Frs vs s2000
 

Hello I am looking at buying a new car. I love the FRS but wondering if the 200hp is underwhelming? It seems like a used S2000 might be a better car overall. Is there anyone that has driven both that could give any comments?

Thanks

Well the S2000 is a much more expensive car. Buying a used car that retails for Around $37,000 vs $25,000 HUGE difference.

Is the Honda S2000 more powerful? YES. Is it the better Deal? NO.

I think you will get some quite biased answers here.

A clean S2000 with less than 15,000 miles is still around $27,000 and a 2008. That means the FRS is cheaper, 5 years newer, under warranty, has back seats and would cost less to insure.

All this for a car that is only slightly faster than the FRS????

A few S's I'm looking at are around $19k with 20-35k miles vs FRS just for reference.

I don't think the s2000 retails used for 37k. A quick check on my local Craigslist netted a dozen or so modest mileage examples around 5-7 years old for under 15K. Likely be at or around 25k for a 2008-9 model with low miles -- more for the CR.

Test drive both. The S2000 is a fun car to drive. With the top down, I think it's more fun than the FR-S. Both cars sit low and handle well, but the S2000 has more power and has a retractable top. It's also reliable and gets decent gas mileage. Especially living in a dry climate like Arizona, it'd probably be a good choice.

Just be sure you're ready to deal with the hassles of owning a 2-seat convertible (highway noise, possibility of theft/slashed top, lack of interior and storage space). Also make sure you do your homework and find a well-maintained car.

IMO, the power of the FR-S is not underwhelming. I never liked s2000 that much, so to me I'd definitely say FR-S but it all depends on what you want more.

Personally, when I'm actually driving my FR-S (using the M mode to keep the revs high), I have just enough power to satisfy my appetite. And I'm a v8 lover ;)

[QUOTE=DarkSunrise;470400]Test drive both. The S2000 is a fun car to drive. With the top down, I think it's more fun than the FR-S. Both cars sit low and handle well, but the S2000 has more power and has a retractable top. It's also reliable and gets decent gas mileage. Especially living in a dry climate like Arizona, it'd probably be a good choice.

Just be sure you're ready to deal with the hassles of owning a 2-seat convertible (highway noise, possibility of theft/slashed top, lack of interior and storage space). Also make sure you do your homework and find a well-maintained car.[/QUOTE
Thanks. I'm pretty familiar with the S slashed tops is a huge problem in Arizona. Insurance practically totals the car after they cut the gauge cluster and part out seats. I really like the FRS BRZ just need to test drive one. 200hp plus the 3.5-5 rev drop scares me a little bit.

I don't care for convertibles and the S2000 gets significantly worse mileage than the BRZ/FR-S (18/25 vs 22/30). Also, the BRZ/FR-S is a brand new design whereas the S2000 was designed in the late 90's. Annd the fact that it has more equipment standard (well, at least the BRZ does) and a decent trunk with folding rear seats makes it that much sweeter. I do like the S2000 but comparing the two I'd take the BRZ/FR-S.

One thing I will say though, is you could buy an S2000 for under $20k and use the extra $$ to buy a supercharger kit, which would get you around 350hp easily. That's pretty compelling!

I pulled a quick search on autotrader for any S2000 with less than 15,000 miles and 24 was the cheapest was 25,000 unless you go to a 2002 or older car. That was in the entire US.

The 04 and up would be a minimum requirement since that is when they switched to the glass headlights, LED tails and the larger motor.

I love S2000's.

But honestly I'm sure 99% of them are beaten to hell.

I'd be very heisitant to buy a used car that I know was most likely beaten on to a brand new car with warranty.

Unless you buy a 09, but I'm sure those are $$.

Yea my buddy has an S2k, ive driven both, overall id take the FRS for the fact of more room, S2000 are tiny inside and you feel it from the moment you sit in it. I will say this, every time we swap cars I find it very hard to believe the S2000 is powered by A 2.0 Inline 4. VS Frs you know its a 2.0 and feels that way.
lets remember the S2000 was built to be a high priced car, Honda built one hell of a motor there. Everytime I drive that car it gives me the satisfaction I want from a car, but so does the FRS in a different way. Frs really challenges you to drive and drive well.

