Toyota 86 Turbo vs S2000 Supercharged (Race Video)
 

The 86 driver is better but both cars are amazing. I would love to know what the details are of each setup.

Enjoy

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCEh1UoejWE"]TOYOTA86 TURBO & HONDA S2000 SUPERCHARGER - YouTube[/ame]

Looks like the S2000 had a power advantage. The GT86 had the higher speed through the corners (or just a better driver).

Much better handling on the gt86.

Yes the GT86 had better handling for sure. But it did appear that the Super Charger had the straight away power over the Turbo.

gotta say i'm not sure this video shows a better handling 86....tbh it just looks like a better driver. The driver of the s2k wasn't taking very good lines.

I've driven both and own an s2000. Stock I think the s2k wins in handling and equally upgraded I think it will too.

And I've driven both and the FRS is better! Power is less of course but c'mon, hardtop rigidity versus convertible... Sorry, but I'll take the hardtop every time! Not saying the s2000 isn't great or not rigid because it is. Stock for stock, yes, the s2k is better. But when talking strictly chassis, I'll take the frs. Power is power so I'll rather take the better chassis.

The s2000 was a $40k car new anyways... No backseats, ewww convertible, nice motor, and I think they're boring to look at...

driven both as well and I think the s2k has the better chassis and better platform to start with

it has negatives IMO such as convertible, 2 seater and lack of space

Way too many factors in videos like this that one can say one car is better than the other, primary factor being driver, or something as simple and important as what tires.

Regardless, both are amazing driver oriented cars, and I would love to add an s2000 to my stable in the future next to my FR-S. In fact, when I bought my FR-S, the only other car I was considering was an S2000.

Thanks Hmong337 for the video find, very enjoyable!

I prefer the s2000 handling over frs handling for the tactile feel through steering wheel, high reving power band, engine note, and twitchy nature of s2000.

Am I the only person who thinks these videos are totally worthless, there are so many unknowns yet people seem to use them as solid evidence to draw conclusions.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLJCWb1apYo"]The Fast and the Furious (6/10) Movie CLIP - Jesse Races Tran (2001) HD - YouTube[/ame]

While the video is nice...it doesn't "prove" the 86 turbo is handling better. the s2k was taking very wide lines eventually over-shooting the apex @ 0.39 and then missing the next apex on the chicane @ 0.41. All of which the s2k could have been executed just as good or better than the frs driving behind him.

IMO this is definitely a show of the difference between drivers on similar machines. Rather 86T vs s2kSC

to bad it was a short vid.

S2K driver was god awful.

Judging by the Chunghwa Telecom billboard by the race track, this video was taken in Taiwan. Looking at the palm tree, it's probably southern Taiwan.

It's also interesting that 400whp supercharged S2000's are only hitting low 12's in the 1/4 mile whereas 400whp turbo FR-S/BRZ's are hitting low 11's in a same weight car.

tires/gearing? :iono:

I don't know either. It's not like these guys run Prius tires or anything. And their gearing can't be much worse than ours. We have short gears for sure and my turbo runs through them quick.

Gearing on the S2000 is pretty long especially when you can rev out to 8.6-9k. I doubt that's helping them with any kind of acceleration tests.

I love seeing this logic all the time.

It was never $40,000

S2k gearing depends on the model.

Turbo AUC is huge compared to SC AUC.

I see

In Australia an S2K was above $70,000 before on road costs so expect to pay $75,000 for one new.

The base model of the 86 is $29,999, about $33,000 after on roads.

I think we can agree that in Australia at least the 86 is a huge value for money.

I just think the S2K here had broken suspension. Maybe he forgot to put in the suspension before racing. It happens. "Oh woops, forgot to put in my suspension."

Turbo cars are faster in straight lines than supercharger cars imo anyway.

Its very hard to tell much in videos like this since the driver is so much more important than the car.

Looks like someone just being more aggressive and someone else didn't want to mess up their car possibly...

There's a lot I don't know about this clip, but neither line was particularly impressive. Yes, the 86'er seems to be doing a better job hitting his or her marks. But, for instance, they both scurry across the straight at :25 and scrub a little speed for no good reason.

Still, I'm sure they both had a blast. :thumbup:

As CGS Mike pointed out, the S2000 was never a $40k car. More importantly, this argument is retarded because, TODAY, there are plenty of low mileage S2000s under $20k.

