Frs vs s2000

[hmong337]

Having driven both, I like the FRS more. It's fresh. But importantly, has a real roof. I'm not so much a fan of convertibles either. Most of all, the shape and exterior of the S2000 never really excited me. I was close to dumping my MR2 for one because I loved the sharper handling of the S2000 but I still adored the SW20 body more than the S2000. But now that I have the FRS, I can look past getting rid of my MR2 for an S2k.

The extra room in the FRS is what makes the car so great. Try taking 4 people all with seatbelts in your S2000 if you really had to! Now, I'm far from saying the S2000 isn't good because it's still better "stock vs stock" against the 86. But who cares for "stock vs stock"!!!

The price was right for the FRS buying new too. I wanted a brand new car so the FRS was the hot ticket to a world class handling car. Sure it's down on power "stock" but $25k new, you really can't complain.

I'm in Canada and at the time, S2000's were $40k cars. They're more expensive than the FRS, but you're also getting a more premium car too. Seems like clean mint low mileage ones still go for around $20k these days, but I didn't want to buy used this time around. I've had a few nightmares buying used (haven't we all!).

The performance is still better "stock" despite being a decade old. The S2000 holds true to being a car ahead of its time. But again, who cares for "stock"?

We're all here because we enjoy modifying cars and the FRS was made to be modified in the aftermarket. Toyobaru intended for that.

I will end with this...

400hp FRS vs 400hp S2000 = DRAW. Both are winners.

[iLuveKetchup]

Just wanted to add that my feelings for the S2000 are from the stand point of track & autox only. It is rare for me to drive my s2k on the street (haven't my driven CR since June & the track s2k is in storage). I'd hate to use it as a street car. So the rare times I drive it, it feels like a new car & I never tire of it. For a mixed use car, the BRZ wins without a doubt.

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by iLuveKetchup

A Lamborghini Countach would be more en vogue than an NSX.

Oh now you're just trollin' me! That Countach doesn't even hold a candle to a Radio Flyer!!

[vhx1]

Originally Posted by iLuveKetchup

Just wanted to add that my feelings for the S2000 are from the stand point of track & autox only. It is rare for me to drive my s2k on the street (haven't my driven CR since June & the track s2k is in storage). I'd hate to use it as a street car. So the rare times I drive it, it feels like a new car & I never tire of it. For a mixed use car, the BRZ wins without a doubt.

so buy one already!

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by hmong337

The extra room in the FRS is what makes the car so great. Try taking 4 people all with seatbelts in your S2000 if you really had to! Now, I'm far from saying the S2000 isn't good because it's still better "stock vs stock" against the 86. But who cares for "stock vs stock"!!!

Have you tried fitting 4 people in a FRS?

[Dave-ROR]

Originally Posted by thill

But your also comparing a car that is older and is worth less. In 8 years or so the insurance on you BRZ should be considerably cheaper than a new RWD sports coupe that costs considerably more.

I meant when it was brand new. The BRZ insurance is more expensive than a new M3, at least for me through state farm it is. The cost of the car is just a minor part of what insurance cost and all the wrecked Subarus over the past few years jacked the rates up on these too.

[aCab]

Originally Posted by Dave-ROR

Yeah Insurance for my S2K was much cheaper than the BRZ. By about 30-40%.

Insurance on my FR-S is cheaper than my S2000 is/was. The S2000 is on storage insurance now though...last time it wasn't, I was a few years younger and likely in a different insurance bracket. Just do what I do...the more cars you have, the cheaper insurance gets on each one!

[Andrew025]

Is seems as though the newer car always costs more to insure in my experience. Yet, almost everyone has posted how it's cheaper than their previous car.
I came from an 04 STI, totally clean record, excellent credit, married, multi car discount, etc., and the BRZ costs more to insure through every agent I got a quote from. How are people pulling that off?

[hmong337]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Have you tried fitting 4 people in a FRS?

Better than nothing...

[AyJay]

Originally Posted by hmong337

Having driven both, I like the FRS more. It's fresh. But importantly, has a real roof. I'm not so much a fan of convertibles either. Most of all, the shape and exterior of the S2000 never really excited me. I was close to dumping my MR2 for one because I loved the sharper handling of the S2000 but I still adored the SW20 body more than the S2000. But now that I have the FRS, I can look past getting rid of my MR2 for an S2k.

