Photo by photobucket user aaa-111
Whew! It's been a hectic couple of weeks here in the gilded halls of IL, and posting the acceleration testing results of Project Miata's Kraftwerks-supercharged ways has been lurking conspicuously on my to-do list.
Okay, excuses are over. Across the jump is what you came here to see.
Now that it's got a solid Flyin' Miata clutch and flywheel -- and it's really quite remarkable in its similarity to stock pedal feel -- we were able to launch this puppy for real. Unlike when we tested it with the tired stock clutch, this time Project Miata could actually get out of the hole. See digits below.
Also, we re-tested the handling just for yuks. 1.03g in the house.
And no, that's not Project Miata in the lead shot. But it's pretty awesome, is it not? There are a few more shots of it here, but no information unfortunately.
(If you want a reminder of what a stock first-gen Miata with average miles can do nowadays, amuse yourself with our old white car's baseline performance test results. Hilarity will ensue.)
Vehicle: 1997 Mazda MX-5 Miata
Odometer: 130,377
Date: 4/5/11
Driver: Chris Walton
Specifications:
Drive Type: Rear-wheel drive
Transmission Type: Five-speed manual
Engine Type: Supercharged and intercooled inline-4
Displacement (cc/cu-in): 1,839/112
Redline (rpm): 7,200
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 173 @ 6,900 (Dynojet chassis dyno)
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 141 @ 5,900 (Dynojet chassis dyno)
Brake Type (front): 10.0-inch one-piece ventilated cast-iron discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Brake Type (rear): 9.9-inch one-piece solid cast-iron discs with single-piston sliding calipers
Steering System: Hydraulic-assist rack-and-pinion power steering
Suspension Type (front): Double wishbones, FatCat Motorsports adjustable ride-height coilovers with coil springs and monotube dampers, Racing Beat hollow stabilizer bar and 949Racing endlinks
Suspension Type (rear): Double wishbones, FatCat Motorsports adjustable ride-height coilovers with coil springs and monotube dampers, 949Racing endlinks
Tire Size (front and rear): 225/45ZR15 87W
Tire Brand: Hankook
Tire Model: Ventus R-S3
Tire Type: Summer
Wheel Size: 15-by-9 inches front and rear 949Racing 6UL
Wheel Material (front/rear): Aluminum
As Tested Curb Weight (lb): 2,342
Test Results:
Acceleration
0 - 30 (sec): 2.4
0 - 45 (sec): 4.4
0 - 60 (sec): 7.1
0 - 60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 6.8
0 - 75 (sec): 10.1
1/4 Mile (sec @ mph): 15.0 @ 92.0
Handling
Slalom (mph): 71.6
Skid Pad Lateral Acceleration (g): 1.03
Comments
Acceleration: A little tricky to launch because of the sticky tires and torque-challenged engine. Here's the deal -- it's now possible to break the tires free, but the engine cannot maintain the wheelspin and bogs down hard. Finally using some of that new clutch, I maintained spin beyond the bogging point and kept revs up. Voila. But there's a problem -- that "mystery gear" between 3rd and 5th where the gear lever definitely finds "home" but no actual gear. Did this several times in a row (also did a 2-5 upshift!) before actually finding third gear.
Handling: Skidpad: As before, breathtaking grip, unbelievable poise and adjustability and maybe, just maybe, scooping out the seat lowered the center of gravity, earning it 0.02g more than before.
Slalom: As before, the car hits the rev limiter in 3rd gear -- requires 4th and it is tempting to go in too hot, slide controllably (and have a great time doing so), however the quickest run was "slow-in, fast-out" to maintain all four tires' grip throughout the run. So freakin' capable, confident and fun!
--Jason Kavanagh, Engineering Editor
bodyblue says:
11:16 AM, 04/26/11
What more do you need? Plenty fast for what it is!
banhugh says:
11:38 AM, 04/26/11
I am a little disappointed by the numbers. I guess I am spoiled by the stock Corvette which is almost a decade younger, 20 grand more expensive and has twice the engine displacement...
kevm14 says:
11:38 AM, 04/26/11
Right but it didn't get a ton faster. About half a second in 0-60 and 1/4 mile. Trap speed came up a bit, but not much. Now it's about as fast as a stock 95 Maxima 5-speed. I'm not saying it's slow, but I never really fully understood the chassis overachiever but speed underachiever. The slalom and skidpad reflect what is evidently a very lively chassis.
banhugh says:
11:38 AM, 04/26/11
I am a little disappointed by the numbers. I guess I am spoiled by the stock Corvette which is almost a decade younger, 20 grand more expensive and has twice the engine displacement...
sierrabravo says:
11:41 AM, 04/26/11
More than enough capability for a killer commuter car...how's the fuel economy? Thanks for posting. Major want. :-)
stovebolter says:
11:45 AM, 04/26/11
Very nice, thank you for getting the numbers up.
