VIDEO: Mazda MX-5 Roadster Coupe retractable hardtop in action
The Mazda MX-5 Roadster Coupe is the latest in a wave of retractable hardtop roadsters entering the market. We've seen static shots of the new MX-5's hardtop both up and down, but until have not taken in the retractable roof in action. Autoblog reader Jerry Standefer pointed us to this Mazda UK promotional video that not only shows the hardtop going up and down, but also shows how the hard top stows away without consuming any trunk space.
[Source: Mazda]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
GhostDoggy 6:38PM (7/20/2006)
Is this entering the US market? Whatever the MSRP we can all figure $5K higher minimally. Dealers are like corner drug dealers these days. Even Saturn has broken the Saturn policy and jacked up the price on the Sky.
Reply
Tim UF 7:02PM (7/20/2006)
Gotta love the science of Dimensional Tolerancing.
Reply
kurt 7:18PM (7/20/2006)
Looks great but is it coming to the US? And if so, when?
Reply
naggs 7:21PM (7/20/2006)
now if only mazda would make A REAL COUPE! first company to make a lightweight rwd coupe or hatch gets my money.
Reply
Tom Design 7:22PM (7/20/2006)
Still a cute little roadster with great dynamics. The extra mechanism weight doesn't seem to ruin the balance, nice! Very curious about the great storage use, not infringing on the trunk. The trunk was meager to begin with, so they needed to do their homework. Wish Volvo would have taken the same lesson with the new C70, which looses its trunk when top down. And the sexy Pontiac G6 should have studied this too!
Reply
&& 7:34PM (7/20/2006)
"World's Greatest Roadster", eh?
*cough*
Yeah, ok.
Reply
Mark 7:51PM (7/20/2006)
Yes, the car is obviously going to be sold in the US.
Reply
Lithous 7:57PM (7/20/2006)
"Even Saturn has broken the Saturn policy and jacked up the price on the Sky."
Minorly, at least according to my local dealership. I asked if they had markups on the Sky and I was told GM will not send another Sky to a dealership they hear are selling over MSRP. So, what is my local dealer doing? Adding must purchase items such as fabric protection and (IIRC) unbody coating (maybe not that but it was two things). I believe it ups the cost $500 - $700. Not outrageous, but sneaky.
"The trunk was meager to begin with, so they needed to do their homework. Wish Volvo would have taken the same lesson with the new C70, which looses its trunk when top down. And the sexy Pontiac G6 should have studied this too!"
I believe we can blame the same engineers (or company thereof) for that, right? :)
Reply
bgdc 7:57PM (7/20/2006)
Maybe a 1-2k premium. They're not gonna ask $5000 extra when they are barely selling MX-5s already.
Reply
Lithous 8:06PM (7/20/2006)
Is Mazda trying to start another Consei (sp?) Engineering thing? JINBA-ITTAI.
Reply
naggs 8:39PM (7/20/2006)
"They're not gonna ask $5000 extra when they are barely selling MX-5s already."
i dont know where you heard that, the mx5 is doing just fine.
Reply
CH 9:46PM (7/20/2006)
"Wish Volvo would have taken the same lesson with the new C70"
Not practical with a 4-seater coupe/convertible.
The roof is larger, cannot be stowed directly behind the front seats, and there is the desire for a reasonably-sized trunk, at least with the roof up. The Mazda approach forces a choice between a disproportionately long backend or a tiny trunk.
The C70 gives you 14.3/7.1 cu ft of trunk with the roof up/down versus the Mazda's 5.3 cu ft. The disadvantage is reduced accessibility with the roof down.
Reply
Tim 11:15PM (7/20/2006)
Oooh, it's so cute and yummy! All my hairdresser friends are just going to love it!
Reply
jstand6 11:54PM (7/20/2006)
"Wish Volvo would have taken the same lesson with the new C70... the sexy Pontiac G6 should have studied this too!"
It's really not fair to compare those cars with the MX-5. The Solstice and Sky are the cars to compare it to. I find it amazing that Mazda can design a folding hard top that doesn't take up any trunk space, while GM's approach practically loses the entire trunk with just the soft top (Solstice: 1.4 cubic feet; Sky 2.0 cubic feet)! To make matters worse, the GM twins are physically larger cars than the Mazda. Is GM engineering really that bad?
Reply
jjd 7:30AM (7/21/2006)
#4 naggs says: "now if only mazda would make A REAL COUPE! first company to make a lightweight rwd coupe or hatch gets my money."
Um, Porsche Cayman? Porsche 911? BMW Z4 and M coupe?
Reply
GDUB 8:59AM (7/21/2006)
Gota love the the miata haters. Dont buy it if u dont like it. Why bother putting it down.
I have a 93 miata and a 05 RX8 and i love both cars dearly.
PS I am not a hairdresser.
Reply
looks good 10:59AM (7/21/2006)
I didn't really want to say this, but it looks good. It appears the reason it doesn't intrude into the trunk is when they did the new model they pre-shrunk the trunk slightly to ensure the hard drop wouldn't intrude further.
But no matter, the Miata trunk was never huge and this trunk size is right in line with what is expected. Except for the weight, you really don't compromise at all for this top. A masterful job.
$5K is a little dear. I know the Mazda Special Editions commanded large premiums here in the US, but I never understood how they could manage that either.
