Mazda MX-5 v Toyota 86 2015 Comparison

So more than a straight-out bang-for-your-buck comparison, we thought it important to delve a little deeper. Handling is a primary focus of lightweight two-door models with modest horsepower. For this pair the brief is more fundamental: Enjoyment; communication; involvement.

Call it what you will: Oneness with the machine; 'Jinba Ittai' (thanks, Mazda) or simply the feel at the wheel. As any good driver knows vehicle dynamics are as much art as science; which is why we've decided to test Toyota's newest superstar against the 'world's favourite roadster' on track, on tarmac and against the stopwatch.

With any luck, the results will give us a definitive answer on which car is best placed to push your buttons, and in our view is the most dynamic.

It's about maintaining momentum. You need to feel the car to go fast. Trust the handling, learn the chassis, then get those knuckles as white as this pair's paintwork as you clip the apex at the limit of grip.

Beware, though. If you don't have the horsepower to get you out of trouble, you probably shouldn't go getting yourself into it in the first place. These cars are built to be forgiving but on the ragged edge the lack of extra 'oomph' to garner more drive from the apex can pucker the shutter of the uninitiated.

On an undulating track like Haunted Hills, it's this philosophy that sits foremost of mind. This isn't a circuit that tolerates fools. It's also a place where having big horsepower can help you avoid any mess as it'll likely get you in to (turn two is called 'Oh shit corner' for a reason). Here you have to choose your lines carefully to carry pace.

Fast laps times reward the brave… Just as well the MX-5 and the 86 encourage confidence.

Initially, the 86 felt 'tighter' than the MX-5. It's well-clamped front-end transmits better steering feedback to the driver, and bites quickly on corner entry. However, the sense of response is somewhat false here. The Toyota's tightly sprung body fails to transmit weight evenly front to rear, and on to the outside wheels, ultimately limiting total grip.

In contrast, the Mazda's generous suspension travel may appear to give it an adventurous attitude in hard cornering, but we found the MX-5 was less inclined to 'slip' in bends, and with fewer understeer/oversteer characteristics.

The 86 seemed very inclined to induce oversteer when provoked, but equally was susceptible to understeer if corner entry speed was too high. The harder compound and stiffer sidewall of the tyres exaggerated the sensation – though we also noticed that when trying to trail brake into corners (in a bid to reduce understeer), the tail would become even lighter and (again) induce oversteer.

In short, the 86 is a car that prefers a lower corner entry speed, relying on its power to dash from the apex.

The MX-5 is more forgiving through corners. Get caught-out by a change in radius or camber and it's the little roadster that offers more mid-corner adjustment. It's accurate and communicates quickly any sense that you're trying too hard.

That said, and in spite of our best efforts, it was very hard to unglue Mazda; its tyres, suspension and stability control far better suited to the tricky turns and undulations of the Haunted Hills circuit.

Take the long way home
Righto, that's the track done and dusted. But it proves only how well these cars fair in a controlled environment. The Haunted Hills circuit is beautifully maintained, free of potholes and of a consistent surface. Pretty much all the things a public road is not!

And rightly there's not too many MX-5 and 86 owners out there who save their ride purely for the track. These are road cars to enjoy on the weekend as much as any other day. Cars you want to drive and experience.

It stands to reason, then, that you're going to want a car that will not only provide feedback and handle with consistency, but that will also get you through the humdrum of commuting with at least some degree of comfort.

Rather than find an average road with a good surface, we decided to take the 'scenic route' -- the kinds of roads owners of cars like the two on test crave. With little traffic and more twists and turns, alas, they are also the kinds of roads that receive less funding. Potholes and imperfections are commonplace here, but that's kind of the point. We want to see how the MX-5 and 86 deal with the worst of the everyday.

If comfort's a selling point, the 86 might disappoint. The firmer ride noted on track was again an enemy on rough surfaces. Single-wheel impacts were noted as especially harsh, and we also found that lumps and bumps could affect the rear-end's attitude when making directional adjustments mid-corner (ie: induce unwanted oversteer).

Otherwise, the 86's steering was 'sweeter' than the MX-5's. There was more weight at the wheel, transmitting even the finer 'graininess' of surface changes instantly to the driver. The tiller also had a better on-centre feel that that of the Mazda and was more progressive (and linear) during torque build-up into high-speed or tightening radius corners.

It wasn't all good news for the 86, though. The stability control was noted as being incredibly sensitive, the system triggering at the slightest yaw motion and sustaining a ruthless break in proceedings until back on the straight and narrow.

For the Mazda, body control was again apparent on-road. But as was the case on track, the variance in attitude gave the car more grip and better mid-corner response and adjustability.

Points off for the over-assisted steering (in contrast to the 86, at least) was a little dull when issuing instructions on surface and camber. The rear-end was also noted as a little 'busy' over mid-speed compressions, and it was our view that with two passengers and gear onboard the tail could 'bottom out' when challenged.

Overall, however, the MX-5 was a joy to drive with the best combination of body movement and chassis communication of the pair. It's a smoother car in corners, more supple over bumps, and, at its core, an easier beast to drive at speed.