1. Subjective. For some people, this isn't a negative. Dude, you're a contradiction. You own an MR2.
2. Subjective. I never thought I'd like driving a convertible either, but trust me, top down sporting is the shiet. Better than the useless t-tops in my old 91 MR2 Turbo.
3. Truth. Leaps and bounds over the FA20 even though it was designed 15 yrs ago. Sad.
4. Subjective. Although I personally prefer the more modern lines of the FRS/BRZ, the S2000 isn't an eyesore either. My jaw still drops when I see one on the road.

I'm talking Canada. USD was obviously less.

a 2001 s2000 was 32k msrp. adjusted for inflation, that would be 42k around a year ago or so.

maybe that's what he meant.

You are 100% correct!

Thanks.

And used is used is used. I could get a low mileage c5z and smoke all these jap craps. But I need a DD and the FRS fits the bill. I can see your need to defend your used car purchase.

1. The mr2 is my 2seater garage queen while my FRS is my DD and has backseats if needed. Two 2seaters would not fly with the Mrs.
2. I'm a hardtop guy when talking pure performance. T-top mr2 is merely because it's a street car. Not race car. Don't hate, the mr2 is vintage. When was the last time you've seen t-tops and old school 90's interior lol.
3. Well I would hope you'd get something better in the S2000 than the fa20 (even if it was made 10 years ago) for what you paid for the car BRAND NEW. A $15,000 C5 corvette will slaughter all and would be my "go to" car if I really wanted performance per dollar. S2000 is mere child's play to the v8 Vette around a real track.
4. S2000 with the OEM hardtop is cool. But the car still doesn't have the neck snapping looks of the FRS. Purely my biased opinion... But I think everybody agrees on this forum, obviously!

Again, don't get me wrong, I love the FRS plenty, but bringing up the C5 Corvette to discredit the S2000 makes little sense. The next guy can simply say that for $15,000, he can drop a fully tuned K20a in a CRX and smash the C5 Corvette. See where this is going? Honestly, you should have given up your Celica...er....I mean MR2, and picked up a C5 Corvette and a 4-seater beater. It's just pathetic to argue all the "I could haves" but yet you didn't. You decided to get a car that is even less than "child's play" so now you have two Hot Wheels that you have to constantly justify keeping.

I'm actually a diehard SW20 fan at heart. However, unlike you, I've been able to move past defending everything that I own(ed). Sure, folks at MR2OC continue to spout how vintage/rare the MR2 is, but to non-MR2 enthusiasts, every generation was simply a mashup of Corolla/Celica parts.

wow amazing!! to see this video at here
S2000 is my friend, this is just a "Time Trial", and before this movie clip, S2000 run very hard and have fun with "gray Ferrari" (in the beginning of this movie), than S2000 is about to get off the field.

more information about this S2000
please check our google photos --> albums

...and why even bring up the mr2? This isn't even about it. Your attempts to hate are quite futile and you seem to pick on things unrelated rather than the subject matter at hand to get at me lol. Quite funny.

I hate the used versus new argument. "Oh you can get x car for x price and is a better deal than the FRS". A c5z used Vette is my rebuttle to that stupid argument.

At least I can say that I bought my FRS brand new fresh off the lot. Can you say the same about your glorified Honda? For something used and strictly performance oriented, the s2000 doesn't even make the cut for me. Better off with an nsx if you're really into Hondas. I could've easily gone out and got me one of those if I was selfish and splurged. Again, the FRS was purchased solely for the purpose of being a DD but with flare. When was the last time you fit 3 people in your s2000?

And my mr2 is merely just a rare toy. It barely cost anything to own and I've got it registered as a classic. Funny how you try to attack it. I never peeped a word about my old school Toyota but you seem to like to bring it up. Maybe because I've got two sexy cars and your stuck with an bland looking ragtop Honda?

If anything, I plan to add a c5 or c6 Vette to my stable. The mr2 is staying. The FRS is the DD.

Chassis wise, FRS > S2000. Anybody can add power...

The S2000 generally outperforms the NSX.

Anyone can add power, but you can't get rid of the negatives of a strut front suspension, ever. Only mitigate them.

When was the last time you fit 3 normal sized adults in your FRS?

hmmmm

http://image.modified.com/f/features...dy_type_gt.jpg

vs

http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/i/20...al-d4hpnx7.jpg

Fit 3 people just this past weekend. Albeit super tight, but still works when I need it.

Not trying to defend Mac struts but try telling this to the Porsche crowd...

The s2000 looks fantastic but the vert kills the lines... The brz looks 1000x better!