While the acceleration numbers aren't going to impress when stacked up against more expensive sports cars, they are very nice for this class - I pulled up the 2006 comparison between the miata and solstice to compare:
http://www.insideline.com/mazda/mx-5-miata/2006/comparison-test-2006-pontiac-solstice-vs-2006-mazda-mx-5-miata.html
The Rotrex is quite respectable.
Now about that hard top.... (kidding, sort of)
fundango says:
11:50 AM, 04/26/11
Given that this car put down 173whp on the dyno (200ish crank) and weighed in at only 2342 lbs, the acceleration times are disappointing.
It's a bit strange actually. This Miata runs pretty much even with a RSX Type-S in the 1/4 mile. Both cars make about 170whp on a dynojet, but the Miata has a 400+ lb weight advantage. It should be faster than the RSX.
Could be that the Miata (with its 225 width sticky tires and RWD) has too much traction for its own good...
banhugh says:
11:56 AM, 04/26/11
there is an echo in the comments section
jkavanagh says:
12:03 PM, 04/26/11
fundango, yup, Project Miata has heaps of traction, not a lot of low-end torque, plus a lot of rolling/aero resistance (relative to a stock Miata's skinny stock 185 tires).
hopster says:
12:07 PM, 04/26/11
Great Miata, but something is off. Back to the rollers!
banhugh says:
12:16 PM, 04/26/11
aero resistance? C'mon it's what 3 feet tall car, much lower than the RSX. Even if the tires are an overkill, I wouldn't think they are as bad of disadvantage as 400lb. I guess the problem might be gearing and the low numbers of torque. Actually torque must be similar to the Civic Si and so are their 0-60 times...
stovt001 says:
12:22 PM, 04/26/11
"I'm not saying it's slow, but I never really fully understood the chassis overachiever but speed underachiever."
Just take one up GMR or any decent mountain road and you will. On a public road with opposing traffic and the occaisional cyclist, I'll take nimbleness and communicative steering any day. I wouldn't mind more power, but I rarely miss it.
jkavanagh says:
12:26 PM, 04/26/11
banhugh, frontal area is not huge, but a Miata's stock Cd is really poor, and worsens substantially with wide front rubber. Protruding tread like it has now really hurts drag (and increases the frontal area!), which will erode trap speed. Gearing could also be contributing, I'll take a look.
sabastian says:
01:15 PM, 04/26/11
Wow! I've never been much of a "numbers guy", but 1.03g and 71.6mph are numbers that even I can't ignore. Impressive stuff, guys.
bodyblue says:
01:16 PM, 04/26/11
"banhugh, frontal area is not huge, but a Miata's stock Cd is really poor, "
Turn on the headlamps if you want to make it worse!
teampenske3 says:
01:45 PM, 04/26/11
So the big question now JKav, is, is it possible to improve the Miata's aerodynamics? 7.1 sec is very good, but w/ somewhere around 200 crank hp, I was expecting about a half second faster.
Thanks for posting, btw!
kevm14 says:
02:00 PM, 04/26/11
"Just take one up GMR or any decent mountain road and you will. On a public road with opposing traffic and the occaisional cyclist, I'll take nimbleness and communicative steering any day. I wouldn't mind more power, but I rarely miss it."
There's my problem. Lack of access to good roads.
ed124c says:
03:50 PM, 04/26/11
Good enough. Now I can sleep at night.
clarkma5 says:
05:51 PM, 04/26/11
Where's the video? :(
church123 says:
12:18 AM, 04/27/11
Still not getting the trap speed. I can understand launch issues, but the trap speed just doesn't jive.
I had an old Honda CRX that dyno'd about 180 on MD's dyno that would trap at 100 mph at the old Carlsbad dragstrip. Weight of the car with me in it was 2440 lbs. And that was with a non-intercooled supercharger that probably dropped 10+ hp between the launch and the traps as the charge temps went through the roof. My S2000, which dyno'd around 210 hp at MD when it was NA with an intake and header, and weighed about 3000 lbs with driver, trapped just under 100 mph at the same strip (and was also hard to launch and not aerodynamically gifted). Project Miata should be trapping a minimum of 95 mph and ideally a couple mph faster.
