I've read somewhere that the early '90 had a crank walk issue. Is this true? Are there any other concerns to look for, is there any years to avoid?
I've read somewhere that the early '90 had a crank walk issue. Is this true? Are there any other concerns to look for, is there any years to avoid?
some info on the crank issues here:
http://www.miata.net/garage/crankshaft.html
I have an early '90 and just replaced the bolt/key when I purchased the car, no issues after 20k miles/180k total on the car. I bet Keith will be along soon to clarify.
My '90 with the short nose crank has gone 130,000 miles without issue, and they haven't been easy miles for sure. It's not crankwalk, it's that supposedly the end of the crank breaks off. But Keith says it's largely overblown and not an inherent issue of the engine, but a result of hacks working on them. I would be more inclined to avoid the '90-'93s because of the spindly rear differential (that only came with a weak viscous LSD instead of the later Torsens) and the brakes that aren't adequate for stock form.
also good to know. I knew this was the right place to ask about miatas. 
It really depends on what you want to do with them.
I think the year that you really want to avoid is 1998.
I wouldn't let the short nose crank scare you off, if you are okay with a 1.6L early car otherwise. If it's not a problem, then proper care will prevent it. I bought one with an acute case of crank keyway erosion. A new bolt, timing gear, woodruff key, and some of that special Loctite and it was good as new. Still running to this day, last I heard.
Short nose crank failures aren't a big deal if you catch them early enough. Heck, most people just drop a 1.8 in these days anyhow. I have had one of my engines fail (no, I was NOT the person who put the bolt on) and it seems just fine after the Loctite fix. There are LOT of short nose engines out there, crossing them off your list does eliminate a lot of Miatas. But there's little price difference between the 1.8 cars and the 1.6, and with the 1.8 NA you get bigger brakes, better proportioning, a Torsen diff (if you shop right) and the bigger engine. Uglier dash, though.
The 1999 Miatas did have thrust bearing issues. Most of those engines didn't make it past 40k or so, so as long as the engine has good end play it wouldn't scare me at all.
I have a 1.6 and I guess I need to read up on this....
It's only the 1990 and early 1991 models. Look at your front crank pulley. 4 slots = short nose, 8 slots = long nose.
Don't touch a 98
I would avoid anything built after 2006 due to a terminal case of the uglies.
The years I would skip are the rusty ones.
Yeah, definitely don't buy a '98. Horrible, horrible cars. Totally atypical of the brand.
Every '98 that I've seen on Craigslist has been real sketchy.
I don't know what you guys are thinking. 98's are like a dream. So smooth you feel like you're not even in it.
Jeesus, I know what you people are alluding to! I'm not an idiot! Lol.
Are the 1998 Miatas kept with the 1983 Corvettes?
In reply to NickD:
Brakes on the 1.6s are fine. Many laps of Laguna Seca, Sonoma, and Buttonwillow.
accordionfolder wrote: In reply to NickD: Brakes on the 1.6s are fine. Many laps of Laguna Seca, Sonoma, and Buttonwillow.
2 consecutive runs of the Tail Of The Dragon: Massive fade, yanking up on the steering wheel trying to stop, with stock 1.6L rotors and Porterfield pads. My friend also had the same issue on his '90 with the Flyin' Miata '90-'93 Brake Upgrade Kit. The next year I came back with the 1.8L front brakes and DBA slotted rotors all the way around and Porterfield pads and had no issue.
unevolved wrote: Yeah, definitely don't buy a '98. Horrible, horrible cars. Totally atypical of the brand.
Don't '98s have the lowest curb weight though?
Brakes on the early cars are ok. But the brakes on the 1.8 cars inspire a bit more confidence on the track
All Miatas are awesome. There are no years to avoid. Some are just a little more awesome. '94s and '99s for instance.
LuxInterior wrote: All Miatas are awesome. There are no years to avoid. Some are just a little more awesome. '94s and '99s for instance.
What makes those years more desireable?
You'll need to log in to post.
