The affordable sports car that makes a used Porsche Cayman less tempting


The Porsche 718 Cayman has long been the sports car benchmark for enthusiasts who want a premium badge without stepping into full supercar territory. Its mid-engine layout, sharp chassis, and near-perfect balance give it the kind of driving feel that makes every corner more rewarding.

But owning a Cayman is about more than the way it drives. The Porsche name carries plenty of appeal, yet the costs that come with it can push buyers to look elsewhere. There is another sports car that delivers a similar focus on driver enjoyment while asking far less from your wallet.

In order to give you the most up-to-date and accurate information possible, the data used to compile this article was sourced from Mazda and other authoritative sources, including Edmunds, Kelley Blue Book, RepairPal, and TopSpeed.

The Miata RF is the smarter sports car buy

Less power than a Cayman, but far less compromise when ownership begins

Dynamic front 3/4 shot of a 2017 Mazda MX-5 RF. Credit: NetCarShow.com

The Porsche 718 Cayman remains one of the best sports cars for drivers who care about handling, but the badge comes with ownership costs that are hard to ignore. That is where the Mazda MX-5 Miata RF makes its case: less power, less prestige, but a huge amount of fun for significantly less money.

The Miata RF is not trying to be a cheaper Cayman. It takes a different approach, focusing on lightweight thrills, simple mechanics, and the kind of driving enjoyment that made sports cars special in the first place.

The numbers that actually matter

Shot of the engine under the hood of a 2017 Mazda MX-5 RF. Credit: NetCarShow.com

Engine

Power

Torque

0–60 mph

2.0-liter inline 4-cylinder

181 hp

151 lb-ft

6.4 seconds

The Miata RF is not winning any drag races against a Cayman, and that is not really the point. Its 2.0-liter four-cylinder makes 181 horsepower and 151 lb-ft of torque, but the car’s real advantage is the featherweight 2,437-pound curb weight that makes every input feel sharper.

Edmunds clocked the RF Club at 6.4 seconds to 60 mph and a 14.8-second quarter mile, numbers that look modest next to a Porsche but feel far more exciting from behind the wheel. Add in the manual transmission, standard limited-slip differential, and the extra rigidity from the retractable fastback roof, and the Miata RF delivers the kind of connection that keeps enthusiasts smiling.

The ownership advantage is where the Miata wins

Dynamic rear 3/4 shot of a 2017 Mazda MX-5 RF. Credit: NetCarShow.com

The Miata RF’s biggest advantage might not show up on a spec sheet. According to RepairPal, the Miata earns a 4.0 out of 5.0 reliability rating and costs just $429 per year on average for repairs, beating both the subcompact segment average and the average vehicle overall.

The Cayman tells a very different story, with RepairPal putting Porsche near the bottom for annual repair costs and the 718 Cayman averaging around $1,135 per year. Insurance widens the gap further, with the Miata costing about $870 less annually and ranking as one of the cheapest sports cars to insure.

Fuel economy is another area where the Miata RF keeps the ownership math on its side. With the manual transmission, it returns 26 mpg city and 34 mpg highway, making it one of the more efficient sports cars you can buy.

Used prices make the argument even stronger. A 2019 Miata RF typically trades in the low-to-mid $20,000 range depending on trim, a reasonable drop from its original mid-$30,000 price tag. It may not hold value like a Cayman, but the Miata starts from a much lower point and costs far less to keep on the road.

The Miata RF’s biggest advantage isn’t speed

Fun without the Porsche price

Dynamic side profile shot of a 2017 Mazda MX-5 RF. Credit: NetCarShow.com

If you take money out of the equation, the Cayman is the obvious winner. It is quicker, more polished, more prestigious, and better at holding its value than the Miata RF.

But that is exactly where the Mazda makes its case. It focuses on the everyday moments that make sports cars special: light weight, simple inputs, and a smile every time you take the long way home.

The sports car you can enjoy every day

The Miata RF’s greatest trick is making ordinary drives feel like events. A quick trip to the store or a familiar back road becomes more memorable because the car is built around the simple joy of driving.

The retractable hardtop also gives the RF a unique appeal, making it a closer match for the Cayman coupe than the standard convertible. The cabin is small and simple, but everything feels intentional—even if Mazda’s decision to skip a standard cup holder means owners have to get creative.

The Miata RF will not match the Cayman’s cabin quality or premium feel, but it is surprisingly close when it comes to usable space. Taller drivers may find the cockpit snug, and driving with the roof panel open brings more wind noise at highway speeds.

Those are small compromises for a car that weighs around 2,500 pounds and delivers so much involvement. Even a fully loaded RF stays around the $42,000 mark, keeping the focus on driving rather than luxury extras.

