You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!
I actually owned a 2003 S2000 before my Z. I have a touring coupe Z now and it's hard to compare. The S2000 was the most fun ever in a car. On sunny days, I regret selling it. I couldn't afford the Z roadster or I would've went that way. The Z offers a better sound system, heated seats, more interior room, nicer wheels, a more definitive style to it overall, but it lacks the convertible top. My $.02
Former S2k owner here as well. I think the S2000 handled better and would probably be more fun as a track car. The Z however is 10,000,000,000,000x nicer as a daily driver and feels like a higher class of car b/c of its power and amenities. S2ks are fun, but I feel a little overpriced for what you get. The Z also has more luggage space and more distinctive styling - I liked the S2k, but it was pretty bland. Oh yeah, the Z has a nicer ride as well.
I love S2Ks but I wouldnt be able to stand the fact that half the population would think it was a Miata. I considered a bunch of other cars but not really, catch my drift?
its too hot here actually. if your not moving, your sweating. and even then, you typicly need the AC on for the occasional blast of cold air.
with that said, its my daily driver, and I prefered the larger more usable storage space. roomier cockpit, and way more low end torque. Im just not the type to be flooring it to redline 24/7. and the way I see it, if you dont floor it, your not much faster than 99% of the cars on the road.
Originally posted by robcassell the s2000 is a ***** car
now there's an intellegent statement...
s2k's are very fun to drive, but hte z (imo) has better looks, and much more power. both are stellar cars, but for me, the z just edges the s out by a little on each category
I seriously considered the S2K. I test drove it and found it to be a lot of fun to drive. What I didn't like about the S2K is that you really need to rev the engine to get some decent power, but that's how it's built. I didn't like the layout of the cockpit. I hated everything being off centered to the drivers side. I like the more balance look and feel of my Z's interior. The seats in the S2K is better than the Z's. I thought it hugged your body better and it held you in place when cornering. The ride is sweeter in the Z and the power is no comparison. I have no regrets about buying the Z, but if I had chose the S2K, I would have also bought the hardtop for it.
uh.. miata is NOT a chick mobile... and a Mustang?! they're everywhere!
i can get more girls with a benz or bimmer
rx-8, s2k's, and z's can attract girls though
s2k's are more expensive and EXTREMELY small, i thought about it, but stopped because my dad would never aprrove of such a tiny car. Also, it's like the rx8, you have to rev pretty high to feel the power, feel like it's a waste of gas.
S2k was my first choice for a long time but it's just too much of a true sports car for daily use. I still wonder daily if I should have gotten an S2k or Evo...
I have a 2003 S2000. I came very close to buying a hardtop Z. The s2k is a raw sports car. The Z is more of a tourer. If I had to do it all over again I'd get the 350z because the S2k is JUST NOT A PRACTICAL daily driver. I need more cockpit room and more luggage space. The 350z is like a honda prelude. Its a sporty 2 door car, but you dont have any problems or inconveniences as having it as your only car. Not so with the s2k.
But make no mistake. As far as sporty is concerned, I believe there is no comparison. S2000 is the real deal. The sits hug you, the cockpit encloses you and its got the best feeling shifter regardless of price and you gotta rev the hell out of it. I bought the s2k because thats what I was looking for back then (my other car is a NOS'ed nissan maxima) but I realize I should have went with something I can live with daily. haha
Originally posted by Pusha Z I love S2Ks but I wouldnt be able to stand the fact that half the population would think it was a Miata. I considered a bunch of other cars but not really, catch my drift?
I seriously considered an S2000 before my Z, and this was one of the reasons I didnt buy one. Everyone I showed a pic to said, "It looks like a Miata." And I wasn`t about to pay $50 000 Canadian for a car everyone thinks is a Miata.
I also found the interior a little cramped, and I`m not a big guy at 6 feet tall.
Also, I was having to convince myself to like the digital display. It reminded me of a buddies piece of crap `86 Supra.
Plus the lack of torque. I could go on.
I still think there nice cars, but the Z is so much better.
I agree re: the user freindlyness. Mind you howeverm the Z has WAY better hnling than the lude could muster (it was a great point nshoot car) and the power, I love driving my Z in 3rd gear only.
ALso, the Z has a very neutral/linear handling dynamic with near-limitless grip.
I owned an S2000 for about 2 years and traded it in for the Z.
I felt the shifter was a little bit better in the S2000 also. My Z is pretty new (haven't even reached the magic 1200 mile mark yet), so I can't speak to the handling limits issue, though it appears from the magazines that the S2000 has a very slight (read: unnoticeable) advantage there. However, I can say that the S2000 FEELS both lighter and like a more direct connection between the driver and the road. I could take turns where I could feel the rears going slightly wide and have full confidence that the amount of oversteer as well as my exact path through the turn were at my command.
The low end power in the S2000 isn't that bad - it's just bad when you consider that you paid sports car money and only get Civic acceleration in most real-world situations (until you hit 6000 RPM, anyway). The things that had really started to wear on me were related to living with it - mostly wind noise, engine drone on the highway (4000 RPM at 75 MPH - JEEZ!!!!), 40 Watt Stereo (that there's no point in upgrading because you'd ruin your hearing with a stereo you could hear). The Z can cruise at 80 MPH with barely noticeable wind noise and the Z's base radio is MUCH better. A more minor annoyance was the fact that at 6' tall, I had to have the seat so far back that if I had the top up as I approached or was stopped at a traffic light, I had to perform high level yoga to see the light. Power is about as much of an advantage for the Z as handling is an advantage for the S2000. The Z has a very slight acceleration advantage at the track when the S2000 is kept constantly above 6000 RPM. However, in most real world situations, I believe more acceleration is immediatlely available from the Z.
All in all, I love both cars. The difference for me to trade in the S2000 and by the Z was personal preference. I prefer low end power and a hard top.
Originally posted by aznkukuboi uh.. miata is NOT a chick mobile... and a Mustang?! they're everywhere!
i can get more girls with a benz or bimmer
rx-8, s2k's, and z's can attract girls though
s2k's are more expensive and EXTREMELY small, i thought about it, but stopped because my dad would never aprrove of such a tiny car. Also, it's like the rx8, you have to rev pretty high to feel the power, feel like it's a waste of gas.
How is a miata not a chick mobile? Are you serious?
I think you are a little confused. He means that chicks normally drive these vehicles, not it's easier to pick up chicks in them.
By the way, a Miata, Z3 & S2000 are definately chick cars. A Mustang is a different story.
350Z vs S2000
