Talk:Mazda MX-5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateMazda MX-5 is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 13, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
October 14, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate

External links[edit]

What should be linked

  1. Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any.
  2. An article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a copy of the work if none of the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria apply.
  3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.
  4. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews.

Miata.net meets #3 and #4 easily. I agree that this article (like most automotive articles) has seen frequent inappropriate linking to local clubs and forums, but miata.net passes muster and should be included. Not for the forum, but for the FAQ and Garage sections which contain detailed data on the various models, specifications, and equipment which comprise too much detail for the scope of this article. I have no personal interest in miata.net gaining traffic. — AKADriver 13:02, 20 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But it also fails due to meeting #4, #6, and #10 of WP:LINKSTOAVOID. #5 could also be argued due to the amount of advertising on the front page. I mean people could argue it's a resource site, but it's clearly and primarily a community site that centers around its forum. This is overwhelmingly enough to make this site not a valid external link as per WP:EL. Anyways, a dmoz link has been added to the external links section which is where sites like miata.net should really be listed. I would suggest getting some admin advice here or maybe putting in a request for comment as to avoid any edit warring. Thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 20:38, 20 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It does not meet #4; miata.net isn't selling anything (and the advertising doesn't pass muster as "offensive", IMO). It does not meet #6 because registration is not required to view any content. It could be argued to meet #10, however, the link was to the main page, not the forum. — AKADriver 00:45, 23 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Real quick comment. I just noticed miata.net is a featured web site on the dmoz link as seen here:
Mazda MX-5 Miata at Curlie
I think that's pretty good recognition of the site. It would also be pretty redundant to throw it on the article directly. Again, thoughts? Roguegeek (talk) 20:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This isn't about recognition of any particular website - it's about linking to a source of extended information relevant to the article's subject. Also, just FYI, talk page content does not need to reflect NPOV. — AKADriver 00:45, 23 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That makes sense. Since we agree that it fails at least one of the criteria in links to be avoided, policy considers it a link to be avoided. Nothing really changes with its removal except that a reader will just now be able to get to miata.net through the dmoz link. Also, if the extended information is a reliable source, it could be used as a citation as well which would bring a direct link to the article. I'll start looking over the site a little more to see if there's something we could reference and cite properly into the article. Roguegeek (talk) 17:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That shouldn't be too hard. Miata.net is an external link I've always shied away from removing because it really does offer a boatload of information, there's bound to be at least something in the article that can be reliably sourced there. Ayocee (talk) 18:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Production figures[edit]

The production figures show an excess of production of some 62,000 cars over its lifespan, this is quite a huge difference, where are these cars? some note should be made about this seamingly large over production?--GazMan7 (talk) 15:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sportscar?![edit]

Yes, it is a good-looking roadster targeted at the young female audience. However, a sportscar?! Something that couldn't outrun a top-trim Honda Accord (family-oriented!) sedan from those same years?! Mazda truly did make a sportscar in those years, but that was the RX-7 (continued production in Japan for about 7 years after delivery ceased to the US). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aadieu (talkcontribs) 22:02, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The MX-5 is without a doubt classified as a sports car by just about any reliable source you can name. The term sports car has a pretty loose dictionary definition (a small, low vehicle designed for performance driving) that the MX-5 fits. The modern use of the term "roadster" translates directly to "convertible sports car." --Leivick (talk) 22:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The car is deffinatly a sports car as it was a homage to some truely deffinitive sports cars. A sports car doesn't have to be fast, the deffining characteristic is handling and responsiveness for a true sports car. Also I think you'll find it was targeted at older men rather than young women.(Morcus (talk) 22:44, 23 September 2008 (UTC))Reply[reply]
"Mazda's MX-5 (a.k.a. Miata) has long been one of our favorite sports cars, blessed as it is with a brilliant chassis, just enough power to keep you grinning, and a relatively light curb weight."-- Automobile Magazine
As long as you get the manual transmission, itll go fast enough to probably fit in with even your definition of a sports car. mystery (talk) 22:05, 26 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By the way, this was a head to head comparison with the Porsche GT2 and the Viper ACR. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.37.209 (talk) 22:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's definately a sports car, no doubt about it,even though it's not hugely powerful. But think - what else it could be classed as? Even Mazda say it's a sports car, and they're the ones who designed it!Chevymontecarlo (talk) 16:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I definitely agree, it should no longer be called a sports car. According to wiki's own definition: "Sports cars have been either spartan or luxurious, but good handling and high performance is requisite." This car is by no means HIGH performance. As the original post states, most family cars feature higher performance.

