Hi there, I have just purchased a NZ new, year 2000 5 speed manual MX5
with 57,000 kms, it has been well cared for and serviced but I have a
few issues concerning it's performance.
Firstly this is my third MX5, I have had a '90 and a '92 previously, I
expected this one to be a quicker, more refined and better riding car
than my previous ones, however I am finding the 1800cc engine breathless
at high revs (5,500 - 7,000rpm), and not as punchy as I thought it would
be lower down the range. The plugs look good (they are original), the
air filter is a little dirty though, could this be restricting airflow?
Are there any other factors that could be restricting performance or are
the 1800's not as punchy as the power figures suggest? My earlier MK1
1600's seemed quicker, sweeter and more willing to pull higher up the
rev range. Subjectively my 1800cc engine feels like about 100bhp rather
than the suggested 140bhp. Would a diagnostic check at my Mazda dealer
be a good idea? Is there anything else I should check?
Secondly, has the year 2000 model got a knock sensor on the engine,
thereby retarding or advancing the ignition depending on what grade of
fuel is used? I am currently running on 98 octane but don't know if I'm
receiving any benefits (other than an easier burn in the combustion
chamber) by using a high grade fuel.
Thirdly, is there a well known and proven product for returning a grey
and dull soft top back to its former black and shiny glory?
Finally, the scuttle shake on this model appears worse than on the
MK1's, despite all the extra bracing, is this my poor memory, my
imagination or a well known trait?
Any wisdom from anywhere gratefully received, Paul.
New owner with a few queries.
New owner with a few queries.
Hi Paul...
There are others on this site more knowlegeable than me on your car.
But for what it is worth, I have a NZ new 1800 (late 93). I have dropped the
cat off, 14 degrees ignition timing, on 98 octane, and the engine pulls
strongly.
My initial thoughts of the things I would look at are: ignition timing, fuel
filter, exhaust restriction (eg faulty /collapsed cat/rear muffler or crimped
pipe). The dirty air filter won't be helping...
It is generally acknowleged that the 1800 is noticeable coarser than the
1600!
Good luck,
Ian
There are others on this site more knowlegeable than me on your car.
But for what it is worth, I have a NZ new 1800 (late 93). I have dropped the
cat off, 14 degrees ignition timing, on 98 octane, and the engine pulls
strongly.
My initial thoughts of the things I would look at are: ignition timing, fuel
filter, exhaust restriction (eg faulty /collapsed cat/rear muffler or crimped
pipe). The dirty air filter won't be helping...
It is generally acknowleged that the 1800 is noticeable coarser than the
1600!
Good luck,
Ian
93 1.8,intake/ex mods,Megasqirt PNP,torsen ,konis,GC coilovers,Nitto-01,cage,sparco seat,Schroth harness.
New owner with a few queries.
PS..you will have a knock sensor..use 96 or will it be 95 now??, to guard
against poor batches of 91, and with a change to a more agressive timing, 95
plus becomes mandatory.
Ian
against poor batches of 91, and with a change to a more agressive timing, 95
plus becomes mandatory.
Ian
93 1.8,intake/ex mods,Megasqirt PNP,torsen ,konis,GC coilovers,Nitto-01,cage,sparco seat,Schroth harness.
-
Ian Chapman
New owner with a few queries.
Paul
Not having any long term personal experience in 1800 vs 1600, I will leave to the more knowledgeable, however I do know the 1600 is a more rev happy smoother engine - as with most engines, as they increase capacity by stroking and/or boring they lose revability and smoothness.
If the NB has the same air filter as the NA I have a surplus near new very clean K&N you can borrow for a few days to see if that makes a difference - providing you are near Wellington!
We use Mothers soft top restorer (or similar name) and it is great for turning dull grey tops into nice black.
Hope this helps - wait for all of the really valuable knowledge about to flow forth from the gurus!
