350z or s2000?
12-18-2006, 01:38 PM
#101
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Juan
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Combat350z
Well seeing how I've seen pics of an S rolling over and both drivers walked away, that says something about the structural strength of the integrated roll bars on it.
Oh and guess what you can get one put in*gasp*.
I guess you don't realize that sometimes things are said not to be taken literally thus the I don't know where you're from comment.
I would bet more people race their S's than Z per capita. Why because out of the Z guys I know here almost none of them race where as the same number of S guys I know almost all race.
Fact is the S is more of a race car than the Z. The Z is more like a GT. Fast but comfy. Yes I love the Z. I'll get another one but the fact is the S is nimbler, a better auto-cross vehicle especially in stock form and can run with a Z while having 60few hp and several hundered lbs less weight.
Oh and guess what you can get one put in*gasp*.
I guess you don't realize that sometimes things are said not to be taken literally thus the I don't know where you're from comment.
I would bet more people race their S's than Z per capita. Why because out of the Z guys I know here almost none of them race where as the same number of S guys I know almost all race.
Fact is the S is more of a race car than the Z. The Z is more like a GT. Fast but comfy. Yes I love the Z. I'll get another one but the fact is the S is nimbler, a better auto-cross vehicle especially in stock form and can run with a Z while having 60few hp and several hundered lbs less weight.
Last edited by streetracer; 12-18-2006 at 01:42 PM.
12-18-2006, 01:45 PM
#102
Registered User
iTrader: (29)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Get out my way pimpin, LA
Posts: 33,731
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by Paul55100
I was assuming from your vague comment about how "you're sure the S2000 handled better" that you had not driven an S2000 before. Which was pretty much right on, it seems like.
So what was your research based on? Were they not results from OTHER PEOPLE's experience with the S? I'm not here to attack you, but to open up your mind a bit. Why not actually get some seat time in before commenting on a car? I don't care if you've written a book on S2000's. I'd rather get advice and opinions from a person that's actually driven one.
Yes, the S2000 lacks in torque, but what do you expect from a 4-banger? However, I did not mind this when I was driving around town. Many S2000 owners will tell you the same. I did not need to launch or take off from stop lights, so low end grunt was not a big deal. At the track, a good rpm take off was good enough. Then, it was actually fun keeping her at a high RPM range. If you wanted a quicker pick-up, 4.56/4.77 gears would remedy that. One guy posted results of 5.5 seconds to 60mph without a launch and only with upgraded gears (4.44, I believe).
Your last comment about how the S2000 bests the Z only in handling is very vague, as well. In what sense were you referring to? Daily driver? Track? There are many pro's that would turn out to be con's in different driving situations.
Lastly, "And I like your term "hangs with the Z in a straight line". I agree.....as in hanging behind." The S2000 beats it in the 1/4 mile. I have not seen a time slip for a stock Z that was in the 13.6X range. Several people on S2ki have already done this. However, the Z will take the S from a higher speed roll.
So what was your research based on? Were they not results from OTHER PEOPLE's experience with the S? I'm not here to attack you, but to open up your mind a bit. Why not actually get some seat time in before commenting on a car? I don't care if you've written a book on S2000's. I'd rather get advice and opinions from a person that's actually driven one.
Yes, the S2000 lacks in torque, but what do you expect from a 4-banger? However, I did not mind this when I was driving around town. Many S2000 owners will tell you the same. I did not need to launch or take off from stop lights, so low end grunt was not a big deal. At the track, a good rpm take off was good enough. Then, it was actually fun keeping her at a high RPM range. If you wanted a quicker pick-up, 4.56/4.77 gears would remedy that. One guy posted results of 5.5 seconds to 60mph without a launch and only with upgraded gears (4.44, I believe).
Your last comment about how the S2000 bests the Z only in handling is very vague, as well. In what sense were you referring to? Daily driver? Track? There are many pro's that would turn out to be con's in different driving situations.
Lastly, "And I like your term "hangs with the Z in a straight line". I agree.....as in hanging behind." The S2000 beats it in the 1/4 mile. I have not seen a time slip for a stock Z that was in the 13.6X range. Several people on S2ki have already done this. However, the Z will take the S from a higher speed roll.
The fact that most people seem to race from rolls is why the Z seems to win out a lot. I don't doubt the S's times there, I've heard they are geared very aggressive down low.