The Wikipedia definition for a roadster: "A roadster is a two-seat car, without a fixed roof and with emphasis on sporty handling. While roadsters usually have soft-tops, retractable hard-tops are becoming more common." fits MUCH better. The MX-5 might handle well, but many family and compact cars can meet or beat it's performance, in base configuration. The class of car needs to be changed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenlightracer (talkcontribs) 23:36, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The original poster makes a schoolboy error here with regards to her knowledge of "sports cars": whilst the Honda Accord may beat the MX-5 of the same era in a drag-race, it will not outrun an MX-5 in the MX-5's home territory: the blatty A-road and twisty B-road. Mazda built the MX-5 with the aim of recreating the nature of the traditional British sportscar. That, it achieved. Take a decent 60s/70s muscle car and put it on a drag strip: it will outrun most modern performance cars. But, try to race it point-to-point and it will be beaten by many modern 1.6 litre family shopping cars. I can't even fit in an MX-5, so no love lost for them here, but they are as much the definition of sportscar as the Camaro is of the musclecar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.6.35.235 (talk) 21:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I believe the poster (that youre referring to) just used the enter key twice to make two paragraphs and that it is posted by the same person. mystery (talk) 22:12, 26 June 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your opinion of who is in error is irrelavent. The definition has nothing to do with drag racing. The examples you note contradict Wikipedia's own definition of sports car, so if you have an issue with that I suggest you start at that page. We are not talking about racing muscle cars or Accords. Simply, we're are discussing the MX-5 sport merit in the current market. Performance improves over time, an indisputable fact, and opinion doesn't count here, facts do. Roadster is much more fitting, as I see, it has already been rightfully changed on the main page. comment added by Greenlightracer (talk —Preceding undated comment added 04:36, 16 February 2011 (UTC).Reply[reply]

It's homage is stated to be taken from cars like the MGB, AH sprite etc, which were certianly defined as sports cars in their day (albeit low end ones in the MGBs case). I do not think the definition of a sports car has changed so much in that time that their classifications should differ. 202.89.136.57 (talk) 10:15, 10 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I found the following article analyses the spirit of the MX5 best, not a hair dresser in sight and no speed over 50mph was harmed in the writing of the piece! Mazda MX-5 Keomike (talk) 02:51, 23 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not confuse the term, sports car, with all flame-throwing, fuel-guzzling monsters that cannot get past a petrol station without stopping. While some of "them" might be considered sports cars, it is the combination of all aspects that defines what a sports car is. With all due respect, Greenlightracer, IMHO the term, roadster, refers to a body style and not to a genre; whereupon I suspect most would agree that the Miata and all of it's "clones" meet the intrinsic definition of "sports car" without too much trouble. I have no problem with Miatas and Ferrari Dinos sharing the designation, sports car. Vive la différence. Vive la similitude. :-) JimScott (talk) 21:00, 3 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, GreenLightRacer ... I suppose there are a few Miatas that would not be sports cars: http://jalopnik.com/here-is-a-v16-miata-pulling-a-mobile-home-473005992 or http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18c7hke479wrnjpg/ku-medium.jpg (though I think the latter might be fun to drive :-) JimScott (talk) 12:29, 4 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mazda Miata User Box[edit]

New User box for Mazda Miata - MX5 enthusiasts! Copy and paste for your user page...{{Template:User Mazda Miata}} Edit if you wish as well BTW SriMesh | talk 22:32, 31 October 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New generation[edit]

A fourth generation is announced, a new face lift and all with pictures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.108.196.34 (talk) 19:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Special Editions[edit]

In New Zealand a 1990 special edition model, designation V-Spec, was available with BRG paint and tan leather upholstery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.234.151.94 (talk) 09:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Updated List of Mazda MX-5 colors and special editions. --maf (talk-cont) 00:05, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
M2 special editions - there has been a lot of useful stuff added on M2 spec cars, but its a bit scrappy and needs a good tidy up, but it's not something I'm wholly familier with. It also needs a lot of citations! Pahazzard (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Engine in NB - Japanese Domestic Market[edit]

I do know:

The 1998 - 2000 production year Japanese Domestic Market 1.8 litre Roadster models used an engine designated BP-5A - not BP-4W. Known differences from the BP-4W motor are: Higher engine red-line and cutout (7500rpm in manual transmission vs 7000rpm for BP-4W fitted models) Different intake camshaft (higher lift and slightly longer duration). Deletion of EGR system. ECU is also BP-5A model number. The exhaust system also differs significantly from North American models which used a cast manifold (with pre-cat in some states). The manifold is a 4:2:1 style tubular header, with final 2:1 "Y" joint converging about 500mm in front of the catalytic converter.