The ownership costs tell the story

Dynamic front-end shot of a 2017 Mazda MX-5 RF. Credit: NetCarShow.com

A used 2019 718 Cayman starts around $50,000, but the Porsche experience comes with higher running costs. Owners can expect roughly $1,000–$2,500 per year in service and around $2,000 annually for insurance.

A comparable 2019 Mazda MX-5 Miata RF can be found for under $25,000, with average service costs of about $430 and lower insurance premiums. The upfront gap is already significant, but the long-term savings make the Miata’s value argument even harder to ignore.

Kelley Blue Book estimates the 2025 Mazda MX-5 Miata RF Grand Touring will cost around $64,818 to own over five years, covering everything from depreciation and fuel to insurance, maintenance, and financing. For a sports car, that is impressively affordable.

The Porsche badge will always carry a certain appeal, but the Miata RF makes a stronger case for enthusiasts who want the fun of a sports car without the financial stress that often comes with it.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


TL;DR

Meta stripped NameTag facial recognition code from its AI app one day after WIRED exposed it on 50 million phones. Meta says no decision has been made.

Meta removed nearly all traces of an unreleased facial recognition system from its smart glasses companion app on Friday, one day after WIRED reported that the software had been quietly embedded in an app installed on more than 50 million phones. The feature, which Meta internally called NameTag, was designed to convert faces captured by the company’s Ray-Ban smart glasses into unique biometric signatures and compare them against a database stored on the user’s device. WIRED also found that faces the system failed to recognise were cropped, indexed, and stored locally for future processing.

Andy Stone, Meta’s vice president of communications, told WIRED on Monday that the feature is “purely exploratory,” adding that no final decision has been made on what to do with it. That characterisation sits uneasily with the evidence WIRED documented. The version of Meta AI published the day of WIRED’s Thursday report contained several code libraries explicitly named for face recognition, a process for running the NameTag recognition pipeline, and a “Person recognised” alert the app would have shown if someone were identified.

Friday’s release stripped all of it out, along with a folder where the app would have stored the cropped images and biometric signatures of unrecognised faces. Meta did not answer WIRED’s questions about why the code was removed or whether the changes were planned before the story was published. A few fragments remain in the latest version, including an internal debug menu label and a dormant link meant to open a recognised person’s profile, pointing to parts of the system that are no longer there.

The 💜 of EU tech

The latest rumblings from the EU tech scene, a story from our wise ol’ founder Boris, and some questionable AI art. It’s free, every week, in your inbox. Sign up now!

The gap between Meta’s public statements and the code WIRED found is the central tension. Before the Thursday report, Stone dismissed the findings by writing that the company could not answer questions about how the system would work because “the feature does not exist.” Andrew Bosworth, Meta’s chief technology officer, called the reporting “incredibly misleading” and “absolutely dishonest.” Yet the code was functional enough to include three AI models, one to detect faces, another to crop them, and a third to encode them as biometric data, all embedded in the companion app for a product already at the centre of a mounting privacy crisis.

Meta declined to answer ten questions WIRED posed before publishing, including whether it had already created the database of face profiles NameTag uses, how long the app retains photographs and biometric data of unrecognised people, and whether that data would ever be sent back to Meta’s servers. The company also did not respond to questions about whether it was building NameTag for blind or low-vision users, or to criticism from privacy advocates who warned the system could let stalkers and abusers identify strangers in public.

NameTag first surfaced in February, when The New York Times, citing internal Meta documents, reported that the company was developing face recognition for its smart glasses and considering a launch as early as this year. One internal memo reportedly described releasing the feature during a “dynamic political environment” when privacy and civil liberties advocates would be distracted by other concerns. WIRED subsequently found that much of NameTag’s machinery had been built into the Meta AI app as early as January, months before any public acknowledgement, adding another layer to the company’s pattern of shipping first and disclosing later when it comes to its smart glasses.

Kade Crockford, director of the technology for liberty programme at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said the removal does not undo the original decision to ship the code and pointed to it as evidence that consumer privacy needs stronger legal protection than Congress has been willing to provide. The Massachusetts House of Representatives last week unanimously passed a consumer privacy bill that, if enacted as written, would impose strong enforcement provisions including a private right of action allowing aggrieved users to sue. “State lawmakers need to do their job and step up to protect consumer privacy,” Crockford said.

Meta’s sneaky tactics in slipping the face-recognition code into its smart glasses show exactly why data privacy bills need the teeth of strong enforcement,” Crockford added. “Companies like Meta prioritise their bottom line, so lawmakers need to speak in the only language its C-suite understands.” Whether a code removal prompted by investigative reporting constitutes a victory or merely a tactical retreat depends on what Meta does next, and on whether the regulatory pressure building on both sides of the Atlantic produces enforceable consequences before the feature quietly returns under a different name.



Source link