There is a huge difference between having an opinion about a car and having to live with it. Mazda's MX-5 is a case in point, for me anyway.
Way back in 1989, I had just left university and lusted deeply after the pert little MX-5 (Miata in some markets – Editor) , recently released and relatively affordable - at least if you had a decent job (which I didn't). I even had a brochure for the thing, on the off-chance that I decided to get off my bum and get a real job rather than bumbling about in a Computer Science department. The motoring magazine reviews were all breathless about the car’s handling, if a little shy about the performance. The continual stream of reports of how badly the Ford Capri would be nailed over a twisty piece of blacktop was proof enough that the MX-5 was drop-dead, drop-top desirable.
So I lusted from a distance, test drove occasionally, but didn't buy. Finally, eighteen months ago, I drove a couple of MX-5s around the local dealerships. The first few were 1989 models, not in great shape (oil leaks, tired engines, tired shock absorbers) that didn't appeal. It wasn't until I drove a power-steered, 1993 model that some of the motoring magazine magic became apparent. The motor spun freely and rasped nicely, the steering was nicely weighted, the paint was shiny (for a four and a half year old car, anyway), it generally shouted "Buy me, thrash me, slide me". The promised MX5 premise was intact: when you want to play, it's ready to play; when you want to doze along in traffic, it'll happily trade off the relatively prosaic economy car underpinnings and slob along in peak hour without breaking down or overheating. I was sold.
The MX-5 turned up in the driveway to the surprised delight of my wife, who had resigned herself to apologizing to people about the rusty Alfas that normally occupied the driveway. In fact I still had a rusty Alfa - the Alfetta GTV - but progress in turning it into a real boy racer’s toy had stumbled for a lack of ideas about what do with the car’s under-achieving chassis. It rolled too much, tyressquealing, floppy old springs and worn shock absorbers conspiring to make the car a slow-responding handful whenever the road got interesting. The previous owner had wound the front torsion bars down in an effort to lower the car (strictly for appearance, I think). While it looked low, it also understeered with conviction. It did ride well though, and the engine was fresh, with 45mm carbs and early, pre-pollution camshafts, so it performed reasonably well, albeit at late '70’s performance levels.
In complete contrast to the Alfa, the MX-5 was zippy, wasn't breaking out in brown scabs, had shiny paint and an ability to change direction which defied belief. Although it had a propensity to slide in the rain which also defied belief Four Pirelli P6000's mostly cured the sliding, increasing the grip on all surfaces (wooden bridges aside - don't you wish somebody filmed your most spectacular recoveries every now and again?). I used the MX-5 for commuting, for fun; and the first 6 months were generally a blast, as long as I remembered to nail the throttle and never expect any power delivery under 4500rpm.
However, having the Alfetta free for mechanical work (tinkering that didn't necessarily have to end on Sunday night) lead to the car’s gradual improvement. I did some cheque-book chassis upgrades (GTV6 torsion bars at the front, reset the ride height to factory specifications, bought new rear springs), threw away the factory original, 20 year old shock absorbers and replaced them with Koni adjustables, had the camber/castor tweaked a little and suddenly the old girl started to lift her skirts. The MX-5 could, decisively, run away on a twisty road, but the gap suddenly wasn't so wide.
More modifications followed: 15 inch wheels and 55-series tyres replaced the 185/65/14's that squealed their displeasure at any attempt at spirited driving. The wheels, 3-piece Simmons units purchased secondhand, were initially troublesome (all that eulogising about light, 3-piece wheels never mentions the fact that the goop holding them together deteriorates, leaving the owner with a nasty bill for re-gooping!). The Simmons were light though - like four pie tins - and the change in unsprung weight, even with the heavier tyres, made the Alfetta lighter on her feet. It also made her tramline on rutted roads - but every car modification is a compromise. There was one big problem that I couldn't fix though: the brakes.
An MX-5 has brakes that work. They stop the car in a straight line, in short order, without fuss or too much noise. They don't overheat when driving on public roads, they are effective without lumping too much weight at each corner of the car, and they don't eat brake pads like they were Tim Tams. Twenty one years out of the factory, an Alfetta's brakes are, well, pathetic. Partly due to a weeping master cylinder, partly due to some overly hard pads that were more suited to racing than street driving, I had a car which squealed, graunched, and refused to stop in a straight line on even a mildly rutted road. It also took an inordinate amount of road to pull up - making commuting a bit of an adventure. Road tests from 1978 heaped praise on the brakes; I can only guess they were comparing them to a 1978 Corona or some other equally wooden-pedalled and drum-braked economy car.
I had tried different brake pads in the past with varying effect - pads that worked well when cold didn't hold up to any real work. Pads which were OK when hot were awful to live with until they warmed up. The real problem seemed to be that the front brakes were basically inadequate, too small, too prone to heat fade and no longer up to the performance of the rest of the car. So, what to do? Go straight to Willwood (I wish) and order up a set of enormous, cross-drilled dinner plates and calipers? A little excessive. Have a look at what the factory did on the later cars? Much better idea.
Alfa Romeo stuck with the Alfetta chassis from around 1973 to late 1989, through Alfetta, GT, GTV, GTV6, 90, Giulietta and 75. The later, V6-engined models had Brembo ventilated disks and Brembo calipers. Much lighter, aluminium calipers as it turns out (the original Alfetta units are iron, heavy as buggery, grabbing 10mm thick solid, not ventilated, disks). I had to have some of that Brembo action. Big problem though – the later cars all had 5 stud wheels and I really wanted to keep the 4 stud Simmons wheels that had cost me a fortune to refurbish. Local Alfa place to the rescue! "We can drill the disks, no problem, no mess, no fuss, costs a fortune for the calipers though". A week later it was done. It did cost a fortune, too. Some A$800 more than the entire car cost me 3 years ago, in fact, but Ferrari has Brembo and now, so did the sad-looking GTV!
I carefully bedded-in the brakes over a week or so then pointed the scabby nose of the Alfetta into heavy, fast moving Sydney traffic to see whether the upgrade was worth it. It was worth it. It now stops like a modern car; much better than the MX-5 in fact. The disks do grumble a little when cold (pad material choice again, I think) but the first time I really leaned on the brake pedal, I thought I'd hit something solid. The poor guy behind me nearly did hit something solid...
The MX-5? Well, it still turned-in better than the Alfetta, but outbraking it in the Alfetta gives more confidence in being able to commit to a corner, so the fun quotient has increased dramatically. The MX-5 started to feel lethargic, it doesn't have the mid-range punch of Alfa's grumpy twin cam engine, nor the insane yowl when working hard. It also started to feel darty, unstable and unsure of itself over bumpy roads where the low weight of the car turns into a disadvantage and the bizarre weight distribution of the Alfetta starts to work (engine in the front, gearbox in the tail). I'm sure the 1.8 litre versions of the MX-5 are better, but they cost a (relative) fortune. I found myself jumping in the Alfetta much more than the MX-5.
I couldn't justify the little red temptress just sitting there, all shiny MX-5 come-on and me with no appetite for its cheap charms, so I sold it. Don't miss it either. It did prove a great benchmark for improvements on the older car, which was invaluable. An Alfa Spider is on the way to do top-down duties (not a new one though, a 1975 model in need of some TLC).
MX-5's do have one particularly attractive quality that an Alfetta never had and will never have - they hold their value well and there is a steady stream of happy buyers out there to take them off your hands. They'll test drive it and fall in love with the thing straight away, like I did. If they're lucky, they won't have some old, faded hero in the background, jealous and demanding attention. They won't realise that the instant accessability of the MX-5's performance is hiding a car whose depth of ability is thinner than it might first appear.
|