Ian
From jifjif@gmail.com Fri Apr 27 17:33:19 2007
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:message-id
from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
b=NF4hQT467gHJYYzzU26WQThr2rG0jz/7A0CV8LuG2cOUCKe72UPXJ1it27/jPGD6MhBmDwlcJQvtMAJQkGlal8IPIvvxCSD4zSfq4QUD7K55ekoJtT6PsRQhzal1pjCxdUe6IlM/Cf9eyFVh4y6Udh9wpjpY1SzM8EsjXcOVAvU=
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 17:13:53 +1200
From: ~Jeff~ <jifjif@gmail.com>
To: MX5List <mx5list@mx5club.org.nz>
Subject: Re: New owner with a few queries.
In-Reply-To: <000001c5b1d0$17c22300$0301010a@SPEEDY>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
References: <000001c5b1d0$17c22300$0301010a@SPEEDY>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message-ID: <q6_nSB.A.Q3D.DxYMGB@L733>
Hi Paul
Congrats on the MX5. It seems as though Mazda made these lithe wee
cars increasingly "comfortable" (heavy, perched high and disconnected)
as the years went on, not to mention less rev and taili happy ! I
know I've always had more fun in other's 1600's than my 1800 ('96) !!
You could try advancing the timing, adding an exhaust and intake
filter (in roughly that order) to loosen things up. An "italian
tuneup" might improve things for a low-mileage car like that also
It might also be a plugged catalytic converter.
I'm pretty sure the NB's got a knock sensor, so you could safely run
on lesser fuel for only a small penalty in power.
Ultimately the 1600s were designed to be peaky and revvy, whereas the
1800s were designed more for a flatter torque curve. This makes for a
less interesing power delivery in the end though ... nothing a few
mods can't fix ..."ubercharger" anyone??
Chic showed me that even an 1800 can go well if you drive with your
foot on the floor and change just before the redline, hehe. Really !
You can add any braces which were added to later models, tho' I've
found that a hardtop (sacrilege! Burn him - I can hear the cries
now...) has good effect .
Might be worth checking wheel balance and alignment, as this can make
a big difference to road feel with such a fine tuned driving device
Hope that helps...
Jeff
On 9/5/05, Lisa & Paul Cardosi <plcardosi@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
[...]
Not having any long term personal experience in 1800 vs 1600, I will leave to the more knowledgeable, however I do know the 1600 is a more rev happy smoother engine - as with most engines, as they increase capacity by stroking and/or boring they lose revability and smoothness.
If the NB has the same air filter as the NA I have a surplus near new very clean K&N you can borrow for a few days to see if that makes a difference - providing you are near Wellington!
We use Mothers soft top restorer (or similar name) and it is great for turning dull grey tops into nice black.
Hope this helps - wait for all of the really valuable knowledge about to flow forth from the gurus!
Ian
From jifjif@gmail.com Fri Apr 27 17:33:19 2007
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com;
h=received:message-id
from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;b=NF4hQT467gHJYYzzU26WQThr2rG0jz/7A0CV8LuG2cOUCKe72UPXJ1it27/jPGD6MhBmDwlcJQvtMAJQkGlal8IPIvvxCSD4zSfq4QUD7K55ekoJtT6PsRQhzal1pjCxdUe6IlM/Cf9eyFVh4y6Udh9wpjpY1SzM8EsjXcOVAvU=
Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2005 17:13:53 +1200
From: ~Jeff~ <jifjif@gmail.com>
To: MX5List <mx5list@mx5club.org.nz>
Subject: Re: New owner with a few queries.
In-Reply-To: <000001c5b1d0$17c22300$0301010a@SPEEDY>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
References: <000001c5b1d0$17c22300$0301010a@SPEEDY>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message-ID: <q6_nSB.A.Q3D.DxYMGB@L733>
Hi Paul
Congrats on the MX5. It seems as though Mazda made these lithe wee
cars increasingly "comfortable" (heavy, perched high and disconnected)
as the years went on, not to mention less rev and taili happy ! I
know I've always had more fun in other's 1600's than my 1800 ('96) !!
