go for the looks, I think the 350z roadster is one of the most elegant convertible for the price.

 

i test drove 350z vert. 350z vert has more room than my s2k... more comfort ride compare to my s2k. For cruise and daily drive, pick 350z vert. but for fun and track driving wise i would pick s2000 over 350zvert.... 350z feels little heavy compare to 350z coupe when i drove...

 

Actually, there is a small spray bottle of "new car smell" that you can buy. I think I bought it at Pep Boys once when I was trading in a car to a dealer. It was 6 years old, but I used a light spray of the vinyl-smelling solution so that the dealers who evaluated the would subconciously feel that it was in newer condition. Ha! Don't know if it worked or not, but it didn't hurt.

WayneTN

 

I tested all 4, and loved all 4. I wanted a convertible, and I liked the more spacious interior and torquey feel of the ZR, as well as the looks, so I bought it. No regrets whatsoever. I don't find the performance difference very noticable, although the ride "feel" is slightly different. But the open air experience of the drop-top is priceless, for me, and so I have no problem giving up the 0.2 seconds in 0-60 (which is nearly irrelevant in the real world).

Conclusion: get what you want, of course; but you will never regret the purchase of a ZR, especially from a performance/handling standpoint. IMO, saying it is boring to drive is downright dopey. It is a major rush to drive, every day.

 

I think the 350 has a nice design... but if you want a true spirited sports car, get the s2k... i have one and it's a blast. i love those sunset orange and daytona blue 350's though. If you wanna trade me ur Z for my S... this is whatcha gotta come through

 

If you want a "true" sports car, forget the s2000 and wait for an Elise (sat in a few today, BTW).

 

When I test drove the 350z roadster, I fell in love with it. It is truely a modern and refined convertible. I could imagine myself cruising down the club district, turning heads, and enjoying the evening breeze. I felt like I was going to buy it right then and there.

But before I did, I stopped by a Honda dealership (next door), and got in a '03 S2k. Lookswise, the S2k isn't on par, but it looks racey enough... however, when I took it on the road and pushed it, all my prejudgement about the S slipped away. This car is RAW. The sounds, the sense of speed and agility for that moment had me totally intoxicated. I know that the S can be harsh as an everyday car, but I've never had more fun driving.

BTW, I was able to pick up a used S in almost brand new condition for $22k a few weeks later, which made the decision that much easier. Its the deal of the century... even though there isn't the new car smell, you can be at peace. After all... its still a Honda

 

Great thread as I am looking at both vehicles myself. The car is not going to be a daily driver. My main concern is the price difference. I can get an S2K for a whole lot less which may make me feel better about it being a fair weather car (current car cost mega bucks and just sits in the garage, makes me feel bad!).

I know that it mainly comes down to personal preference. However, does anyone who has owned the S2K have any insight as to reliability, etc? Is it similar to other Hondas? Any problem areas?

I am contemplating doing a used S2K (jus out of warranty) and adding a blower. I need to think less.

-GT

 

I looked at the S very briefly, I think I pulled something trying to get into it. It is a great car, especially in the bang for the buck category, just not for me at 6'4". The Z is very comfortable car and has a real substantial feel. I guess it all depends on what you are going for, I love the Z, especially the roadster. I think the looks are classic, IMO the S doesn't have the class, it's a little more fast and furious crowd.

In all the group Z drives I have been on there has never been a time where one of the stock coupes has "walked" me. I know what the magazines say, but when I have been side by side with completely stock coupes there has been no difference.

I have a black 350 roadster and have never had a problem with the cops, the average buyer for the roadster seems to be a little older and I think law enforcement knows this. We really don't seem to be the target that a red coupe or a yellow S2000 would be.

That being said, watch me get nailed on the way home.

 

I believe in MOST circumstances the 350z will be faster than the S2k. Driving the S2k you really have to shift in vtec range to milk the power out, once you fall out of the power band you lose quite a lot of grunt. The 350z has power all over the place so amateur drivers can recover from an error quite easily.

As for 350z roadster acceleration vs. coupe i would think there would not be a huge difference. Mainly is because the top and tonneau cover is in the back, which increases the weight on the rear wheels, helping traction on launch.

 

As i've mentioned in other threads, the 0-60 on the roadster is 0.2 secs faster then the coupe according to Road & Track Magazine. So its a real toss up to which is faster.. I would say driver skill would determine it, not the cars..

 

Roadster all the way. Turn more heads and its just as fast as a coupe. I've beaten both coupes and s2k's multiple times on the highway.

 

I don't want to offend anyone but I simply can't fathom why anyone would purchase a Z roadster over an S2000. They both cost roughly the same. Thanks to ~600 lbs more heft, the Z roadster simply can't match the S2000's acceleration or handling. Say what you will about quality and reliability, but it is quite apparent that the S2000 is a better built car than the Z. The Z roadster looks very akward with the top up, whereas the S2000 has more classic proportions. Finally, I don't think anyone can honestly argue that the Z Roadster's driving experience matches up to that of the slick-shifting, high-revving, ultra-nimble S2000.