I don't know:

If the BP-5A engine was only used for Japanese Domestic Market Roadsters. Engine performance specifications. They will be different. Other (likely) differences to valve springs, or other possible differences to withstand higher rpm limit.

I suggest that if other information isn't able to be found, then at least BP-5A is added to "engines" box. I'll wait a few days for comments before editing the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.180.87.174 (talk) 05:12, 29 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stat Sources[edit]

Many of the specifications and performance figures have no sources, at least in the third gen. part. They need to be removed or references found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenlightracer (talkcontribs) 23:40, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I too fully support a merge of the 10th anniversary Miata and have changed the header to reflect it.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 19:13, 15 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
20th anniversary now redirected to here as content identical and nothing to actually merge. Warren (talk) 12:39, 16 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will sleep better now. Thanks.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 00:48, 17 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

LS version is not specified[edit]

The article refers to the LS model, but does not specify it anywhere.

Sorry I can't help - I'm looking for information about this car, not providing it!

87.113.223.200 (talk) 12:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1998?![edit]

Um ... to my knowledge, there is no such thing as a 1998 Mazda MX-5 Miata. Not my fault. Didn't do it. Is there a reason no one has "fixed" this article?? JimScott (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To my knowledge, there was 1998 model sold on some market. But I don't have any source for now, I'll be back when I find one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Szzczupak (talkcontribs) 04:31, 3 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a little complicated. "Miata" is a name for the Mazda MX5 used only in North America; elsewhere, they are called either "Roadster" or just "MX-5" (in the UK, used Japanese Roadsters imported into the UK are sometimes called "Eunos," but "Eunos" is just the name of Mazda's upscale domestic subsidiary selling the MX5 Roadster, among other cars, in Japan -- sort of like Lexus being Toyota's upscale subsidiary, Infiniti being Nissan's, and Acura being Honda's). Since there was no 1998 model MX5 sold in North America, there are no 1998 Miatas, as such. However, 1998 MX5 models were sold in other markets as MX5s and Roadsters. The problem was the result of production delays at the Mazda factory in Japan producing MX5s as it retooled from making the NA (1990-1997) MX5 to the NB (1998-2005) MX5, a major change. It was decided to sell what would have been 1998 NB Miatas as early 1999 models in North America, where about half of MX5s worldwide were sold. Elsewhere, the new NB MX5 version first appeared as a 1998 model.67.170.184.5 (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We need to be careful about what we mean when we say 1998. To Americans, a 1998 car means roughly October 1997 to October 1998 (the actual months can move around a bit but August-October is common). To most of the rest of the world, a 1998 car is typically October 1998 to October 1999 (again, the months often move around a bit). So, Americans can say they have a 1998 car, most of the rest of the world says they have a 1997 car and naive editors/readers think the Americans had the car a year later. Is this the source of confusion here? Even if it isn't, we should be explicitly saying calendar year 1998 and model year 1998 (or 1998 calendar year / 1998 model year) whenever we a talking about years, just to avoid this confusion. And to be extra clear, '1998 model' is often read as the 'model of car from 1998', which isn't always the same as what an American thinks of as the '1998 model year'. Stepho  talk  23:37, 14 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"wishbone suspension"[edit]

what is a "wishbone" suspension (in 3rd gen section)? all front suspensions have wishbones...i assume its a mcpherson strut except maybe someone edited it so that someone who didnt know that a mcpherson sturt could be called a "single wishbone" suspension would think it has a double wishbone suspension (which was a key feature of the previous generation). anyway, its unclear. any front suspension could be called "wishbone" suspension. ""

Fourth generation (ND) infobox picture[edit]

My latest edit to this article, which changed the fourth gen (ND) infobox pic from the one you see to the left to the one to the right, was recently undone by fellow editor Stepho-wrs on the grounds of image quality. I stand by my edit, so I'm bringing the issue up here. I think the current picture is far from ideal:

