BRZ vs S2000 around a track

[Superhatch]

Originally Posted by scorcherjf

You could just calculate a rouge estimate yourself... 100 mph is about 146 feet per second, so 1/10th of a second is 14.6 feet which is a bit over a car length. So yea, 0.2 seconds is about 2 car lengths.

And in regards to a track battle... I think the S2000 will post slightly faster lap times on most tracks. Very small technical tracks the BRZ might be quicker. The Laguna Seca times for the BRZ that motortrend just did was 1:51.3 while a 2006 S2000 do a 1:50.7 (on RE050 tires, though).

So the S2K with 40 more hp and the same tq with super sticky tires does a lap .6s faster than the BRZ on grand touring summer tires?

But .7s difference in the 1/4 mile doe!? Looks like the .1s = 1 car length theory has just gone out the window. Also, 6-8 more mpg average, rear seats, bigger trunk...at one point I was comparing these cars...I'm not anymore I think the BRZ is the winner unless you don't like it's looks.

[iLuveKetchup]

RE050s are far from being sticky, albeit better than the Primacy tires. I haven't seen a BRZ at the track (road course). Not sure if its faster or not.

[TSY]

Originally Posted by dwx

I've driven a few RX8s and I wouldn't really consider them to be quicker, at least not stock for stock.

My previous track car was an RX-8. Great car- very good handling, but no way was it a lot quicker than the BRZ. In fact, 0-60 felt slower.

Once you got that rotary engine revved up though it was a wonderful motor. You could leave it in 3rd and drive the whole track without shifting if you wanted to.

[RWD-boxer]

I have a friend with a s2000 and the frs wins by half a car up to 100 from a 40 roll

[random hero]

Originally Posted by skeeler

Did you bother to test-drive the S2000?

I sure did...... NOT My own stupidity, but ended up pocketing couple thousand bucks, so wasn't a total disaster

[hotaka]

Theoretically, aren't the only advantages of the s2000 weight distribution, tires, and power? Those are very easy aspects to fix thru tuning (except for weight distribution).

BRZ/FR-S has better weight, center of gravity, track, wheelbase, drag, and probably rigidity

[scorcherjf]

I think you're missing the point of the OP's question which was "which is faster around a track" not which is the better overall car. I'm sure almost everyone here (this is the BRZ forum after all) would choose the BRZ over the S2000 for practicality and fuel economy reasons but the question was which is actually faster around a track.

I'm still convinced that the S2000 will be quicker around MOST tracks because of the power advantage and the superior front suspension setup, given that they're modified similarly. The car is 12 years old now... has great weight balance, a superior suspension geometry, more power from an engine that revs to well over 8000 rpm, you can't deny that it's a great track car and when you actually go to track events you'll see many of them there for these reasons exactly. Also the RE050 tires aren't "super sticky" either... they're just decent summer tires, that's all.

And the 0.1s = 14.6 ft "theory" isn't theory... just calculate it yourself, it's a fact. Although this is more to do with drag racing than anything else so I'm not even sure why we're talking about it since this thread is about track performance.

Originally Posted by Superhatch

So the S2K with 40 more hp and the same tq with super sticky tires does a lap .6s faster than the BRZ on grand touring summer tires?

But .7s difference in the 1/4 mile doe!? Looks like the .1s = 1 car length theory has just gone out the window. Also, 6-8 more mpg average, rear seats, bigger trunk...at one point I was comparing these cars...I'm not anymore I think the BRZ is the winner unless you don't like it's looks.

[azngolfur]

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

Looks like s2k for sure.

[rwd_]

Originally Posted by RWD-boxer

I have a friend with a s2000 and the frs wins by half a car up to 100 from a 40 roll

You're friend obviously doesn't know how to drive.

- notice the S2000 in the straights

[RWD-boxer]

Originally Posted by rwd_

You're friend obviously doesn't know how to drive.

- notice the S2000 in the straights

I agree ... I also ran a s2000 at the dragstrip and I won ever race . Ran about 4 times

[rwd_]

By all means, I know the S2000 isn't a fast car - in reality, it's quite slow, but it's definitely faster than the BRZ around the track/0-100km.

[bazi]

A buddy of mine had AP1 s2000 and it is one of my all time favorite cars BUT there is something to be said about getting a brand new car that i know has not been revved by knuckle heads and abused.

Also at 6'2" FR-S is a lot more comfortable AND still I cant knock the s2000.

[rwd_]

Originally Posted by bazi

A buddy of mine had AP1 s2000 and it is one of my all time favorite cars BUT there is something to be said about getting a brand new car that i know has not been revved by knuckle heads and abused.

Also at 6'2" FR-S is a lot more comfortable AND still I cant knock the s2000.

I could definitely agree with that settlement, buying a used s2000 is tricky especially if it's got modfications. You have to be especially cautious with the AP1's specifically with their 9k rev and weaker differential.

I bought mine brand new from the dealership in 03, and to be frank; nothing has put a smile on my face whether it be on the track, on a mountain curvy road or even going to get groceries with the top down like the S2000.

And I'm not trying to bash the BRZ, on a BRZ forum, I'm simply providing my opinion from a different perspective.

[SpeedR]

The cars are close enough that the driver will be 90% of who is faster at auto-x or RR. At the 3 Auto-Xs I have been too I have had better times than every S2000 (4I think) that has shown up including moded and even one on race tires. S2000 is harder to drive at its limits it’s just not as neutral or tossable.