Frs vs s2000 - Page 41 - Toyota GR86, 86, FR-S and Subaru BRZ Forum & Owners Community

CSG Mike · 03-19-2013, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTM_Challenge

I love my FR-S the more I drive it. And I'm an s2000 guy...

TRAITOR

You may now credit me with convincing you to buy your FRS in your sig. tyty.

GTM_Challenge · 03-19-2013, 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

TRAITOR

You may now credit me with convincing you to buy your FRS in your sig. tyty.

<3

"CSG MIKE told me the FR-S/BRZ Was easier to drive fast than an S2000...So I bought one and now I can drive Flat Out, the way I couldn't drive my S2000"

CSG Mike · 03-19-2013, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTM_Challenge

<3

"CSG MIKE told me the FR-S/BRZ Was easier to drive fast than an S2000...So I bought one and now I can drive Flat Out, the way I couldn't drive my S2000"

Immortalized. LOL

GTM_Challenge · 03-19-2013, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

Immortalized. LOL

roffles

Ryeong86 · 03-19-2013, 08:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

It's not super hard to change rims...

Most people aren't going to be buying hoosiers and running stock class autox.

It's not hard but for scca you can't get wider rims than what the factory provides for the car. The wider the tires, the more you will grip. That extra surface to grip will make a big difference.

CSG Mike · 03-19-2013, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryeong86

It's not hard but for scca you can't get wider rims than what the factory provides for the car. The wider the tires, the more you will grip. That extra surface to grip will make a big difference.

I did not know that. I guess the 225 tires I run need to be wider for more grip.

WolfpackS2k · 03-20-2013, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ryeong86

The S2000 is a great car but look at the specs. 240 HP with 152lb ft of torque. The S2k weighs in at 2800 lbs. Now the FR-S has 200hp and 151lb ft of torque and weighs in at 2750. 200 hp is achieved at 7000 rpm in the FR-S and 240 hp is achieved at 8300 rpms. These cars are very similar.

The advantage I see with the s2k over the fr-s is this:

When doing SCCA stock events, the s2000 has wider rims that are provided by the factory. You can throw on 275's on the rear tires and grip like a beast. The measly 7 inch width on the FR-S hinders how wide your tires can be before upgrading to a new wider rim which takes you out of stock class. If that is important to you, then go with the S2000, if not go with the FR-S.

That's my opinion.

That's an overly simplistic and flawed comparison. First you're just comparing the AP1 model, not the AP2 as well. Second you're leaving gearing entirely out of the equation. And third, if you're on a race track it doesn't matter if the car makes peak power at 7000 or 8300 rpm if the gearing is done properly and you can keep the engine in the power band (hint, the S2000's gearing is set up that way).

I love my BRZ but still miss my S2000 b/c it was more fun to drive as a stock vehicle.

Ryeong86 · 03-21-2013, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

That's an overly simplistic and flawed comparison. First you're just comparing the AP1 model, not the AP2 as well. Second you're leaving gearing entirely out of the equation. And third, if you're on a race track it doesn't matter if the car makes peak power at 7000 or 8300 rpm if the gearing is done properly and you can keep the engine in the power band (hint, the S2000's gearing is set up that way).

I love my BRZ but still miss my S2000 b/c it was more fun to drive as a stock vehicle.

I figured I simplify it.. but I love both cars so it would be a tough choice either way.

redcelica · 03-21-2013, 09:46 PM

While I own and have always loved the S2000, my bud Heath (sn: Nothing) just picked up a turbo FRS off the forums yesterday. At 300whp+, the car is simply a joy to experience. We both test drove a stock FRS and I have high compliments in regards to the brakes and the steering in the FRS. Power is lacking, but it's lacking in the S2000 too. I have an 07, which has the drive by wire, nanny-VSA system, and is prone to understeer. It takes the right alignment, the right tires, and most importantly the right DRIVER to get the most out of the car in stock form. I was not impressed with the clutch in the FRS, as it felt very numb with little to no feedback, and the tires are absolute shit. The lack of power, clutch, and tires are simple, yet costly fixes. Add a turbo and a better clutch and a set of wider star specs, and the FRS is an even more impressive machine. The handling capabilities out of the box is what impressed me the most though. The car, even on crap tires, still felt settled and inspiring.

Now that my friend has a turbo, it only inspires me to continue my progress in supercharging my S. I track my S as well and I will say, it's nice not having a rollbar requirement!

