6/1.8 mazda engines, thats why I would put my money on an mx-5, peace of mind.

instead you drive a rover 800 !?!?!?!? :lol: enough said

I dont quite follow the emoticon but yes I drive an 820 vitesse, your point is? I bought the car to last me through my third year at uni, after which im getting another car. Laugh if you want, but one day your coolant will start to drop and then I hope you think of me, as its not a matter of if but when.

Totally unbiased view,

My wife has a MGF and tbh both these and the MX-5's are associated with girls cars or hairdressers cars.

The MX-5 handles better and drives better but the MGF looks loads better hence why we got one of these rather than the MX5.

Also New mx-5 steering is not the best i have to say, far toooo light

is it hydraulic or electric powered steering?

hydraulic, as Allah intended

Good stuff, should still provide good feed back then:)

Good stuff, should still provide good feed back then:)

Huh? The steering wheel in my old F was alive in my hands. More feedback would have been too much!

im talking about mx5 :)

if your wheel is that jerky you might have wanted to check the tracking/balancing heheheh :D

im talking about mx5 :)

if your wheel is that jerky you might have wanted to check the tracking/balancing heheheh :D

The MX-5 i drove was brand new as i won a comp to test drive the RX-8 / MX-3 / MX-5 and not drive slow either !!!!

The MX-3 though is one hell of a car, quite quick and the handling is superb, rather one of those than the MX-5 for sure.

The MX-5 i drove was brand new as i won a comp to test drive the RX-8 / MX-3 / MX-5 and not drive slow either !!!!

The MX-3 though is one hell of a car, quite quick and the handling is superb, rather one of those than the MX-5 for sure.

What's the MX-3???? You mean the early 1990s bug-shaped front wheel drive coupe thing with the world's smallest V6? Horses for courses, but quantifiably it cannot outhandle the '5 in standard form.

I wonder how u managed to test drive the MX-3 along with the MX-5 and RX-8 though, seeing as they're from different era's. Unless the MX3 is something else entirely in the UK to the one I know in Oz (if it is, I'd be really interested to know how Mazda managed to do something better than the '5 and not sending us any of those :))

Anyone ever driven an F/TF with the power steering unplugged/switched off (I've heard of people wiring in a switch into it), does it feel much better driving with it off?

Looking at this poll, Mazda hit the jackpot,a car which appeals to at least 50% of the population.Id say that is pretty good marketing !!!A car thats cheapish, stylish ,nippy and compact.Sounds like what most women are looking for when clothes buying - a bargain !!!

The 800 series has its problems like every other car on the road gearbox for one but at the end of the day who cares what other people think as long as we are happy to drive them

Just wondered if I'm totally alone in this opinion, or whether other people share this view? Is the MX5 a girls car? To me it has nothing manly about it. It looks like something advertised on telly for women (made by Tampax or lillets or someone). If Mazda claimed the car had wings it really woudn't surprise me. :)

The MG TF on the other hand, appeals to both sexes. The cars looks appeal to everyone. It manages to achieve what great sportscar design is about. Hell its lasted as a design much longer than the Mx5. So if Rover produces old men's cars (which they don't), then perhaps the press should point out that Mazda makes girls cars?
No, i'm not having that.

If the MX-5's a girls car then so is the TF.

Anyway, what are you on about, the MX-5's been going for much longer than the F/TF.

No, i'm not having that.

If the MX-5's a girls car then so is the TF.

Anyway, what are you on about, the MX-5's been going for much longer than the F/TF.

i love the way you can ruin a perfectly good conversion with utter drivel

i love the way you can ruin a perfectly good conversion with utter drivel
I love the way you haven't got a leg to stand on against me, so immediately resort to getting personal. And you're so bad at attacking me.

I'm a giant and i don't need to move until i'm provoked, you've got to jump and swing up to hit me in the knees John. :jester:

The MGF and TF sure look nicer than an MX5 but thats where it ends! The MX5 although slower , drives much better , is far more reliable and the build quality is in a differant league to the MG.
I love MGs but if it where my money i was spending it'd be the mazda every time.

I voted "Yes".

The standard question to a man in this car is "Oh, did your big sister lend you her car?".