12-18-2006, 01:49 PM
#104
Originally Posted by streetracer
I hear you, bro. The S2k is sexy and a very good machine. I have a Honda myself and love the handling and engine on it. I have yet to drive the S2000 though. However, at 2,835 lbs, it is not as featherweight as other people might think. And with the 45 lbs hard top in place is almost 2,900 lbs. It has a very low center of mass which is a plus and those insane seats. On the downside, they are expensive.
The S feels buttoned down because that F-motor is pushed soooo far back towards that firewall. Makes for a great layout.
I never read to much into the weight of the S2000. It's just a great handler in general.
12-18-2006, 01:59 PM
#105
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Rockies
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 35oZephyR
Good point.
The S feels buttoned down because that F-motor is pushed soooo far back towards that firewall. Makes for a great layout.
I never read to much into the weight of the S2000. It's just a great handler in general.
The S feels buttoned down because that F-motor is pushed soooo far back towards that firewall. Makes for a great layout.
I never read to much into the weight of the S2000. It's just a great handler in general.
The S is a great handler, but like many S2000 owners, I feel the steering is very numb. You can't "feel" the road as well. When I drove my car and my friend's E46 M3 back-to-back, I could feel the difference. That is one thing that I hope Honda will fix in the future.
12-18-2006, 02:03 PM
#106
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Rockies
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by streetracer
Who really cares who's faster. They are both great machines and we both loose to Evos and STi's.
We do lose to EVO's and STi's, but at least our cars don't look like it'll transform into a robot and fly into outer space.
Jokes. Those EVO's are no joke. I considered one in the past, but I never cared for the AWD layout.
12-18-2006, 02:05 PM
#107
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: south cali
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you like a 4 banging race car that can keep up with anything, get a S. Don't get me wrong, I still have a Integra, love this car, but I think for me it's time to get out of the 4 banger seen and move up to a 6 cylinder. Nothing is wrong with the S, it's just all them high school kids swapping/EG's/DC's/b16c/b18c/str8 pipes/rice rockets kinda made me want to stay away from Honda's & Acura's. Great cars though!!!
12-18-2006, 02:07 PM
#108
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Juan
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Paul55100
The S is a great handler, but like many S2000 owners, I feel the steering is very numb. You can't "feel" the road as well. When I drove my car and my friend's E46 M3 back-to-back, I could feel the difference. That is one thing that I hope Honda will fix in the future.
12-18-2006, 02:10 PM
#109
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Juan
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lxlHoTsAuSelxl
If you like a 4 banging race car that can keep up with anything, get a S. Don't get me wrong, I still have a Integra, love this car, but I think for me it's time to get out of the 4 banger seen and move up to a 6 cylinder. Nothing is wrong with the S, it's just all them high school kids swapping/EG's/DC's/b16c/b18c/str8 pipes/rice rockets kinda made me want to stay away from Honda's & Acura's. Great cars though!!!
12-18-2006, 02:20 PM
#110
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Rockies
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by streetracer
That, my friend, was not a characteristic of the Civics (93-99). If that is true, I'm slightly dissapointed. BTW, my Honda is a 98 Civic EX cpe black with M/T. Some slight modifications like short shifter, 15" Heliums, Integra 97 rear discs, etc. Handling and feel is great.
One suggestion I'd have for you, would be, go back to your stock shifter (or stick with the short shifter), but put in some Energy Suspension bushings. It's an $11 part, but it made the shifter feel so crisp. It was probably the best upgrade I did on my R.
12-18-2006, 02:28 PM
#111
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Juan
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I already did. Got the idea off the SCC project car database in their website. I bought and installed the master kit including rack and pinion. Had some trouble with the fit and on some of them specially since the car has adjustable camber plates. Also installed the engine mounts from energy.
The difference in the shifter is very noticeable. You are correct. I'm having a little trouble with the steering because the car is not responding as quick. It has a bent snorckel from the rear discs install I found at the junkyard. I turn the wheel and the car feels as it is still going straight. Weird.
The difference in the shifter is very noticeable. You are correct. I'm having a little trouble with the steering because the car is not responding as quick. It has a bent snorckel from the rear discs install I found at the junkyard. I turn the wheel and the car feels as it is still going straight. Weird.