For further comparison, using the data from the test stovebolter posted, and power to weight ratios, I calculate that Project Miata should be running 6-8% higher trap speeds than the 89+ mph the stock 2006 was pulling (94-96 mph).
No matter how you look at it, either the car isn't making its measured power on the road for some reason (belt slip?), or something else isn't right.
joefrompa says:
04:15 AM, 04/27/11
Sorry to say this, but can we evaluate the driver?
:)
dagmar3 says:
06:36 AM, 04/27/11
The body is cutting checks the motor can't cover. The wing is hideous for a car that will lose a drag race against Grandpa's Toyota Avalon.
The hood ducts and wheels say "speed demon". The acceleration figures say "secretary's car".
Sure, it can handle. But that's half the equation.
there have been thousands of Miata projects over the past two decades: this one fails to impress.
bimmerjay says:
09:16 AM, 04/27/11
I echo the others that the acceleration numbers are soft, I'd also expect at least the low to mid 6 range given the power-to-weight ratio. Perhaps it is gearing combined with too little torque/too much traction. The skipad and slalom numbers are positively scorching, however. It makes you realize how amazing the handling numbers would be on cars like the BMW M3 if they had 1000 lbs less mass.
@dagmar3,
Perhaps you missed the part in the post where they said the picture was NOT of Edmunds' project Miata.
"And no, that's not Project Miata in the lead shot."
morrisg2 says:
11:57 PM, 04/27/11
Guys, look at the torque peak number: 141 @ 5900 rpm. It's a belt driven supercharger, so the compressor speed is locked to the crank speed. Ergo, low boost at low revs. I suspect if you look at the dyno curve of torque, you won't find a lot of grunt down low. All of which helps to explain the acceleration times.
For those who don't think much of the performance, I advise driving one at an autocross event where the sweet handling characteristics of the chassis allow the car to do amazing things quite easily.
chrisnick04 says:
10:24 PM, 04/29/11
I find the numbers a bit slow as well. I had a 1995 R-package that dyno'd 120whp on Pure Tuning's Dyno in Toledo, OH when I lived there, and that car(on 205-60-13 BFG R1 Autocross tires), with a crappy launch(2.1 second 60' time), and a slipping clutch on more aggressive launches would turn a consistant 15.4@89mph. I flat-foot shifted that car, as well, and used to autocross it all the time. Prior to that car, I had an '02 RSX Type-S, that when fairly stock(Injen short ram intake, Energy suspension motor mount inserts), would run consistant 14.6's at 94mph, 2.2 second 60' times, on some $60 all-seasons I got at Discount tire. All runs were done at Milan dragway in Milan, MI, and I used to have a stack of timeslips about 4" tall for each car. I always filled my cars with Sunoco 93 when I lived out there, but that shouldn't make that significant of a difference.
Strange. I really thought IL would bust out some mid-low 14's with this thing considering the power/weight ratio. I say take it to a prepped drag strip and work on the launch. That car should be much faster than that.
powderhound says:
03:52 AM, 06/10/11
Dear editor,
Have you considered an ECU reflash to improve the bogging, etc?
Here's a link from the Miata.net forum: http://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.php?t=40998
dougmare says:
08:12 PM, 06/10/11
Honestly the numbers show there's something wrong with the engine's state of tune. Either it's detonating at the top end or under full boost the tired stock rings aren't containing the compression sufficiently.
This car is not a brick, aerodynamically speaking. There's a lot of rolling resistance in such sticky tires but it doesn't fully account for the low trap speed. I think Inside Line got hosed when someone convinced Mr. Kavanagh to spend such a large amount on that dubious supercharger kit. Flyin' Miata's base-level turbo would absolutely spank it both off the line and roll-on, and their more serious turbo kits would leave this Miata wheezing five car-lengths behind through the quarter mile. For not so much more money than has been spent here (which is similar cost to a Flyin' Miata turbo), a used LSx V-8 could've been shoehorned underhood with just a 200lb weight gain over stock. Guarantee the intercooled supercharger setup added close to 100lbs, and the performance gain it provided is laughable. I really hope these numbers don't convince readers that this is cutting edge performance for a modified Miata.
The suspension mods, however, have given this humble Miata similar numbers to what a Lotus Elise could manage.