The Sky/Solstice is 4" wider, but otherwise is the same size as the Miata. The lack of trunk space is is not because GM doesn't know how to design (although obviously Mazda has more experience with this), but because GM wanted to make the car exactly like the concept car. You hear people on here bitch constantly not to change stuff from concept to production, and here they didn't.
The Solstice/Sky have this crazy trunk hinging system which flips back instead of forward. Also the top of the trunk is actually lower than the top of the wheel arches and then the tailights come quite far foward. GM could have opened up a lot more space with some small styling (in the case of the trunk hinging, not even visible with the trunk closed), but instead they decided to deliver the concept which was shown.
I think they did the right thing, delivering the no-compromise production version. For decades the Corvette had no trunk at all, and it flourished in those times.
No doubt, this new Miata is an incredible car. I'm so tempted to buy one, and then I see those clown wheels and ugly wheel arches again and remember my reservations. They didn't do the nose any favors either. The previous model was much prettier, but it'll never have a foldable hardtop, will it?
quote:
" Jinba Ittai, a Japanese phrase that translates to "the rider and horse as one," has been the focus of the MX-5 Miata concept since its inception, and is the purest essence of Mazda�s Zoom-Zoom spirit. Oneness is the cornerstone of the Jinba Ittai driving experience and occurs when the boundaries between driver and vehicle melt away and create one single being. Essentially, Jinba Ittai is a celebration of the simple delights of driving a lightweight, nimble, open-air roadster, and anyone who has driven a Miata knows the feeling.
We improved the all-new MX-5 to meet the needs of modern motorists while maintaining the passionate spirit of the original, best envisioned in the expression �Jinba Ittai�," said Kory Koreeda, vice president, product development for Mazda North American Operations (MNAO). "As the range-topper, the MX-5 3rd Generation Limited�s eye-catching color and unique features will surely turn heads and bring pure driving excitement to all who sit behind the wheel."
There's that phrase, from the launch. Apparently this phrase is part of a new global marketing push and was floated here. It appears it has been about as successful as trying to stop calling it the Miata. Mazda should wise up.
Reply
naggs 1:34PM (7/21/2006)
"Um, Porsche Cayman? Porsche 911? BMW Z4 and M coupe?"
none of those are mx5 competators. they are all at least 600 lbs heavier and 30 grand more expensive. there is no reason someone cant sell a mx5 or solstice coupe for 18k.
Reply
Tom Design 8:32PM (7/21/2006)
CH => The relative loss of trunk space is what I'm discussing. It shouldn't matter if a car is 4 seater, or 2 seater. The article stated that the hardtop convertible was engineered to use little more space when deployed than the ragtop MX3.
The 2 other cars, C70 and G6, also offered 2 versions, one of them a convertible hardtop. The last C70's (the ragtop) space compared to their new offering, the convertible hardtop? Are you with me? I was inferring that the trunk space in the last C70 compared to the smaller trunk space in the new hardtop model, with top down, would have benefitted from studying the tricks used by Mazda. But you did make a good point about the verticle storage. However, couldn't the hardtop be engineered in several pieces to fold vertically behind the seat?
I also ranted to include a comparison between the Pontiac G6 Coupe's trunk to the tiny one in the G6 convertible hardtop. The Miata's standard convertible would compare to the new hardtop convertible. The Miata seems to win the least space (proportionally) lost award (if I got the article and my review of the C70/G6 accurate).
jstand6 => Your rant of GM's products and engineers just doesn't segue well from my discussion. It doesn't make any sense since Sky and Solstice haven't a hardtop to compare to their ragtop?
I know you're only being thoughtful, but don't worry, the Sky/Solstice owners are getting great cars. They are resigned to having little trunk space, like most enthusiast cars (MR2, Mini, Vette, Lambo...).
If people want the compromise of a balance between performance and utility, they'd choose the Mazda.
Of course you could say the same thing about all hardtop convertibles. No one is being fooled about the uselessness of a trunk at 7cu/ft nor 5cu/ft. Hmmm.. a C70 box, 1ft high x 2 ft wide x 3.5 ft long or a MX3 box 1ft H x 1.4ft W x 3.5ft L. For a holiday trip you'd certainly need to pack the back seat of the C70 with presents. And the entire passenger seat of the MX3. Maybe the owners are happy with the compromise from utility for the joy of driving a sleek and unique hardtop convertible? Sounds good to me, and everyone loves the gift of green.
Reply
CH 4:05PM (7/23/2006)
"The relative loss of trunk space is what I'm discussing. It shouldn't matter if a car is 4 seater, or 2 seater."
Relative loss of trunk space may be useful for bragging rights and marketing hype, but what's really important is the actual amount of space with the roof up/down.
It's pretty clear to me that to increase the MX-5's trunk space to, say, a still modest 10 cu ft with the current design approach, the tail end would have to be disproportionately longer. That problem would be much greater with a 4-seater, because there is more roof to stow and now it all has to go behind the back seat.
The C70, for example, already has one more roof panel. Additional panels mean more complexity, unattractive seams and, short of a roller top, may actually increase the need for stacking space - whether vertically or horizontally. The C-pillar panel is particularly problematic because of it's size and shape.
That section of the Mazda's roof is stowed vertically directly behind the front seats. That is not an option with a 4-seater in either location (obviously) or orientation. The trunk area isn't deep enough to accomodate it vertically, even without considering the wheel wells.
The Mazda's roof packaging is a nice piece of work, but it's only possible because it's a 2-seater with a tiny trunk.
Reply