Miata deficiencies.

The other day I bought my usual losing lottery ticket and asked myself what
I'd get to replace my 1992 1600 pretty much stock Miata if I won.....

The answer I came up with is I'm almost completely satisfied with the car, it
does what I want, seems pretty much trouble free and is always fun to drive
so what would I fix if I were designing cars for Miata?

The most important would be the top. I once had a 1964 Corvette which had
the easiest to use and best designed top I've ever encountered. It went up
effortlessly, had no rain rails to cause problems and hid itself under a hard
cover when lowered. Why couldn't Mazda design a similar top mechanism?

Next, why did nobody except Corvette have those really neat power windows
that went up and down faster than any others? Was there some kind of patent
that won't allow anyone else to adopt the system? Even other Chevrolets have
never AFAIK used the same system, why?

Other than those two things, one trivial and one major, the car suits me.

PS, if I did win the lottery I'd replace my almost new top with one with a
glass window that didn't require unzipping such as the later Miata's have,
that would help quite a bit.

XS11E wrote:
> The other day I bought my usual losing lottery ticket and asked myself what
> I'd get to replace my 1992 1600 pretty much stock Miata if I won.....
>
> The answer I came up with is I'm almost completely satisfied with the car, it
> does what I want, seems pretty much trouble free and is always fun to drive
> so what would I fix if I were designing cars for Miata?
>
> The most important would be the top. I once had a 1964 Corvette which had
> the easiest to use and best designed top I've ever encountered. It went up
> effortlessly, had no rain rails to cause problems and hid itself under a hard
> cover when lowered. Why couldn't Mazda design a similar top mechanism?
>
> Next, why did nobody except Corvette have those really neat power windows
> that went up and down faster than any others? Was there some kind of patent
> that won't allow anyone else to adopt the system? Even other Chevrolets have
> never AFAIK used the same system, why?
>
> Other than those two things, one trivial and one major, the car suits me.
>
> PS, if I did win the lottery I'd replace my almost new top with one with a
> glass window that didn't require unzipping such as the later Miata's have,
> that would help quite a bit.
>

I agree about the glass window. On my 1990 I added some enhancements -- daytime running lights, a remote trunk-opening button in the console, a couple of cup holders to replace the ashtray, a 12-disc CD changer in the trunk, and a sun-glasses cubicle under the radio -- and now it IS the perfect car.

-- Robbi.

Robbi > wrote in:

> I agree about the glass window. On my 1990 I added some enhancements --
> daytime running lights, a remote trunk-opening button in the console, a
> couple of cup holders to replace the ashtray, a 12-disc CD changer in
> the trunk, and a sun-glasses cubicle under the radio -- and now it IS
> the perfect car.

Most of that wouldn't do much for me. I've got the cup holder replacement
for the ashtray, that came with the car. The CD changer is not anything I'd
use, my radio is either off or very rarely listening to a baseball game.

I would like to raise and lower the top w/o unzipping the glass but replacing
the top when the one I have was installed less than 6 months before I bought
the car doesn't make any economic sense, that's why I need to win the
lottery! ;-)

"XS11E" > wrote in message
...
>
> The other day I bought my usual losing lottery ticket and asked myself
> what
> I'd get to replace my 1992 1600 pretty much stock Miata if I won.....
>
> The answer I came up with is I'm almost completely satisfied with the car,
> it
> does what I want, seems pretty much trouble free and is always fun to
> drive
> so what would I fix if I were designing cars for Miata?
>
> The most important would be the top. I once had a 1964 Corvette which had
> the easiest to use and best designed top I've ever encountered. It went
> up
> effortlessly, had no rain rails to cause problems and hid itself under a
> hard
> cover when lowered. Why couldn't Mazda design a similar top mechanism?