You could try advancing the timing, adding an exhaust and intake
filter (in roughly that order) to loosen things up. An "italian
tuneup" might improve things for a low-mileage car like that also
It might also be a plugged catalytic converter.
I'm pretty sure the NB's got a knock sensor, so you could safely run
on lesser fuel for only a small penalty in power.
Ultimately the 1600s were designed to be peaky and revvy, whereas the
1800s were designed more for a flatter torque curve. This makes for a
less interesing power delivery in the end though ... nothing a few
mods can't fix
..."ubercharger" anyone??Chic showed me that even an 1800 can go well if you drive with your
foot on the floor and change just before the redline, hehe. Really !
You can add any braces which were added to later models, tho' I've
found that a hardtop (sacrilege! Burn him - I can hear the cries
now...) has good effect .
Might be worth checking wheel balance and alignment, as this can make
a big difference to road feel with such a fine tuned driving device
Hope that helps...
Jeff
On 9/5/05, Lisa & Paul Cardosi <plcardosi@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
[...]
-
my2cta
- Need, more, 5-ing, time....
- Posts: 102
- Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 12:43 pm
- Location: Upper Hutt
New owner with a few queries.
I have a 2000 6-speed with 38,000 kms and my daughter has a 1990 with 150,000.
The NB is quicker to 100 kph than the NA, not by a lot (it is 100 kg heavier
after all), but at that speed it is pulling away from the older car. I agree
it doesn't develop much punch at lower revs, basically if you want some 'go'
you have to use over 3500 rpm. Goes OK then. The 6-speed box helps. Doesn't
seem breathless to me at higher revs, still revving freely all the way to the
cutout, but I've only driven the NA twice so no real experience of it for a
meaningful comparison.
One big difference, at 100 kph the NA is doing around 3500 rpm, the 6-speed NB
only 2900. makes for more relaxed cruising. On a long road trip in convoy, top
down, the two cars returned almost identical fuel consumption (14 k/l). The
speedos are almost equally (in)accurate. Indicated 100 in the NA shows 99 in
the NB, and registers 95 on the GPS.
The NB engine retards/advances the ignition timing automatically to cater for
the fuel you use. On 91 octane it runs perfectly, but fule consumption isn't
as good. I expect power is down, but haven't tried any measurements to confirm
that. Running 96 the fuel consumption is consistently 10-15% better. I tried
98 but the difference from 96 was too close to be significant and the extra
cost didn't appear to be justified. It is cheaper to run on 96 than on 91,
more so now that fuel prices are up by 50%.
Don't know about the scuttle shake. Mine does shake on really bumpy tight
bends, but haven't done a comparison ride in my daughter's car on the same
bends at the same speed to see if there is any difference. Might give it a try
some time (if she'll let me), now you have piqued my interest.
I like both cars. You really can't tell there's 10 years and 110,000 kms
between them, except the NA has little things going wrong with it from time to
time and the NB doesn't.
Looking forward to driving an NC.
Tim
MY2CTA
The NB is quicker to 100 kph than the NA, not by a lot (it is 100 kg heavier
after all), but at that speed it is pulling away from the older car. I agree
it doesn't develop much punch at lower revs, basically if you want some 'go'
you have to use over 3500 rpm. Goes OK then. The 6-speed box helps. Doesn't
seem breathless to me at higher revs, still revving freely all the way to the
cutout, but I've only driven the NA twice so no real experience of it for a
meaningful comparison.
One big difference, at 100 kph the NA is doing around 3500 rpm, the 6-speed NB
only 2900. makes for more relaxed cruising. On a long road trip in convoy, top
down, the two cars returned almost identical fuel consumption (14 k/l). The
speedos are almost equally (in)accurate. Indicated 100 in the NA shows 99 in
the NB, and registers 95 on the GPS.