12-18-2006, 03:03 PM
#112
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: R3d L3tt3r Vill3
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by streetracer
I hear you, bro. The S2k is sexy and a very good machine. I have a Honda myself and love the handling and engine on it. I have yet to drive the S2000 though. However, at 2,835 lbs, it is not as featherweight as other people might think. And with the 45 lbs hard top in place is almost 2,900 lbs. It has a very low center of mass which is a plus and those insane seats. On the downside, they are expensive.
The average Z is like 3400 or more. It may not be a featherweight but it is still several hundred pounds lighter than the Z
12-18-2006, 03:06 PM
#113
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: R3d L3tt3r Vill3
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by hardrock905
Excuse me? Am I wrong? Is the S2000 not weak in the torque category with little or no low end grunt? Do you not have to rev the **** out of it to keep it in the powerband?
I am not regurgitating what others are saying. I am speaking on what I know from research that I have done. I was considering an S2000 some time back. I test drove one in 2002 I believe? I didn't like the lack of torque, period.
How do you have the slightest clue what I have driven and what I haven't driven? People are so quick to jump to conclusions.
And I like your term "hangs with the Z in a straight line". I agree.....as in hanging behind.
As I said before, the S2000 bests the Z in overall handling but that's it IMO.
I am not regurgitating what others are saying. I am speaking on what I know from research that I have done. I was considering an S2000 some time back. I test drove one in 2002 I believe? I didn't like the lack of torque, period.
How do you have the slightest clue what I have driven and what I haven't driven? People are so quick to jump to conclusions.
And I like your term "hangs with the Z in a straight line". I agree.....as in hanging behind.
As I said before, the S2000 bests the Z in overall handling but that's it IMO.
Thats why S2000 post better 1/4 mile times and are from what I've seen always able to edge out a Z on an autocross. Add in gears and you will be looking at my taillights until we get up to high highway speeds. But at that point most races are over anyways
12-18-2006, 03:07 PM
#114
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Juan
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Combat350z
Yea but when you take out the spare and tool, get a lighter weight exhaust and then change the airbox out thats around 100lb give or take.
The average Z is like 3400 or more. It may not be a featherweight but it is still several hundred pounds lighter than the Z
The average Z is like 3400 or more. It may not be a featherweight but it is still several hundred pounds lighter than the Z
12-18-2006, 03:09 PM
#115
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: R3d L3tt3r Vill3
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by streetracer
Average Z I would say is about 3200 excluding the roadsters. Even in the 06. But yes, there is no doubt the S is way lighter.
Now if they would shave off around 500lbs then the Z would be an absolute monster.
12-18-2006, 03:10 PM
#116
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: San Juan
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Combat350z
Add in gears and you will be looking at my taillights until we get up to high highway speeds. But at that point most races are over anyways
12-18-2006, 03:13 PM
#117
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: R3d L3tt3r Vill3
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by streetracer
That's were I like to race. The highway.
Well unless I had a S/C that is hehe.
I will say that I am looking forward to the spring so I can auto-cross this thing.
Although the steering is not as communicative as the Z it feels more planted especially at high speed turns.
Its also harder to drive the S fast and well than the Z. Its more forgiving at its limits and since it does have lots of torque you can afford to make a slow shift more so than with the S.
Granted when I did drive a 6sp Z last week it was a lot easier than the S.
12-18-2006, 03:44 PM
#119
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Rockies
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lxlHoTsAuSelxl
OMG this thread is still alive, I think the original poster decided and bought a 1 way ticket to Miami a year ago and this thread is still going.
This thread started a month ago. You're probably confusing it with one of the other 99,999,999,999 threads about this exact same topic.
12-18-2006, 04:08 PM
#120
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Combat350z
Yea of course it hangs behind
Thats why S2000 post better 1/4 mile times and are from what I've seen always able to edge out a Z on an autocross. Add in gears and you will be looking at my taillights until we get up to high highway speeds. But at that point most races are over anyways
Thats why S2000 post better 1/4 mile times and are from what I've seen always able to edge out a Z on an autocross. Add in gears and you will be looking at my taillights until we get up to high highway speeds. But at that point most races are over anyways
So, in real world driving, not the drag strip, the Z straight out kicks the Hondas *** in a straight line. Get up in the top end and forget about, the Z is gone."Looking at your tail lights until we get up to high highway speeds", lol. I happen to hit high highway speed in the Z quite often.
So.....the S2000 is a dog down low and peters out on the top end??? Wow, great car.
S2000 better than the Z in handling only as I have been saying.