Current
Proposed
  • ☒N Taken from a very low angle, shot sideways
  • ☒N Hard lighting; half of the subject is in the shade
  • ☒N Covered in extremely distracting reflections
  • checkY Uncluttered background (☒N and yet heavy shade on the ground)
  • checkY Good 3/4 angle, taken from the height of an ordinary person
  • checkY Natural lighting, limited reflections
  • ☒N There are parked vehicles in the background, though not directly behind the subject

My opionion:
Striking: good for a magazine article Illustrative: good for an encyclopedia article

Cloverleaf II (talk) 08:17, 19 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I recognise your points (except the heavy shade is not as bad as you make out). However, that background is very distracting and ruins the entire picture. The viewer is spending almost as much brain power on the background as on the foreground. To my mind, that background clutter trumps everything else you mentioned. Maybe a different picture (possibly with the sign cropped away).  Stepho  talk  22:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Date format[edit]

Oknazevad (talk · contribs) and myself have a disagreement over the date format. The article already has a consistent date format of "mmm d, yyyy" (and its shorter form of "mmm yyyy") that has been in use for quite some time. I don't see any inconsistent usage in the article that warrants a change. WP:DATERET says we are not supposed to change the date format without a good reason or consensus.  Stepho  talk  22:30, June 19, 2017 (UTC)

I would have sworn that I saw some day-month-year dates in the body text. But it's been a long week, and my eyes were probably playing tricks on me. I do wonder if day-month-year isn't a better choice per WP:TIES being it's a Japanese car (TIES does also apply to date formats). But just so long as it's consistent I'm not preturbed. oknazevad (talk) 03:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem, I feel tired like that too sometimes. WP:TIES would apply only if Japan used "mmm d, yyyy" or "d mmm yyyy" natively but they use the "yyyy-mm-dd" format common to many Asian countries. They do sometimes use the English formats but which one depends on which country they got their higher education in or which foreign market they are addressing.  Stepho  talk  13:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mazda MX-5. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:02, 23 January 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Separate articles for generations[edit]

I think it's time for this article to split into different articles for each generation, or at least for the third generation (NC), which has the lion's share of information. - Areaseven (talk) 11:19, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think all of the generations would be fine as separate articles. Toasted Meter (talk) 12:01, 13 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If we were to proceed with splitting the article, how should we label each article: as "x generation" or as platform code (NA/NB/NC/ND)? - Areaseven (talk) 10:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would split them as Mazda MX-5 (NA), Mazda MX-5 (NB) and Mazda MX-5 (NC) and Mazda MX-5 (ND), as outlined at WP:WikiProject Automobiles/Conventions#Nomenclature and exemplified by BMW 3 Series (E90). The parent article could remain with short summaries of each generation and the common sections like production numbers and awards. Similar to how Toyota Corolla is split.  Stepho  talk  12:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
NC now has its own article and needs some cleanup. - Areaseven (talk) 04:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
ND article is now online. As with the NC, some cleanup will be needed. - Areaseven (talk) 04:13, 13 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good work!
I have created Mazda MX-5 (NA) and Mazda MX-5 (NB). They are just redirects to the sections here but at least we can have articles link directly to a generation. When the time comes, those 2 pages can be made into full blown articles and all the links to them will still be correct.  Stepho  talk  11:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Still called Miata?[edit]

I'm confused with the North American marketing of the ND generation, as several articles online state that Mazda has dropped the Miata name, but Mazda USA's website still uses it. Should we continue to use the Miata name on the ND article? - Areaseven (talk) 07:47, 7 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It looks like Mazda USA is have a bet both ways - harmonising the name with the rest of the world and also keeping the American traditional name of 'Miata'. Since the Mazda US website still calls it a Miata (technically 'MX-5 Miata', then the article should keep using the Miata name for the American sections. We can revisit the question in a couple of years if they change it back or drop the 'Miata' part completely.  Stepho  talk  08:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would be helpful if the article explained why Mazda decided to use the 'Miata' name in NA in the first place. It isn't Japanese, and doesn't mean anything in English. --Ef80 (talk) 13:21, 8 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kit Cars[edit]

Is it worth mentioning since so many have been produced that they serve as a foundation of many different types of kit car models currently available? (Exocet, Bauer Catfish, etc.)