The extra room in the FRS is what makes the car so great. Try taking 4 people all with seatbelts in your S2000 if you really had to! Now, I'm far from saying the S2000 isn't good because it's still better "stock vs stock" against the 86. But who cares for "stock vs stock"!!!

The price was right for the FRS buying new too. I wanted a brand new car so the FRS was the hot ticket to a world class handling car. Sure it's down on power "stock" but $25k new, you really can't complain.

I'm in Canada and at the time, S2000's were $40k cars. They're more expensive than the FRS, but you're also getting a more premium car too. Seems like clean mint low mileage ones still go for around $20k these days, but I didn't want to buy used this time around. I've had a few nightmares buying used (haven't we all!).

The performance is still better "stock" despite being a decade old. The S2000 holds true to being a car ahead of its time. But again, who cares for "stock"?

We're all here because we enjoy modifying cars and the FRS was made to be modified in the aftermarket. Toyobaru intended for that.

I will end with this...

400hp FRS vs 400hp S2000 = DRAW. Both are winners.

I LoL'd at talk of hypothetical 400hp N/A 2.0L cars would somehow "end" this thread.


Furthermore, the import world has no shortage of owners who build unbalanced 400+ hp penis sleds who look down their noses at "stock" owners by saying "who cares". Many of these are the same guys never show up on track day with endless excuses about their set up. Maybe they are scared their package of car/driver will get exposed... or maybe they are worried about potential durability issues on the 400hp they are sending thru an engine and drivetrain engineered for 200hp.

For all who read this, if I just described you... Don't be that guy.

[hmong337]

Originally Posted by AyJay

I LoL'd at talk of hypothetical 400hp N/A 2.0L cars would somehow "end" this thread.


Furthermore, the import world has no shortage of owners who build unbalanced 400+ hp penis sleds who look down their noses at "stock" owners by saying "who cares". Many of these are the same guys never show up on track day with endless excuses about their set up. Maybe they are scared their package of car/driver will get exposed... or maybe they are worried about potential durability issues on the 400hp they are sending thru an engine and drivetrain engineered for 200hp.

For all who read this, if I just described you... Don't be that guy.

And the 2JZ was "engineered" for 280-320hp. That doesn't stop people from making 600hp+ with them. Same with the F20C and K20 motors. People push them daily at double the horsepower without a hiccup all while still being balanced.

I guess you're one of the butthurt ones that ended up being looked down upon because your shit is stock? That's just ridiculous that you'd even mention such a stigma.

This thread is FRS vs S2000. If you've got a problem with peoples opinions... why bother posting?!

Both cars are great, both will win. Obviously stock vs stock, the S2K wins. But everybody knows the FRS needs a turbo. That's where the 400hp vs 400hp example sets in. It's a toss up.

Why so butthurt?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by hmong337

Both cars are great, both will win. Obviously stock vs stock, the S2K wins. But everybody knows the FRS needs a turbo. That's where the 400hp vs 400hp example sets in. It's a toss up.

Why so butthurt?

Problem is, you can make 400hp on a S2k reliably and sustainably with just the following:

- Bolt on kit
- Tune
- Engine Cooling

You need the following to make 400hp on a FRS reliably and sustainably:

- Extreme kit
or
- bolt-on kit + heavy headwork
- Tune
- Engine Cooling
- Oil cooling
- Upgraded transmission (no options unless you go sequential.... $$$$$$)
- Upgraded axles

Even then, nobody REALLY knows long term reliability, cuz most 400hp cars have blown up or broken stuff, and have gone down.


This is the result of slapping on a supercharger on the S2k; this car is heavily tracked.

[rice_classic]

[rice_classic]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Problem is, you can make 400hp on a S2k reliably and sustainably with just the following:

- Bolt on kit
- Tune
- Engine Cooling

Mike FTW!

I might also add an upgraded diff is usually part of the equation but that's independent of the engine.

I've also seen S2k's make ~400hp on 92 octane reliably. Something I don't think we'll EVER see the FRS do.