Well, just speaking for myself, I've actually OWNED both cars for about a year each, and I prefer more torque lower in the powerband, as well as the extra room, since the Z roadster is a daily driver. The S was more of a weekend toy, when we were in the mood for a short drive in a go kart w/no suspension (at least that's how it felt). Also greatly prefer the exhaust note of the Z; sounds more gutteral, angry and "burbly," whereas the S was more of high pitched "whine," esp. at high rpm (which my wife still likes better than the sound of her own Z--to each his/her own).

Last, just regarding the Z roadster, one more reason for me (balding) to prefer it over the S: less buffeting w/top down!!

Oddly enough, the only girl I've seen driving a Z is my wife (we each have one). She was quite good driving the S, too, which was primarily her car, and did more than a little redneck humiliation stoplight racing herself (better hand/eye coordination than most men, incl. me; can you imagine being owned by a chick?), but she also bounced off the rev limiter in the S an average of about 3 or 4 times for every hour of driving in the twisties.

 

I've owned an s2k for over 4 years, and I'm going to purchase a Z in the next few weeks I think. I've driven the Z but don't have enough experience to subjectively comment on the car.

Even with the hardtop, the s2k is a [very] difficult car to live with everyday. Low torque, small interior, RWD, expensive, can influence you in making another car decision. Don't even think about driving in the snow with the stock tires, better buy snow tires! It's a rewarding car to drive though, and that makes up for any short comings IMO.

Plenty of times I'll get left by everyone at a red light, but if I press above 6k I can leave everyone in the dust, way behind me. And trust me, way behind me...

It's a very safe car though, based on every accident I've read about.

Not many cars can match the s2k's fun factor, but you need to decide on what compromises you can live with on either car.

 

"the powerband gave no idication of when to shift?" and you hit redline? I do not understand what you mean by that. I never hit redline I think. Not even at dragstrip. Maybe you are just not used to the engine/tranny.

LSD is standard except on the most basic model. 100% of those who get the basic model and are serious about the car upgrade to nismo/kaaz/whanot LSD. Plenty of choices to go around. Those who don't upgrade dont care about performance and just go for the looks and wouldn't know an apex if it hit them on the head.

SoloII means little I've seen almost stock civics rape S2000s, solo2 is the worst sportscar benchmark you could have mentioned...

but you a right on the Z setup, and I have to agree 100%. Stock, the Z setup sucks monkey nut. Chassis is there, but setup just sucks. Understeers like a bull in heat. Nissan really screwed up. Sad because the car has more potential than that. The car is still fast on a track(and has been proven fast on numerous tests), but can be made so much faster. It's not impossible to dial out the understeer, and not that expensive to do.

S2000 is a track car out of the dealer. The Z is not.

 

How is solo2 the worst sports car bench mark? It most closely resembles aggressive everday driving and stock rules keep cars close to production tune. Seems like a very good benchmark to me.

...and to say you've seen almost stock civics rape an S just says to me that a) you're full of it. b) you've been to one auto-x in your life and you know very little about the sport. c) you witnessed a horrendous novice in action.

 

First off, for the Nth time, it's pretty sad you s2000 guys trolling here.

Second, if you haven't seen civics win solo2 events(faster than some S2000s), you never have been to one. Solo2 a good sportscar benchmark? Are we talking about the same solo2? the low speed, no-risk motorsport? that one?

third if you purely talk about national level. The few 350z last year placed well. Carter finishing 6th B stock in front of about 40 S2000s. Wait a few years and I'm sure they will do better.

fifth just like the S2000, the 350z has shortcommings. Who said you have to live with them? Some can be resolved quite easy, others you keep for the life of the car unless you spend $$$$$.

Just read the march issue of R&T. The S2000 with it's precise close ratio steering, scalpel sharp gearbox and flat NEW improved setup came in a whooping 0.98sec ahead of the clumsy, heavy *** understeering 350z.... do the math. Spend a few K$ on both cars and they will even out. If you can't see that the 350z has potential, you are simply unwilling to see the facts. It's not the perfect sportscar and it never will be. You think the S2000 is WAY better? good for you, lol. What are you doing here though? Trying to convince me? or trying to convince yourself? Seeing how many s2000 guys come here claiming their car is the god given sportscar... I'd bet on the second.

 

have you ever tried solo2?? it gives a good overall picture of acceleration (lower gears), max grip, transitional handling, braking, etc....almost all "sports car" characteristics. Yes a MODDED civic may outrun a S2000 on the track, but a MODDED <insert "inferior" car> can outrun any STOCK <insert "superior" car>.... and .98 seconds on that track is QUITE a lot....in 5 laps that'll be 5 seconds (assuming linear interpolation hehe) .....OUCH! hardly comparable IMO

and i don't think anybody here is flaming....this topic is "350Z vs S2000" so naturally we are here to debate the merits of the two cars??? what did you expect to hear on this topic?

 

i don't understand how "low torque" affects daily driving??? when do you need torque in daily driving situations??? is it because you have to shift more??? i ENJOY doing that

and the 350Z is just as RWD, small interior, expensive, and difficult to drive in the snow (characteristics of the tire more than the car) as the S2000???

