[Anaxilus]

Originally Posted by ZDan

Well, the two MR2's (1st gen and 3rd gen) that are smaller than the S2000, are certainly a lot uglier...

That's a matter of opinion. I prefer my blacked out, hardtop, face lifted Gen 3 to any of the 2000s. Plus the 2000 hardtop looks horrific by comparison IMHO.

My only point was that the S2000 is a lot more svelte looking than the FR-S, if car "fatness" bothers you.

It's a wider GT car w/ more space and room w/ similar to less actual weight. When I said 'fat' I was talking about weight as a roadster, not looks.

You brought up torque, I just pointed out that the 2.0 s2000 has as much as the FR-S, and the 2.2 has more. The FR-S has more low-end and midrange.

Right. You brought up power which was what I responded to. Plus people are always bitching about power. Just make your own.

Personally, I think 215s all around was a good choice for stock rubber. It's the tire make/model they got wrong, not the size.

I agree on the size, it was well calculated but at the cost of people not getting superior benchmark performance numbers flipping out and not understanding the choice. I disagree they got the model wrong for the same reason, it was very well thought out as a fuel saving, drift character tire. It wasn't a cheap decision either. Those tires are more expensive than some of the grippiest rubber out there.

.