Thread: Frs vs s2000
View Single Post
Old 10-29-2013, 10:53 AM   #890
ZDan
Senior Member
 
ZDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Drives: '23 BRZ
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 4,672
Thanks: 1,439
Thanked 4,012 Times in 2,098 Posts
Mentioned: 85 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsimon7777 View Post
FR-S has rear seats. FR-S has modern crash protection. Hence, FR-S wins in the real world.
IF rear seats and "modern crash protection" are big priorities for you, over more power, adjustable double-wishbone suspension all around, and more trackworthy front/rear weight distribution (the track is a part of my "real world")

Quote:
Really, I see the S2000 as occupying a no-man's-land of cardom. It's not a track rocket ship like a Corvette or many other big-engine coupes.
Dedicated track S2000s even with stock powerplants are forces to be contended with.

Quote:
It's not as sublime or balanced as a Boxster or Elise.
I think it is every bit as sublime as the Boxster on the street and at the track. I picked the S2000 over the Boxster after a few test drives, not only based on price/reliability. The S2000 was a more fun drive for me. The Elise is definitely more of a track car right out of the box, but the gearbox linkage is the opposite of "sublime" and of course it has too many shortcomings in other areas...

Quote:
It's not as cheap to run or track-toy-like as a Miata. Yes, it's a reliable sports car. That's about it. If I'm going to buy a 2-seater, there's a massive list of cars I'd buy first.
For me, it's the best overall totally stock sports car of the last few decades. I only wish they'd made a fixed-roof version...
ZDan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ZDan For This Useful Post:
AyJay (10-29-2013)