Frs vs s2000

[Skurge]

Originally Posted by Lonewolf

Tis all true...you can't deny any of that...

However, the huge proliferation of douche s2k owners is a big downside

a lot of them are douches, but there are some normal ones...


personally i love both my cars(s2k and frs) but really i dont compare them often, they are totally different cars

[Skurge]

Originally Posted by ayau

How do you S2000 owners haul track wheels to the track? Drive on them? Install a hitch?
@CSG David, @CSG Mike

Edit: Found this, LOL

this just reminded me of how i transport my MTN bike in the S2000 lol

[l0aded]

Just drove my buddies s2k with drop, intake, and exhaust. Honestly it blows the twins out of the water in terms of the overall driving experience. Granted it costed 10K more 10 years ago but the car feels faster by a significant margin and the power delivery is phenomenal. I love my FRS but the s2k is really something different. Would I trade it? Probably not. Interior wise it is a 10 year old car and obviously it is a little dated but going back to what I said earlier it is an amazing driving machine It's suprisingly that it gets about the same torque as our car but doesn't feel like it's lacking in the pull from a 0-60.

[WolfpackS2k]

Originally Posted by AsianStyle

Essentially the twins are what the s2k was in the past on a smaller scale. At the time the s2k was on sale there were tons of cars faster, cheaper, etc..., but you choose the s2k due to drivers feel that the other cars don't offer. So, why bash and state these hopped up hatchbacks are the cars to buy instead?

When the S2000 came out it more or less directly competed with:
-Mazda RX8
-Audi TT
-350Z
-Boxster S
-BMW Z4

It was faster around a track than all of those, and cheaper than all of them too (except maybe the RX8, and 350Z depending on trim package). I don't think you can name any car from 2000-2003 that was faster around a track than an S2000 for under $50k.

[DarkSunrise]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

I don't think you can name any car from 2000-2003 that was faster around a track than an S2000 for under $50k.

2003 Evo VIII, and it probably wouldn't be that close.

[Frost]

Originally Posted by l0aded

Just drove my buddies s2k with drop, intake, and exhaust. Honestly it blows the twins out of the water in terms of the overall driving experience. Granted it costed 10K more 10 years ago but the car feels faster by a significant margin and the power delivery is phenomenal. I love my FRS but the s2k is really something different. Would I trade it? Probably not. Interior wise it is a 10 year old car and obviously it is a little dated but going back to what I said earlier it is an amazing driving machine It's suprisingly that it gets about the same torque as our car but doesn't feel like it's lacking in the pull from a 0-60.

The human mind doesn't notice gradual changes as much as drastic ones. The power delivery on the twins is more linear (except for the dip) than the S2k which is peaky thanks to the VTEC. So it will feel much more aggressive even though the power is only 40hp more and the same torque.

That being said, the S2k is currently combatting with the Twins on my shopping list so I am keenly keeping an eye on this thread but some of the arguements are pretty hilarious.

[tahdizzle]

The torque dip is a large factor in the butt dyno.

[AsianStyle]

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

When the S2000 came out it more or less directly competed with:
-Mazda RX8
-Audi TT
-350Z
-Boxster S
-BMW Z4

It was faster around a track than all of those, and cheaper than all of them too (except maybe the RX8, and 350Z depending on trim package). I don't think you can name any car from 2000-2003 that was faster around a track than an S2000 for under $50k.

I'm thinking about the the 4WD rally cars (EVO, STI) as competitors. Also, how did the s2k fair against the BMW e46 M3, M roadsters of the time?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

2003 Evo VIII, and it probably wouldn't be that close.

Stock for stock? Sorry, the Evo never had a chance.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Frost

The human mind doesn't notice gradual changes as much as drastic ones. The power delivery on the twins is more linear (except for the dip) than the S2k which is peaky thanks to the VTEC. So it will feel much more aggressive even though the power is only 40hp more and the same torque.

That being said, the S2k is currently combatting with the Twins on my shopping list so I am keenly keeping an eye on this thread but some of the arguements are pretty hilarious.

Do some quick math, and figure out how much *total* torque is put down to the wheels.

Most people look at relative gearing and just say that both cars do roughly 40 in 1st, 60 in 2nd, and 80 in 3rd. They forget how much more aggressive the S2000's gearing is, to get the same top speed in every gear.

AP2 vs 6MT and AP1 vs 6AT is a fairly good comparison

[Frost]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Do some quick math, and figure out how much *total* torque is put down to the wheels.

Most people look at relative gearing and just say that both cars do roughly 40 in 1st, 60 in 2nd, and 80 in 3rd. They forget how much more aggressive the S2000's gearing is, to get the same top speed in every gear.

AP2 vs 6MT and AP1 vs 6AT is a fairly good comparison

Not sure what you mean by that - you will have educate me unfortunately. Please do? I don't mean to be facetious - I really don't know what you are referring to.

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Stock for stock? Sorry, the Evo never had a chance.

According to Sport Auto's times at the Nordschleife, it's the other way around:

Evo VI (tested 11/1999): 8:24
Evo VII (tested 11/2002): 8:25
S2k (tested 01/2000): 8:39

All with the same driver too (Horst von Saurma)...

[DarkSunrise]

Lightning Lap (VIR)
Evo IX MR -- 3:13.5
S2000 CR -- 3:15.0

For sub-$50k cars that were faster than the S2000 at the time, you can also add the 350z track.
350z track -- 3:12.5

Laguna Lap (Laguna Seca)
Evo IX MR -- 1:47.9
S2000 -- 1:50.7

[glamcem]

Originally Posted by DarkSunrise

Lightning Lap (VIR)
Evo IX MR -- 3:13.5
S2000 CR -- 3:15.0

For sub-$50k cars that were faster than the S2000 at the time, you can also add the 350z track.
350z track -- 3:12.5

Laguna Lap (Laguna Seca)
Evo IX MR -- 1:47.9
S2000 -- 1:50.7

If we are talking about best track performance for the money, new Camaros will always win ...ALWAYS try sub 3 mins at VIR and you'll see what I am talking about