I had a 1999 on a lease for two years in NYC. Was able to raise and lower
the top with one hand while sitting at a traffic light. The glass rear
window was a nice plus.
>
> Next, why did nobody except Corvette have those really neat power windows
> that went up and down faster than any others? Was there some kind of
> patent
> that won't allow anyone else to adopt the system? Even other Chevrolets
> have
> never AFAIK used the same system, why?
>
Mine didn't have power windows and I never missed them. I am a fan of simple
devices. The car was small enough that I could reach over and lower the
windows without unbuckling the seat belt. (granted, I am 6'2")

> Other than those two things, one trivial and one major, the car suits me.
>
> PS, if I did win the lottery I'd replace my almost new top with one with a
> glass window that didn't require unzipping such as the later Miata's have,
> that would help quite a bit.
>

Squat wrote:
> Mine didn't have power windows and I never missed them.

I never thought I'd want power windows until I got my 'B'. The best
use for these is that when your cell phone rings on the highway, you
can raise the windows to hear.

Jeff
'91 Mariner (Betty) Blue

> wrote in message
ups.com...
> Squat wrote:
>> Mine didn't have power windows and I never missed them.
>
> I never thought I'd want power windows until I got my 'B'. The best
> use for these is that when your cell phone rings on the highway, you
> can raise the windows to hear.
>
> Jeff
> '91 Mariner (Betty) Blue
>
My radio was always too loud to answer the phone.

XS11E wrote:

> The other day I bought my usual losing lottery ticket and asked myself what
> I'd get to replace my 1992 1600 pretty much stock Miata if I won.....
>
> The answer I came up with is I'm almost completely satisfied with the car, it
> does what I want, seems pretty much trouble free and is always fun to drive
> so what would I fix if I were designing cars for Miata?
>
> The most important would be the top. I once had a 1964 Corvette which had
> the easiest to use and best designed top I've ever encountered. It went up
> effortlessly, had no rain rails to cause problems and hid itself under a hard
> cover when lowered. Why couldn't Mazda design a similar top mechanism?

Because the MX-5/Miata was always meant to be affordable. They cut
corners on the specification where it doesn't detract from the driving
experience. Stuff like all-round independent suspension, powerful twin
cam engines, PPFs and alumin(i)um panels doesn't come cheap.

> Next, why did nobody except Corvette have those really neat power windows
> that went up and down faster than any others? Was there some kind of patent
> that won't allow anyone else to adopt the system? Even other Chevrolets have
> never AFAIK used the same system, why?

See above. FWIW, my UK-spec 1.8 has no PAS, no aircon, no power windows
and steel wheels, although a previous owner bought a set of alloys.
That didn't stop them selling like hot cakes in Britain, the world's
most car-snobbish country.

> Other than those two things, one trivial and one major, the car suits me.
>
> PS, if I did win the lottery I'd replace my almost new top with one with a
> glass window that didn't require unzipping such as the later Miata's have,
> that would help quite a bit.
>

Me too. The plastic window sucks.

Zog The Undeniable > wrote in:

> XS11E wrote:
>
>> The other day I bought my usual losing lottery ticket and asked myself
>> what I'd get to replace my 1992 1600 pretty much stock Miata if I
>> won.....
>>
>> The answer I came up with is I'm almost completely satisfied with the
>> car, it does what I want, seems pretty much trouble free and is always
>> fun to drive so what would I fix if I were designing cars for Miata?
>>
>> The most important would be the top. I once had a 1964 Corvette which
>> had the easiest to use and best designed top I've ever encountered. It
>> went up effortlessly, had no rain rails to cause problems and hid
>> itself under a hard cover when lowered. Why couldn't Mazda design a
>> similar top mechanism?
>
> Because the MX-5/Miata was always meant to be affordable.

Wanna bet the Corvette top is cheaper to build than the Miata?

>> Next, why did nobody except Corvette have those really neat power
>> windows that went up and down faster than any others? Was there some
>> kind of patent that won't allow anyone else to adopt the system? Even
>> other Chevrolets have never AFAIK used the same system, why?
>
> See above.

Again, power windows are power windows. It can't cost any more to make them
that go up faster than the sluggish ones Mazda provides.

>> PS, if I did win the lottery I'd replace my almost new top with one
>> with a glass window that didn't require unzipping such as the later
>> Miata's have, that would help quite a bit.
>>
>
> Me too. The plastic window sucks.