 

0.98 seconds difference for 2 100% stock car is absolutely 110% meaningless. It's the point where a basic setup modification can improve your time. Reading the article, it seems the350z would benefit the most and improve it's time considerably with a mild setup modification.

 

see but i think you're missing the point of this article....road and track (and most magazines) test STOCK cars they get from the mfgs. same argument can be made for the NA market MY04-05 S2000's which come with less agressive suspension setup than say the european S2000's. A 4 wheel alignment should yield better times for the NA S2000's as well. And gaining 1 sec on a 60-70 second track is HUGE.....any racer will acknowledge that.

 

Sounds like some folks are in denial.

 

well... I'm positive you are missing the point entirely. let's me make an example you might understand. The pre 2005 S2000 was pleagued by a dreaded-by-auto-x-ers snap oversteer. Honda engineers have revisited and updated the rear setup for 2005 and now the problem seems gone. Does that mean pre 2005 models can't be cured? Koni studied it's shocks to fix this problem, just like it studied the 350z understeer. I am a racer, I fix these problems and my car is not stock. You sunday posers might not know this, but if you track your car, you need to modify it. You might want to note that neither car would last 5 laps stock. I stand by what I said, <1s is rediculous. These articles are written to wet magazine racers and sunday posers. The S2000 is an awesome machine, drove more than one, I have no problems with it. Is it superior to the 350z? I picked the one that appeals to me the most for the use I make of it, I'll leave it to that.

 

Everything else you said aside, but ummm, The suspension was revised in 04', not 05'.

 

impressive argument !

 

1) The MY00-03 (i.e. the AP1 S2000's) do NOT "snap oversteer". I define "snap oversteer" as when the car is in a steady state in a corner when suddenly the car breaks in to oversteer (ala early 90's 911's). The AP1 S2000's do NOT do this, but they do exhibit oversteer when DRIVER INDUCED.....and often times with little warning or very suddenly (I tend to think more as a result of the S-02 tires but that's up to argument).

2) Yes I do get the point. The magazine is testing STOCK cars on a track, so let's not get in to MODIFIED cars as all comparisons are off then (aka my modified $5K civic is faster than your stock $50K corvette.....and the point is????)

3) I agree if you want to track your car competitively then you most definitely need to modify your car (at least get some decent tires), but are you telling me that these cars can't run a few laps on a track??? Many people (even on this forum) take their COMPLETELY stock cars (including tires) and track their car for MANY laps (greater than 5).....and I'd argue that the S2000 is a great track car out of the box, decent brakes that won't fade after 5 laps and decent tires.

4) Let's face it, 350Z has some big disadvantages on the track, namely its 3200lb weight which makes life harder for all the components to get the car to accelerate and stop......and the S2000 at 2800lbs does as well, when compared to say a Miata or Elise.

 

2,800 is on the light side...

2,850-2,900

Still light, regardless. The Z does very well in the corners though, and is much easier to control at it's limits, and is more forgiving if anything happens. They both have their advantages and disadvantages.

 

yeah i hope i don't sound like i'm bashing the 350Z.....i love the car and have been following it religiously since it was first reported that Nissan was considering building one.......my favorit car mfg is Nissan (all my previous cars were Nissans) and i've been on this site since "09-16-2002". IMO the biggest disadvantage of the 350Z aren't its performance traits but the fact that it's so popular (too many around the Bay Area) and the fact that it shares so many parts (or at least similar looking parts) with other Nissan's (i.e. the low price tag).

 

BTW, 2800 is not on the light side. 2670 is on the light side and it there were a few Stock legal S2K's at that weight at Nationals this year.

Also, the AP1 (the first model) was not prone to oversteer. It was a truely nuetral car. Something not too many people are familiar with. The latest gen is a understeer prone car. It'll push some far before it starts to oversteer.

I just can't imagine anybody arguing performance issues here.

 

agree with this post....but 2800lbs is "reasonably" light for a modern, safe sports car with all the amenities required.
Yeah the AP1 is about as neutral a car as you can get these days, as most cars are dialed in to mild understeer from the factory (e.g. AP2). Many AP2 owners make alignment changes to get back the neutral handling.

 

well i test drove both cars before judging them both,, and i chose the Z for these reasons
even though both cars felt solid the Z was definitly made (intierior) with more in mind the vents the design was more impressive also the seats were hella better on the Z
the TQ but linear powerband on the Z felt to me very confident vrs the S2000s loss of tq in its first and 2nd gears when compared.
The S2000 had some great things about it aswell, i liked the rev happy motor , and it sounded like it wanted to be reved, when you rev the Z while racing in first gear , you really dont feel like you moving fast. While the s2000 i felt like i was moving.
At high speeds 100+ both cars felt great but the Zs road noise was alot quiter than the S
the handeling was superb on both, but the weight diff was apparant
overall, i went witht he Z becasue to me i think that the Z will not only look better in the coming years , especailly modified. But just it has the capability to become and surpass many 50k+ cars, and still have that Z heritage

 

The interior was actually one of the main reasons why I didn't get the Z. The Z's interior looks incredibly cheap and flimsy. I thought I was going to break the door handles when I tried to open the door.