The NB engine retards/advances the ignition timing automatically to cater for
the fuel you use. On 91 octane it runs perfectly, but fule consumption isn't
as good. I expect power is down, but haven't tried any measurements to confirm
that. Running 96 the fuel consumption is consistently 10-15% better. I tried
98 but the difference from 96 was too close to be significant and the extra
cost didn't appear to be justified. It is cheaper to run on 96 than on 91,
more so now that fuel prices are up by 50%.
Don't know about the scuttle shake. Mine does shake on really bumpy tight
bends, but haven't done a comparison ride in my daughter's car on the same
bends at the same speed to see if there is any difference. Might give it a try
some time (if she'll let me), now you have piqued my interest.
I like both cars. You really can't tell there's 10 years and 110,000 kms
between them, except the NA has little things going wrong with it from time to
time and the NB doesn't.
Looking forward to driving an NC.
Tim
MY2CTA
Tim
MY2CTA
MY2CTA
-
Grant
- Need, more, 5-ing, time....
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 9:41 pm
- Location: Sunny Blenheim
New owner with a few queries.
I have a 1992 (200,000km) NA 1600 and a 1998 (55000km) 1800, both autos. My
daughter now uses the 1992.
The 1800 is quieter, more refined (slightly) and has more torque. The auto
box is quite different to the older one and the combination does go quite a
bit better than the older car. The torque is more important in the auto I
suspect. Fuel economy of the 1800 is better as well. It's a bit difficult
comparing a car done over 200,000km with one done 55000, as the older one I
would expect to be somewhat noisier and not have as much get up and go. On a
rough road, I felt the scuttle shake was about the same on the two, but the
NB is different and at first I felt the shake was worse. I now think it's
just different the way it does shake. Not very technical but that's the best
I can do.
I think the seats (both have leather) are better in the older car and have a
bit more support, especially in the lower back. If I was a bit larger,
perhaps the new seats would fit me better but I do tend to slide around in
them more than the older ones. My wife thinks the same. I miss the headrest
speakers in the old seats as well. I have been tempted to get a pair of NA
seats to fit in the NB but have only got to thinking about it stage. The
boot space in the NA, with the spare mounted under the floor, is better than
the NB. The NB is ok, but somewhat shallower than the NA. Pity the spare
wasn't inverted in the NB so you could pack stuff in the hollow of the wheel.
Overall, I do prefer the NB over the NA, as it does perform better. I
thought the handling wasn't as good until I realised I was tending to corner
faster in the NB because of its more refined nature, I suspect and the
better acceleration.
In the 2.5 years and 70,000km, I used the car, the only thing to go wrong in
the NA was a split top tank on the radiator and a couple of clips requiring
tightening on the auto transmission hoses to the transmission cooler.
At present my NA is far superior to my NB because its engine goes. My NB
engine still doesn't however once I get it back from the doctors, I am sure
I will be happy with it again. Once I get over the heart attack caused by
what I imagine will be a rather large bill!
Grant.
daughter now uses the 1992.
The 1800 is quieter, more refined (slightly) and has more torque. The auto
box is quite different to the older one and the combination does go quite a
bit better than the older car. The torque is more important in the auto I
suspect. Fuel economy of the 1800 is better as well. It's a bit difficult
comparing a car done over 200,000km with one done 55000, as the older one I
would expect to be somewhat noisier and not have as much get up and go. On a
rough road, I felt the scuttle shake was about the same on the two, but the
NB is different and at first I felt the shake was worse. I now think it's
just different the way it does shake. Not very technical but that's the best
I can do.
I think the seats (both have leather) are better in the older car and have a
bit more support, especially in the lower back. If I was a bit larger,
perhaps the new seats would fit me better but I do tend to slide around in
them more than the older ones. My wife thinks the same. I miss the headrest
speakers in the old seats as well. I have been tempted to get a pair of NA
seats to fit in the NB but have only got to thinking about it stage. The
boot space in the NA, with the spare mounted under the floor, is better than
the NB. The NB is ok, but somewhat shallower than the NA. Pity the spare
wasn't inverted in the NB so you could pack stuff in the hollow of the wheel.