Perhaps some are (irrationally) afraid of a smaller, 4 cylinder car, or they really needed a navigation system in their roadster.

Sorry if I angered anyone. I understand some people have different taste, but I still find their buying decision perplexing. The 350Z coupe vs. the S2000 is a different story, though...

 

Just to clarify, I don't think the Z roadster is a bad car. I just think that the S2000 bests it in very significant ways.

 

Ouch.. All I can say is go out and drive both like I did. I bought the Z Roadster because its great in a lot of categories, rather than the best in one or two categories.

I agree that it doesn't look as good as the S with the top up. But if your driving in conditions that require the top to be up, I don't think people will be paying much attention to your car.

Quote: "Perhaps some are (irrationally) afraid of a smaller, 4 cylinder car"

Gimme a break man, are you afraid of a Buick LeSabre, its more luxurious/roomy than your G35C. I'm sure your not but you sacrificed luxury for more performance, just as Z Roadster owners sacrificed some performance for driveability.

 

I can respect your opinion that you think the S2000 is better looking then the roadster when there tops are up. BUT when the tops come down the 350z roadster is a far better looking car then the S2000 (my opinion). The S2000 looks like a beefed up Miata.... And why would anyone buy a roadster to drive with its top up?!?!?!?

As far as performance goes, yes the S2000 is a better track car (nobody will deny that, the performance comes at a price, a very stiff ride). But in straight line performance its a drivers race. I've raced them in my roadster and i've lost a few times and i've won a few times, all depends on drivers.. Only way a S2000 driver can beat a 350z everytime is if he hammers the hell out of his car to get a fast start, several of these starts and he will have to have his car towed form the drag strip.

You state that the S2000 is a far superior car performance/driving wise compared to the 350z Roadster but go on to say the 350z Coupe is a different story??!?? Kind of a dumb statement considering the 350z coupe and 350z roadster pretty much have identical performance/handling numbers..... If you think the S2000 is a better sports car then the 350z Roadster then you are ALSO saying that its a better car then the 350z Coupe... You can't have it both ways...

As far as you not being able to fathom why someone would buy a 350z Roadster over a S2000, all I can say is you must be a very short person, the S2000 will NOT accomodate anyone over 6' tall where the 350z Roadster will...

 

I was considering getting the S2; but the interior is too small. I want a little more breathing room. The S2 is fun to drive but you have get the engine to rev a little higher than the ZR. If it is a daily commute than S2 is good. If it's only a weekend car then ZR. If you plan on modification the S2 is right for it, they have more after market for it. Good luck in you decision!

 

You need to test drive both.

For street driving and respect from your peers and have admiration of your car get a Z roadster.

For track performance and respect from import tuners get an S2k.

Consider your driving experience the factor to your decision. I chose mine for daily driving and aesthetics.

 

About the shifters of both cars, is the S2k's shifter really really really really smooth compared to the Z? Like silk compared to sand paper or wat? All I hear is how "smooth" the shifter is for the s2k. Is that really enough to sway buyers?

 

Hold up hold up. I owned an S2k for many years...owned a Z coupe for > 1yr now, and have driven countless ZRs. Here's what I think (which is based on actual experience rather than mag racing/driving).

The S2k is a lot of fun as a track car. It is an extremely difficult car to drive well. I doubt that even 10% of its owners could drive it as quickly around a track as they could a ZR. The real difference in handling comes at turn-in where the S2k is sharper and more willing. Mid-corner and corner-exits are actually better in the ZR IMO.

On the street there's no comparison - the Z's torque allows it to consume the S2k. Yes you may be able to fry an S2k's clutch and get similar/better 1/4s....but come on..for 95% of your driving the Z is gonna hand the S2k its A$$. This is why I got rid of my S2k - I got tired of the fact that in the city, it rides/drives like a dropped Civic. Also consider that the S2k has NO TCS/VDC. Now of course you are all expert drivers who don't need those features...

In the parking lot the ZR again triumphs with more modern styling, and a more creative and original interior. As far as quality goes, I've owned both cars Shivak. I've driven them both for 10s of thousands of miles...they are the same quality. S2ks are not as well made as the Hondas of yesterday that everyone remembers so fondly. My S2k's build couldn't hold a candle to my 95 accord. Just like the Z every set of railroad tracks would set up a plastic buzz throughout the cabin.

Lastly as for cost - the S2k is a cheaper car. It has far less equipment, and in day to day driving is far less satisfying than a ZR. You get what you pay for. S2k - one trick pony with an awesome trick. ZR - Excellent balance of sports car, sex symbol, and daily driver.

NzZ