Don't know, mine's glass but I hate having to unzip it to lower the top.

XS11E > wrote:

>Zog The Undeniable > wrote in:
>
>> XS11E wrote:
>>
>>> The other day I bought my usual losing lottery ticket and asked myself
>>> what I'd get to replace my 1992 1600 pretty much stock Miata if I
>>> won.....
>>>
>>> The answer I came up with is I'm almost completely satisfied with the
>>> car, it does what I want, seems pretty much trouble free and is always
>>> fun to drive so what would I fix if I were designing cars for Miata?
>>>
>>> The most important would be the top. I once had a 1964 Corvette which
>>> had the easiest to use and best designed top I've ever encountered. It
>>> went up effortlessly, had no rain rails to cause problems and hid
>>> itself under a hard cover when lowered. Why couldn't Mazda design a
>>> similar top mechanism?
>>
>> Because the MX-5/Miata was always meant to be affordable.
>
>Wanna bet the Corvette top is cheaper to build than the Miata?

I would agree the Corvette top must be cheaper than a whole Miata.

Anyway, it is self-evident that Corvette top must have had
major problems with cost, space requirements, or function, or it
would have been used on every car by now.

A top apparently retracting in its own waterproof compartment would
probably have several of those major problems.

I am happy with my 1999 top, though when the AC was overheating the
engine in the deserts, a zip-down rear window would have been nice.

>>> Next, why did nobody except Corvette have those really neat power
>>> windows that went up and down faster than any others?

There is a race? Whichever sports car has the windows that go down
fastest is the best sport scar?

>>> Was there some
>>> kind of patent that won't allow anyone else to adopt the system?

You can pay royalties on patents.

>>> Even
>>> other Chevrolets have never AFAIK used the same system, why?

The reliability was not even up to GM standards?

GM got tired of being sued by people getting limbs, necks,
faces, kids, cut in the lightning-quick windows?

Especially when the lack of build quality meant that these windows
would usually operate erroneously?

Leon
--
Leon van Dommelen Bozo, the White 96 Sebring Miata .)
http://www.dommelen.net/miata
EXIT THE INTERSTATES (Jamie Jensen)

(Leon van Dommelen) wrote in:

> XS11E > wrote:

>>> Because the MX-5/Miata was always meant to be affordable.
>>
>>Wanna bet the Corvette top is cheaper to build than the Miata?
>
> I would agree the Corvette top must be cheaper than a whole Miata.
>
> Anyway, it is self-evident that Corvette top must have had
> major problems with cost, space requirements, or function, or it
> would have been used on every car by now.

It's a manual top, it could never be used on anything GM built BUT a
Corvette.

It has no problems with cost, space requirements or function as I believe the
current Corvette convertibles use the same top as did the first StingRays.

>>>> Next, why did nobody except Corvette have those really neat power
>>>> windows that went up and down faster than any others?
>
> There is a race? Whichever sports car has the windows that go down
> fastest is the best sport scar?

Nope, which ever car of any kind that has the windows that go up and down the
fastest is the most convenient car.

>>>> Even
>>>> other Chevrolets have never AFAIK used the same system, why?
>
> The reliability was not even up to GM standards?

Solid as a rock, never had any problems nor have I heard of other owners
having problems. Much as most GM cars are crap, they do have some things
that others should emulate and those windows are one of them.

BTW, they don't use them on current Corvettes, they use the same window motor
as all their other cars use.

> GM got tired of being sued by people getting limbs, necks,
> faces, kids, cut in the lightning-quick windows?

Never happened. Power windows are made so they can only exert a certain
amount of force going up so the speed at which they travel wouldn't make any
significant difference. I think they're gone because it's cheaper to use the
same part for all their cars.

> Especially when the lack of build quality meant that these windows
> would usually operate erroneously?

There's no lack of build quality.

I'm shocked that someone with a white Miata would talk about build quality
when we all know that white Miatas are the absolute worst in reliability,
even with the photon drag advantage.