Overall, I do prefer the NB over the NA, as it does perform better. I
thought the handling wasn't as good until I realised I was tending to corner
faster in the NB because of its more refined nature, I suspect and the
better acceleration.
In the 2.5 years and 70,000km, I used the car, the only thing to go wrong in
the NA was a split top tank on the radiator and a couple of clips requiring
tightening on the auto transmission hoses to the transmission cooler.
At present my NA is far superior to my NB because its engine goes. My NB
engine still doesn't however once I get it back from the doctors, I am sure
I will be happy with it again. Once I get over the heart attack caused by
what I imagine will be a rather large bill!
Grant.
Red 2006 NC Tiptronic
FIX A PC
FIX A PC
-
Jon Addison
New owner with a few queries.
This is an interesting comparison. Many weights and power outputs are
quoted for the MX-5. However the figure for the NZ 1990 model with no
extras is 955-990kg depending on the source and for the NB 1100-1150kg.
The NZ NA was 85kW/135Nm and the 1800 NB 103kW/162Nm. However in other
markets the 1800 was rated at 96kW/152Nm.
Therefore the NA could have 11.24kg/kW and 7.07kg/Nm and the NB
11.98kg/kW and 7.57kg/Nm depending on the engine rating and equipment level.
Key in taller gearing and the 1800 could be noticeably slower. Even the
best power-weight ratio for the 1800 NA is only a little sharper,
although the torque-weight quite a bit better. This is entirely
consistent with the owners' experiences.
Jon
On 07/09/2005, at 4:05 PM, The Simpsons wrote:
[...]
From supasparky@yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 27 17:32:57 2007
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk;
h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
b=t1gCEm3jv98dxm5KTQ9JOdunWSNOu5dfenTodTdvP4ECiSajptCzsM3q8lQGBvuCeAFDDZcv1GwWFcsmioV0UhvsQe8JUNyW2L6QLCXtmKXV48f4LEQQcYePHbDv7OGHwgWX58DpYAwlkBYcCHvWoDyf3jOex8Pd7pivCXi/DEA=
;
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 05:47:13 +0100 (BST)
From: glenn roberts <supasparky@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Battery drain cure
To: MX5List <mx5list@mx5club.org.nz>
In-Reply-To: <a44c51feecfdad71fedfccaaf31e8a23@xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message-ID: <8Gi2jC.A.y3D.DxYMGB@L733>
Disconnecting modern electronics by the earth can
sometimes lead to disaster... some elecronics need the
earth to keep floating voltages down, when the earth
is disconected long term it can lead to problems...You
should be ok in most instances but you never know...
If you have an immobiliser then make SURE you have the
reprogramming info at hand... My battery went flat
when left for a few weeks and i had to get the stereo
shop to reprogramme it cause it had been unpowered for
such a long time...
Glenn "SLYDIT"
http://miata.cardomain.com/id/supasparky
Currently building a DIY Turbo..Subaru VF10 Turbo, Weld el manifold, 2.5"exhaust,subaru BOV, Isuzu intercooler, 330cc GTX injectors, dual feed fuel rail,RX7 air flow meter, Greddy Emanage piggy back computor.Custom full length cold air box...YEEEEEHHHAAA
Hopefully finished by summer:)
quoted for the MX-5. However the figure for the NZ 1990 model with no
extras is 955-990kg depending on the source and for the NB 1100-1150kg.
The NZ NA was 85kW/135Nm and the 1800 NB 103kW/162Nm. However in other
markets the 1800 was rated at 96kW/152Nm.
Therefore the NA could have 11.24kg/kW and 7.07kg/Nm and the NB
11.98kg/kW and 7.57kg/Nm depending on the engine rating and equipment level.
Key in taller gearing and the 1800 could be noticeably slower. Even the
best power-weight ratio for the 1800 NA is only a little sharper,
although the torque-weight quite a bit better. This is entirely
consistent with the owners' experiences.