Time gentlemen, please
We're probably contradicting ourselves by publishing results measured against the stopwatch (well, a very expensive GPS version thereof). This is a driver's car test on which the numbers have less bearing. But in the interests of providing as much info as we can, here goes…

The more powerful Toyota managed an identical 0-60km/h time to the Mazda at 3.9sec. The margin grew, however, in the 0-100km/h dash where the 86 clocked 7.7sec, 0.5sec ahead of the MX-5.

But there's a curious pointer to delivery and linearity here, as well as the difference in torque delivery. The roadster's lighter weight may have seen it jump from the line quicker than the tin-top, though in roll-on acceleration tests, the 86 was faster 50-70km/h (1.7sec v 1.8) and 80-100km/h (2.1sec v 2.6).

The MX-5's engine felt less flustered than the 86. Its potent little 1.5-litre four revved more freely than the 86.

In contrast, the horizontally-opposed 2.0-litre of the 'Toyoburu' was a little reluctant to reach redline, but felt happy enough to stay there once it had overcome its own mass. There's a difference in aural character too, though it's largely going to depend on whether you enjoy more bass (Toyota) or richer high notes (Mazda).

The canvas top (or sans roof entirely) of the Mazda obviously allows an even greater vantage point from which to enjoy the exhaust note. Though it's interesting to note that roof-up the MX-5 wasn't greatly different in terms of cabin noise measuring 80dB(A) against the 86's 81dB(A) at 80km/h over the same stretch of road.

The 86 offers more road and tyre noise, the MX-5 more wind.

Braking was a dead heat from 60km/h with both cars measuring an identical 13.6m. The Mazda features all-disc stoppers measuring 258mm up front and 255mm at the back while the heavier Toyota has 294mm ventilated discs at the pointy-end and 290mm rotors at the rear.

We preferred the pedal feel, and noticed less fade, in the lighter MX-5 on track.

Where fuel consumption is concerned – and over the course of an identical day on road and at the track – we averaged 8.1L/100km in the MX-5 and 9.2L/100km in the 86.

Horses (and riders) for courses
It's not just the dynamic differences that will appeal to different buyers… Considering our two challengers can be had for around $30K (and that this higher-grade pair retail for closer to $40K) it's interesting to note how different the quality of interior materials are between them.

The Mazda feels more 'premium' inside with higher quality surfaces and switchgear, and a more uniform look between its infotainment and instrumentation. The Toyota looks 'low rent' by comparison. It sounds harsh but it's amazing how much more Mazda seems to have squeezed from the same orange.

The shutlines are also tighter in the Mazda, and from a 'feel' perspective alone, the ergonomics get the nod.

The 86 offers more space – especially where headroom is concerned – and the bonus of two additional, err, seats should you have a set of headless torsos you need to transport. It also has flat folding rear seats, more cargo space (218 litres plays 130), a glovebox, and the security of a real roof.

On the flipside the Toyota loses out a little when it comes to after-sales support. Sure it has a three-year warranty, capped-price servicing and the same pay-as-you-go roadside assistance deal as the Mazda (though it's $78.00 a year against $68.10 for the Mazda), however, the 86's warranty runs out at 100,000km where the MX-5 is an unlimited kilometre deal.

The 86 also needs to visit the service department every nine months (or 15,000km) instead of once a year (and 10,000km) for the MX-5. The Toyota is limited to fixed-price services only for the duration of the warranty period, whereas the Mazda's deal extends to 16 years or 160,000km (whichever comes first). Granted, the 86 is cheaper to service ($180 at the first visit versus $297).

Mazda don't charge for metallic paint (except on Soul Red which is $200) where Toyota stings you $450, but the 86 gets 17-inch wheels (16s on the MX-5), a reversing camera and a bigger fuel tank (50 litres v 45). The Mazda reclaims ground with better fuel economy (6.1L/100km on the ADR Combined cycle against 7.8 in the Toyota) and a tighter turning circle (9.4m as opposed to a bus-like 10.8).

Decision time
Enjoyment; communication; involvement: these are the three pillars of any good driver's car, and characteristics each of our rivals have in abundance. As we suspected, each has a temperament of its own with pros and cons which appeal to different drivers and different driving styles.

But, we said we'd pick a winner based on its performance on the track and the tarmac – and we have.

Simply, it's the MX-5.

As a car more capable of delivering a spirited drive without the demand for driver dexterity, skill or even finesse, the Mazda MX-5 is a deserved winner. It's a car that's easier – and more forgiving – to pilot at speed and one whose interaction will readily attenuate even the most novice driver.

If you love 'drifting', lairising a bit, or being constantly at war with the electronic nannies then the Toyota is a great choice – and that aside it's still a great car.

There are not too many vehicles that can offer the purity of either of these two, and though we prefer the dynamics of the MX-5, it's obvious both are a cracking way to embrace and enjoy thrill of the road.

2015 (ND) Mazda MX-5 Roadster GT pricing and specifications:
Priced from: $37,990 (plus on-road costs)
Engine: 1.5-litre four-cylinder petrol
Output: 96kW/150Nm (95.1kW/tonne)
Transmission: Six-speed manual
Fuel: 6.1L/100km (ADR Combined)
CO2: 130g/km (ADR Combined)
Safety Rating: N/A

Not so much:
>> Tight cabin for tall drivers
>> Limited cargo and oddment storage
>> Roof-up visibility (no reversing camera)

Not so much:
>> Engine less willing in mid-range
>> Fit and finish of interior materials
>> Lesser service and warranty provisions