|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
A comparative review.
As you no doubt know by now, I used to have a Lada Samara. I now own a Mazda MX5. (pictures of my car) In case you are considering purchasing a new car and you're agonising over whether you should go for the hard-top practicality of the Lada or the open top motoring of the MX5, here is a comparative review to help you make your tough decision.
At first glance, the Lada appears to be an ugly low-grade steel box with badly welded low-grade panels which have been precision aligned with some form of advanced Paleolithic technology. However, on second glance you will see that the worst has in fact been covered up with horrible lumps of low grade plastic and big low-grade speed stripe stickers.
At first glance, the MX5 is gorgeous. At second glance it's still gorgeous.
The Lada has cheap but cheerful bench-like seats. They don't exactly hug your body but then with cornering G-forces maxing out at about 0.1G, they don't need to. The rear seat folds down (spontaneously sometimes) to increase the luggage capacity of the boot.
In the front, the designers have spent a good 5 or 10 minutes on the retro pre-ergonomic design, with seats that move back and forth (spontaneously sometimes), a steering wheel like a child's plastic toy (which is attached to the front wheels in a cunning manner contrived to transmit the full force of all undulations and potholes from the road through the rattle and wobble of the wheels to the driver while not actually providing much control over the direction of the car), and electronic dials that are living evidence that Lada invented electronic dials a good century before Western civilisation. (I especially liked the feature that made the petrol tank alternately fill and empty itself whenever the indicator ticked on or off)
The Mazda interior is typical of modern Japanese design - comfortable, well laid out, if a bit boring and plastic. The gearstick is in the perfect place, and it has such a short throw you can engage first gear with a flick of your thumb.
The Lada shares more than just its looks in common with the everyday variety of brick. However, just because it has a 0-60mph acceleration time in the early 80s (in that you had to start accelerating in the early 80s to have any chance of reaching 60mph by now), we must not ignore the fact that once the downhill slope and unseasonably strong tailwind have got the lada up to speed, the sheer weight of the machine gives it a momentum which allows it to carry on in a straight line through almost any obstacle known to man. Nothing will stop it, including the brakes. And at least you know that you will soon be joining all the famous Russians who have also died in hideous Lada crashes.
The cute wee Mazda sports a cute wee 1.8 litre engine, which only develops 140bhp. However, it weighs in at around 1000 kilos, so has a respectable 0-60 time of 8 seconds. Or 10 with a flat-mate and all the shopping. The brakes are positively dangerous, typically catapaulting the car behind you into your boot at an alarming pace. The only solution I have found for this design flaw is to simply not use the brakes. Luckily, this is made possible by the road-holding abilities of the car.
The Lada is pretty crap on the cornering front.
The MX5 is positively dangerous. Luckily it has good brakes, which while unsettling it in mid-corner, do at least stop you ramming the car in front. I don't understand why other drivers insist on braking for every corner, especially as they're going way too slowly before they even approach it.
It also has a great anti-tailgater system. They can have their fun down the straights (I am pretty slow. Some days I just cruise along at a leisurely 70mph) but when we get to a corner, in almost all cases the tailgater spontaneously decides they want to drop back a few hundred yards. Even better are roundabouts, where I just flick the car round to the right, and the tailgater mysteriously decides to plough straight ahead into the trees or someone's front garden. A most effective (and amusing) system.
The Lada has a neat device labelled "economy" that tells you how hard you are pressing the accelerator pedal. When idling, this points towards "consume", and the slightest bit of pressure causes it to leap across to the far end of the dial, to "guzzle". This seems slightly redundant in light of the fact that most people can tell how hard they are pushing with their feet. It's worth a laugh though. I got about 25-30mpg out of it.
Mazda added a similar feature to the MX5 - the further you push your foot down, the more the car presses you into the back of your seat. While redundant from a point of view of information, it's a nice feeling, so I'm glad they added it. I get 32mpg (a bit less than the quoted figures, but the doctor tells me I have a heavy right foot).
Good lord! The Lada outscores the Mazda by virtue of being able to transport 4 people, and/or a fair bit of luggage (when it's running). The Mazda has a small boot (just enough for a weekend break or 2 people's weekly shopping) which makes it perfect most of the time, but inconvenient on occasion. But hey, that's what friends are for, right?!
Lada - See the Lada Tribute page for a full list of what fell off. Say no more.
Mazda - It's a hassle, but you may need to refill the windscreen washer fluid about once a month.
The Mazda has a manually opened roof, but this can be whipped up or down in approximately 5 seconds without even leaving the driver's seat (though it helps to stop the car first). In contrast, the Lada's roof, while removable, takes a little longer to get down (you have to wait for the rust to eat through the pillars) and once it's off, you ain't getting it back on. The MX5 thus wins for ease and convenience of open-top motoring.
The Lada is ponderous and dull to drive, but it beats the Mazda hands-down in one department - while you will feel protective of your Mazda, not wishing even the tiniest scratch to marr its beauty, you will practically welcome any accident in your Lada, as (a) rather than not caring if it gets dented, you feel it would be a service to the world if you were able to rid it of one of the things, and (b) although you will die a horrible death, at least you'll be put out of your misery.
Then again, there's nothing to compare to driving in the sun, the wind in your hair, at high speed around tight bends. The MX5 wins again. My friends think the MX5 is great, too, because every time the sun comes out I piss off and leave them in peace for a couple of hours.
Final scores:
| Mazda MX5 | 96% | (Technically speaking, "Fab") | |
| Lada Samara | 32% | (Technically speaking, "It blows chunks") |
|
Dear Sir With regards to your artilce entitled mx5 vs Lada (25 nov 2000), as devoted lada fans and avid dislikers of all Japanese motor cars, we feel that your report may be biased. When you detail the fun aspect of the two cars your argument is simplistic and unjustified. I would, quite personally like to see an mx5 climb it's way across 20 km of garvel river bed with out bottoming out! any way I must make this short so I will say this, at least Ladas are an original design where as the mx5 is a blatant copy of the Jaguar E type. |
You make some good points, Mr Watson. I am biased, in that I like my MX5 more than I liked my Samara. I totally appreciate that a 2-seater sports car is perhaps not your cup of tea. I was also unfair in not comparing the prices of the cars in question, where the Samara is significantly cheaper than the MX5, and suffers much less from depreciation - but I expect that most readers are aware of this difference.
I agree that driving over rocky river-beds could be great fun, but as I never tried it in either my Samara or my MX5, I'm afraid I cannot offer any sort of useful comparison. It is clear that the MX5 is almost as suitable for this purpose as a haddock would be suited to life in the Sahara. However, I would contend that my Samara would not fare well either - a Lada Niva would be somewhat better suited to this sort of terrain - and I wholeheartedly agree that a Niva would rate as "much more fun" than an MX5 in all conceivable river-bed adventuring scenarios. I strongly suggest that anyone thinking of buying an MX5 for any sort of cross-country driving should seriously reconsider their position, and buy it instead for wheels-firmly-planted-on-tarmac based exhilaration.
I agree that the MX5 is a beautiful, timeless, and classic shape, although I feel I should correct you on one point - I believe it is (or rather, was, 12 years ago) in fact a blatant copy of the orignal Lotus Elan rather than the E-Type.
Thank you for your comments - it is always interesting to hear other people's views and opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
If you have any comments about this site, please email us. Our operators are standing by.
 |