I find the FRS is much more enjoyable on a day to day basis as well, and with just the intake and Srt exhaust im already satisfied with the extra power. My re-flash is on the way as well and the flash alone seems to win a lot of ppl in terms of feel of power from the car.

I was in your same shoes prior to buying the FRS. I was in the market for an S2000. Im completely happy with my choice mainly cause all around the car works for me, I can do everyday stuff like hockey, or carry 2 extra passengers if needed. My buddy on the other hand often can barely fit anything, but its all about what you want out of a car!
certain ppl will sacrifice certain things to have what they want.

Just my 2 cents

Cheers

Owned two S2000s and now the FR-S.
As mirrored, the S2000 is much more edgy and tail happy and much less forgiving. You don't drift the S2000 it just spins. To drive it fast you have to be a good driver.

It is faster and in many ways feels more hard core. But...
It's a convertible, if you have winters it sucks, it's also a tight fit, uncomfortable for daily driving if you actually put on more than 12k a year. No storage.

The FR-S feels more composed, easier to drive and is more comfortable to drive all the time. And in many ways, despite it being slower, I personally think out of the box it can be driven faster with much less skill. The S2000 to me would be a good weekend project car, not so much a daily driver.

Well said:party0030:

completely agree:happy0180:

I have both now, 2008 GPW/red interior and 6M white FR-S

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2162

Have fun.

I mentioned "modest" miles. For a seven year old car -- there seem to be quite a few 2005s around -- 15k is very low mileage. 30-50K is modest for a car that old. I wouldn't always try to get the lowest mileage one you can find. Sometimes too few miles means you'll get age based maintenance at the same time as mileage based maintenance.

http://i472.photobucket.com/albums/r...0/DSC00149.jpg
My S2000.

The S2000 = Pure car The S2000 feels more powerful.

FR-S = Compromise The FR-S is much bigger and gets better mpg.

Both are great cars. Cant really go Wrong with either.

I loved the S2000, nothing has been like the 9000 rpm vtec song. But for me and my wife, the FR-S is a more practical car.

That is why you never search on autotrader lol...

S2ks are cheap as fuck compared to fr-s's youd have to be on crack to buy a used S2k for 30+ g's

Stock for stock the s2000 would always win on a track, assuming you can take both to their limits. Frs is still a better deal and won't get stolen.

You're missing what he's saying. A car originally priced at $37k NEW vs. a 25k NEW car will be very different. A used car is only as good as it's first owner. I would take a better chassis, real roof, warranty, new, slightly less horsepower car with more interior room.

Well I won't be on the other side of that argument since I bought a BRZ and not a used s2k -- perhaps if I didn't already have a roadster I would argue the point, but I wasn't saying one was better than the other.

I was simply clarifying since it was pretty clear the car is not going for 37k now and the price it was when new while not irrelevant is not very useful without the information about what they are going for now.

I can't comment on used vs. new (only ever got one car so far :)), but as for power, I think if you drop 25k on a car and are also considering used (aka possible slight problems out of the box) then it's not too much of a stretch to do a little bolton/tune stuff, and the FA20 motor is looking pretty strong. When someone makes some slightly bigger cams for it, cams and tune should let you get very close to S2000 power, if you don't mind doing that.

E85 on pretty much stock motor is almost hitting S2000 power, but there's an extra unknown reliability factor there. Tunes leaning out the fuel mix already close the gap quite a bit and massively improves top end power, but without the extra bit of specific torque that E85 gives you'll need power at higher revs. Seeing how the rods are holding up to quite a bit of boost on a high compression engine, it seems like the slight rev limit increase that Visconti is using would probably not be an issue although there's obviously no long term reliability data for that as well.

Anyways, just a tune and exhaust closes most of the power gap already which you may want to consider. The torque is pretty strong from 5000 upwards as is, so I imagine cams (when they get made) wouldn't really sacrifice much, as you can land well over 5000 on most shifts. I don't know how well S2000s respond to similar mods, but seeing how it's got 168lb-ft of torque or something on the F20C it seems like there's not much room for improvement on the S2000 engines.

How is it not a better deal? The S2000's already suffered the majority of its depreciation, and late models haven't been depreciating. In fact, the car generally has been appreciating, which is highly unusual...