Jon
On 07/09/2005, at 4:05 PM, The Simpsons wrote:
[...]
From supasparky@yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 27 17:32:57 2007
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.uk;
h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
b=t1gCEm3jv98dxm5KTQ9JOdunWSNOu5dfenTodTdvP4ECiSajptCzsM3q8lQGBvuCeAFDDZcv1GwWFcsmioV0UhvsQe8JUNyW2L6QLCXtmKXV48f4LEQQcYePHbDv7OGHwgWX58DpYAwlkBYcCHvWoDyf3jOex8Pd7pivCXi/DEA=
;
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 05:47:13 +0100 (BST)
From: glenn roberts <supasparky@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Battery drain cure
To: MX5List <mx5list@mx5club.org.nz>
In-Reply-To: <a44c51feecfdad71fedfccaaf31e8a23@xtra.co.nz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: list
Message-ID: <8Gi2jC.A.y3D.DxYMGB@L733>
Disconnecting modern electronics by the earth can
sometimes lead to disaster... some elecronics need the
earth to keep floating voltages down, when the earth
is disconected long term it can lead to problems...You
should be ok in most instances but you never know...
If you have an immobiliser then make SURE you have the
reprogramming info at hand... My battery went flat
when left for a few weeks and i had to get the stereo
shop to reprogramme it cause it had been unpowered for
such a long time...
Glenn "SLYDIT"
http://miata.cardomain.com/id/supasparky
Currently building a DIY Turbo..Subaru VF10 Turbo, Weld el manifold, 2.5"exhaust,subaru BOV, Isuzu intercooler, 330cc GTX injectors, dual feed fuel rail,RX7 air flow meter, Greddy Emanage piggy back computor.Custom full length cold air box...YEEEEEHHHAAA
Hopefully finished by summer:)
-
Grant
- Need, more, 5-ing, time....
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 9:41 pm
- Location: Sunny Blenheim
New owner with a few queries.
Forgot to add that at an indicated 100km/h both cars are running at close to
3000rpm with the torque converter locked.
Grant.
3000rpm with the torque converter locked.
Grant.
Red 2006 NC Tiptronic
FIX A PC
FIX A PC
-
Lisa & Paul Cardosi
New owner with a few queries.
Thanks to everyone for the advice, a new air filter has improved things
no end (god I love the easy fixes) but I still hanker after another
good, low mileage, NZ new Mk1 1600, if anyone has one then let me know
and while I'm at it if anyone is interested in my NZ new, year 2000 MX5
with 58,000 kms and known history then e-mail me, I'm up for a swap if
anyone's keen. Also if you know of an E30 M3 available anywhere then
please tell me, thanks again for all the help, Paul.
no end (god I love the easy fixes) but I still hanker after another
good, low mileage, NZ new Mk1 1600, if anyone has one then let me know
and while I'm at it if anyone is interested in my NZ new, year 2000 MX5
with 58,000 kms and known history then e-mail me, I'm up for a swap if
anyone's keen. Also if you know of an E30 M3 available anywhere then
please tell me, thanks again for all the help, Paul.
New owner with a few queries.
Paul...
Have your thought about trading your auto on a NZ new NB manual? A VVTi
manual has to be the way to go...
Have your thought about trading your auto on a NZ new NB manual? A VVTi
manual has to be the way to go...
93 1.8,intake/ex mods,Megasqirt PNP,torsen ,konis,GC coilovers,Nitto-01,cage,sparco seat,Schroth harness.
-
Lisa & Paul Cardosi
New owner with a few queries.
I don't have an auto, it's a five speed manual, I've seriously thought
about a VVTi but I find them underwhelming (where's the VVTi bit!) and
I've loved the purity, lack of purpose and lack of pretence of my MK1's,
so (to me anyway) less is more.
about a VVTi but I find them underwhelming (where's the VVTi bit!) and
I've loved the purity, lack of purpose and lack of pretence of my MK1's,
so (to me anyway) less is more.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
