dont know if this was already posted, they compared the 350Z, Rustang Mach 1, S2000, and Audi TT. The Z came in FIRST with the rest scoring in the order I listed. boy are the S2000 guys pissed! check out their thread and listen to all their excuses
http://www.s2ki.com/forums/showthrea...threadid=89171
Jeremy

 

jeez they are bitching an inordinate amount. I will agree the fact that the S2000 was barely broken in was not good. but the rest of the excuses about hardtop weighing more(44lbs??? come on now) and it making the car louder; Ive driven a convertable in my day, it may not reverbarate the engine noise, but it does let in all the outside noise as well as wind.

lastly they just straight out bashed the magazine. thats a fallacy of arguement, tho my mind is half gone and I forgot which, but you cant just say "that magazine sucks because we didnt win, so for that reason the magazine is wrong"

 

yeah, I didnt get that part. ALL new cars that magazines test are invariably "not broken in" mileage wise, you cant take the best test results from the one mag that squeezed the best time out of your car on that particular day when the planets were aligned in the perfect way to be representative of how every car should perform everytime rain or shine, thats just absurd. and as for the 44lb top, thats the difference between 5.5 gallons of gas! c'mon.

 

that works out nicely then since the Z holds 6.8 more gallons of gas then the S2000.

That isnt fair the Z should have been run with only 13.2 gallons of gas instead of 20!

 

Hey hey be nice... Yeah you guys won, congrats.

But as a S2000 owner, I do agree somewhat with what's being said on s2ki.com. For C&D will run a comparison using a S2000 with the optional hard top installed is absurd. BTW, were all the cars used broken in?

But hey, the 350Z won and its definitely an awesome car.

 

Of course, none of this will do anything to shut up the nay-sayers out there. Now they're going to pick apart the article and ***** about how the S2K needed plastic valve caps to save weight...

And the Disgustang crowd will say they didn't pick the correct version, and should have picked the Cobra. Oh wait! Ford stopped making Cobras for some undisclosed reason!

The TT crowd... well I can't even imagine they have a leg to stand on.

For once, I actually can't wait to get this month's C&D. It's nice to see them be honest for a change (then again, had they entered a BMW 2002 with one orange door they would have found SOME way for it to finish 1st.)

 

Well, they had a point with their moaning about engine breakin. For the larger displacement engines, a lack of breakin doesn't penalize power as much as a smaller engine like a 4-banger. I went to C&D's site to try and read the article, but it's not there yet, and my C&D hasn't arrived yet this month.

I didn't even consider the S2k or the TT as I'm too tall to fit in them comfortably, but I've read very little that sheds any true negativity on the cars, and they're both sweet to sit in. The Mustang I passed on just because it's a little too old, and a few too many of them out there.

I have to wonder about the hard top making that big a diff though... even at 75 lbs or so, it ain't that much, and if C&D tested a touring edition, it's the heaviest Z of the bunch.

 

I haven't seen the article yet so I can't make any specific comments.

2 general points:

1) S2000 with only 300 miles is REALLY not broken in. It would have been a good idea to have someone (an intern mybe) drive the car around for 8-10 hours to loosen it up a bit. So the acceleration is slower than expected.


2) I do not question the hardtop for it's extra weight (44 lbs). I have one and don't think it makes the car noticibly slower. But the hardtop is a little expencive ($3300) so I'm not sure if that had any effect on the final outcome. I mean if the S2000 lost points because it's high price.


You know me, I expected the Z to win due to it being an all around great sports car. The thing I am scratching my head about is HOW the mustang beat the S2000. The S2000 has been on the C&D 10 best list for 2 years, I'll eat my hat if the mustang takes its place. The Z might bump the S2000 out of the list but if the mustang does than I'm going to lose it.

 

I agree the S2000 should have been run without the top if for no other reason than you hardly ever see them with hardtops on the street anyways, but 44lbs is kind of spliting hairs, I can see if it weighted 100-200 pounds, then there would be an argument. The one thing I cant imagine is how horribly they had to drive in the S2000 to give second to the stang

 

TT is too damn expensive, mustang is too damn old and common.

but the S2000...it is a great deal, VERY few made(which has led to a huge markup which makes it too damn expensive) but I wont hold that against it. it is an incredable performer, all with only 4 cylinders and a hp/L ratio that is untouchable. but it needs torque, thats its downfall, for regular driving, it needs some guts. but what can ya do, for all other purposes its great.

 

Torque makes a car feel fast, HP makes the car go fast.

 

Go to edmunds and see what cars come up as a comparrison for the z. CnD is good at selling mags. Why not compare cars to others in thier own price range??? Why choose fords 27k car when a 35k car would have been a more equal match. I guess because they share almost similar sticker prices.

 

I haven't seen the article yet ,but it seems like maybe the s2k didn't quite get a fair shake. I am in 100% agreement however that the 350Z is an overall better car than an s2000. This is coming from an s2000 owner. I really have no complaint with the article other than the fact that the tested a green S2000. To me this misleads the common consumer that really doesn't know any better. C&D did this once before and got a 6.8 sec 0-60 on a S2000 with 300 miles so the times really don't surprise me. A 6.3 0-60 and a 14.9 s quarter is just plain shameful in an s2000.(We all know better) As an enthusiast however, it would have been nice to see an apples to apples comparison of fully broken in vehicles. The Z is a great car though, so it definitely deserves recognition for being the great all around sport car that it is. Enjoy the Z's guys.

 

Was the Z broken in?

 

Maybe your post was on an off hour, Honda Troll, or your title wasn't as catchy.

In any case, I don't really care what C&D says. They could have easily chosen the Honda. I'm sure their reasoning was based more on magazine sales and advertizing income than any other factors.

I think the Z is more my kind of car even without their input.

 

I really don't have anything bad to say about the S2k. More than likely I would be driving one right now if I actually fit in one. Keep in mind that the hardtop also adds a lot of stiffness to the car as well. That should negate the weight penalty.

One thing that bugs me is the fact that the Honda does "loosen up" so much. As any motor builder can tell you, you will make the most HP and turn your fastest laps right before the motor blows. The S2K, like the new M3, uses a highly stressed engine with piston speeds greater than those of F1 cars. Tolerances need to remain tight and the fact that you do gain so much HP over time tells me they don't. That is the main reason of the higher failure rates of the S2K engine.

Even that said, I think the S2K and Z are both great and I would have still bought an S2K if I would have fit.

 

Make that a BMW 2002 with one orange door and 4 mismatched tires -- one bias ply! LOL!