OP: I've put well over 100k miles on s2ks, so what exactly are you looking for? To answer your question, yes, 200hp does feel rather underwhelming. A lot of people look at specs on paper, and assume that the FRS's 200hp is "only" down 20% from a s2k, but that doesn't tell the whole story. Not only does a S2k rev higher, it's geared FAR more aggressively, and these two facts are rarely conveyed. When you combine more revs, more aggressive gearing, and more power, the difference in torque delivered to the wheels is quite significant. The S2k isn't exactly a quick straight-line car anymore, but it wont have any issue pulling from a stoplight.

To put it in perspective, a FRS would have trouble pulling from a current model minivan from a stop, but how many people buy a FRS to drag race? :)

I have driven both cars and I went with a BRZ. My reasoning behind my choice was that the S2000 just wasn't comfortable at all for me. I'm 6'1 215lbs. I just couldn't comfortably fit in the car. Same with the 370z. I can sit in them but not comfortably at all. When I saw my BRZ on the showroom floor I thought "no way i'm I fitting in that little car". The roof line honestly comes up to my belly button. Surprisingly though it actually has more than enough room for me. I have plenty of headroom to fit a helmet, enough space to stretch my legs, and with the telescoping steering wheel my arms don't have to be fully extended to steer.

Next to my MKIV this is the most comfortable sports car I've ever driven.

Oh, and it gets 30mpg!

I say if all you care about is having the best track times maybe go with the S2K, but if you actually want to drive your car everyday... FRS/BRZ.

I just don't think its a deal. 40 more HP, but the car is 100lbs heavier. Out of warantee. Unless your finding one with under 30k miles for 18k miles. The FR-S proforms better on AutoX. S2000 are notoriously uncomfortable, and most people don't keep them for every day drivers. Oh and 10+mpg LESS then an FR-S/BRS.

This is from Motortrend

""It only has 200 horsepower!" you may be screaming. Yes, but it uses that power respectably, reaching 60 mph in 6.4 seconds. "That's slower than the FR-S!" Yes, but this might've been due to the low number on the odometer. "The Mustang's a second faster to the quarter mile! USA!" Yes, but that gap falls to 0.4 second on the figure eight. The secret? The Mustang spends more time in transitions, giving the BRZ precious catch-up time."

I think that shows HP isn't EVERYTHING. Mustang has 50% more HP, but what good did it do?

Think about this...
Take the S2000's 37,000 USD price tag and spend that on an FRS.

Supercharger, Exhaust, Tune, Tires, and tons of extra's and suddenly you have a car with almost the same HP as the Mustang at 50% of the weight.

I'm not saying you need to do that.. the car is WIN out of the box.

But Slap on a Tune, Exhaust, Pulley, Tires, and you've beat the Mustang in a road coarse, and the S2000, and almost anything else out there.

Well, the "significantly" worse mileage is a bad arguement. The average MPG of a S2000 by actual ownders is more like 24 MPG (driven pretty hard). It's still less than the BRZ/FRS, but I don't think it's wide enough to complain about. The S2000 is no RX-8. That said, my S2000 gets about 23-24 city, 28 highway with the top down.
http://www.fuelly.com/car/honda/s2000

To the OP, I would probably get the BRZ/FRS if you're dailying the car. The S2000 is really tiring every day. Plus, the upgraded tech and back seat make it much more liveable.

I am trying to get my spouse to buy a BRZ/FRS, because they need to replace their daily very soon. I love the BRZ/FRS. If I was in the market for a sporty daily, it would be the twins. For me, the S2000 is my weekend car, which I feel is more of an appropriate niche for it. Therefore, I have to get the "practical" daily.

You understand they are no longer making the S2k and hence there are none with a 37K price tag ... So, you can't take the money you didn't save and spend it on the FRS instead ... :bonk:

Yeah, it's the exact opposite. If you take the $5k+ you save buying a used S2000 you can spend that money on a supercharger kit or whatever else you like. Trust me, I find it tempting!

http://www.tunerzine.com/articles/158/2.jpg

I want to race a supercharged S2000. If anyone can find me a good condition "salvage title" Supercharged S2000 for sale for $10k or less please let me know.

I understand the S2000/FRS comparo due to layout, weight, etc but really... apples and oranges. One is a coupe with a roof and the other is roadster. Comparison on performance basis, track days, racing... Ok, I get it but as an everyday car it isn't logical, they're too different.

As for the mileage. I managed a region that was half the state of WA for 2 years while owning an AP1 s2k. Even when I hypermiled, all freeway, never touching VTEC the best I got was 30.2MPG (80/20 hwy/city). The car is horrifically geared for touring/daily driving. It seemed like I was on the only owner that wanted a "freeway-6th-gear". The fact that the best MPG I could get all freeway (road trip) was 31.1mpg was pitiful for a 2L, 2700lb car. My typical mileage, and I'm no lead foot, was 26-28mpg avg. Most others saw less than that were amazed I could even see 28.

I will echo the comment about the S2k being a "tiring" everyday car. The gearing sucks for it, the complete and utter lack of power below 5k sucks and lack of room and high road noise just drains. I made custom ear plugs for long trips so I didn't show up at my destination drained and irritated, which worked great when the top was down!

Also, considering 80% of track clubs won't let you take your S2k on track without a roll bar there's also that to consider.

As an overall car, I enjoy my FRS way more.

If I had to choose between the two has a dedicated track-only use car.. then probably the S2k with a rollbar.

Re: MPG.

Remember, the FRS/BRZ comes with Prius (albeit optional summer) tires from the factory. We switched ours out after the break-in and two laps at the track, and immediately noticed a 40% drop in MPG. During break-in, we were averaging 33MPG according to the in-car computer. Once the Star Specs went on, the car dropped to just 24.

On the flip side, the S2k is affected the same. Because it's most people's weekend/summer car, S2ks tend to have stickier tires on them. If you throw on low rolling resistance tires, the MPG will jump up. I typically see 22-23 MPG with RS3 on, but have seen 35+ with a tp, tune, and V12 evos.

Tires matter a LOT when MPG is involved.


As for performance, out of the box, the S2000 is faster, period. At the bolt-on level, I suspect a FRS/BRZ will be slightly faster (breather mods, tune, wing, splitter, coilovers). Once FI is involved, I suspect the BRZ will be faster on track, but at the cost of reliability. Just some speculation on my part.

Remember, the s2k's reliability is steller (part of why the resale is so high on them), while the FRS/BRZ is still unproven. There are no major failures you have to watch out for on a s2k, other than a ripped top, as long as all the maintenance has been done diligently. My S2k currently has 110k miles on it, and a good 1/4 of that has been at over 6000 RPM.


That being said, Scions and Subarus in general also tend to hold value well, and the FRS/BRZ is a far more comfortable daily, but it's hardly quiet. The NVH is disturbingly high for a modern car, but I suppose that comes with the territory... and it's still less than that of a S2k.

If you come down to SoCal, I can arrange for that :D

Last I checked, the S2k dominates in BS and STR. I could be wrong; I don't AutoX myself.

I don't deny that the BRZ might be faster at a road course... in fact, I'd love to see it do well, considering we're developing our car for time attack ;)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaArJZOMCpI"]BRZ vs S2000 - YouTube[/ame]

I don't get why people are saying 37k. I can get an s2000 for cheaper than a BRZ right now and throw the $4000 towards FI. Can anyone talk me out of that? I really do like the BRZ FRS but it just seems silly. The rev drop is really what scares me.

This exactly!

S2000 was my dream car. I owned one, and it was awesome.

I wanted a coupe, but the convertible grew on me and I ended up loving that.

Add to the fact that it was a more expensive car (at one time); they are appreciating in some areas; it's an icon; it's very fun with the top down; they're very, very reliable; VTEC!!!; and they are cheaper than the FR-S.

If you're young, to me it's a no brainer.

But if you care about turning heads, getting substantially better gas mileage, and having a bit more practicality, then it's the FR-S.

I think the best solution is to have an S2000 and an FRS in your garage ;)

Well... in order for you be get a S2000 at or close to the price of a brand new FR-S, you'll be looking at something like 2005 with 50,000 miles on it. S2000 is a fun car so their resales value is pretty high, too high to my opinion. Don't get me wrong! I love the S2000 as much as the next person but that car is too expensive even for a use one. You much rather trying to consider a 350z or a FR-S. But at the end of the day, you are go with the FR-S, that's a brand new car with warranty VS a use car.

I think he should get a GTR!