I look forward to seeing the progression of the FRS/BRZ as more tuning options come online.

jm2c

-Brett

Brzetto · 03-22-2013, 04:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k

^interesting that you think that. The position of that tachometer, and the way the increments spread out further above 6000 rpm, was intentionally done. Makes it FAR EASIER to glance at engine speed when you're flying from to turn to turn on a race track.

For that purpose it's one of the best designed tachometers in a production car.

You could put analog gauges on the car and they would still be easy to read at a glance. I find the illuminated needle and digital speedometer on the BRZ very easy to read at a glance.

iLuveKetchup · 03-22-2013, 11:01 AM

Anxiously awaiting an STi version. Hopefully it will stay NA.

Hordur · 03-26-2013, 04:20 PM

The S2000 is a convertible. I am not a hairdresser, so to me it is pointless.

GTM_Challenge · 03-26-2013, 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hordur

The S2000 is a convertible. I am not a hairdresser, so to me it is pointless.

.

manonastick · 03-27-2013, 10:58 AM

as owner of a s2000 was jizzing myself about the 86 until i drove my friends s2k. The 86 was designed to be a car to be easy and fun to drive. The s2000 is no doubt a fun car but its much more challanging to drive it fast. Remember also its not fair comparing a roadster to coupe when the coupe obivously has more chasis rigidity. Also the deiciding factor for me to get a s2000 is its potential (in terms of modding) i know as time goes the 86 is going to get more parts and all but i just can't get over the fact the ASM s2000 being n/a was able to out run cars with much more power.
Well thats just me i love both cars though

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FR-S vs S2000	vang	FR-S / BRZ vs....	436	09-19-2012 05:52 PM
E36 M3 vs FR-S vs S2000 (for me)	RearDrive	FR-S / BRZ vs....	48	07-02-2012 11:46 PM
S2000 or MX-5	balance	Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions	10	11-01-2011 03:01 AM
S2000 from hell	CyberFormula	Other Vehicles & General Automotive Discussions	13	07-09-2010 10:05 PM

03-21-2013, 09:46 PM	#569
redcelica Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Drives: S2000 Location: Raleigh, NC Posts: 144 Thanks: 7 Thanked 40 Times in 21 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	While I own and have always loved the S2000, my bud Heath (sn: Nothing) just picked up a turbo FRS off the forums yesterday. At 300whp+, the car is simply a joy to experience. We both test drove a stock FRS and I have high compliments in regards to the brakes and the steering in the FRS. Power is lacking, but it's lacking in the S2000 too. I have an 07, which has the drive by wire, nanny-VSA system, and is prone to understeer. It takes the right alignment, the right tires, and most importantly the right DRIVER to get the most out of the car in stock form. I was not impressed with the clutch in the FRS, as it felt very numb with little to no feedback, and the tires are absolute shit. The lack of power, clutch, and tires are simple, yet costly fixes. Add a turbo and a better clutch and a set of wider star specs, and the FRS is an even more impressive machine. The handling capabilities out of the box is what impressed me the most though. The car, even on crap tires, still felt settled and inspiring. Now that my friend has a turbo, it only inspires me to continue my progress in supercharging my S. I track my S as well and I will say, it's nice not having a rollbar requirement! I look forward to seeing the progression of the FRS/BRZ as more tuning options come online. jm2c -Brett

03-22-2013, 11:01 AM	#571
iLuveKetchup My VTEC fluid is full Join Date: Jan 2012 Drives: EFF JAY Location: NYC Posts: 935 Thanks: 149 Thanked 268 Times in 183 Posts Mentioned: 6 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	Anxiously awaiting an STi version. Hopefully it will stay NA.

03-26-2013, 04:20 PM	#572
Hordur Member Join Date: Mar 2013 Drives: Peugeot 106 Rallye, Integra Type-R Location: New Zealand Posts: 10 Thanks: 0 Thanked 3 Times in 2 Posts Mentioned: 0 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	The S2000 is a convertible. I am not a hairdresser, so to me it is pointless.

03-27-2013, 10:58 AM	#574
manonastick Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Drives: WRB ZC6 Location: NSW, Australia Posts: 125 Thanks: 38 Thanked 19 Times in 13 Posts Mentioned: 1 Post(s) Tagged: 0 Thread(s)	as owner of a s2000 was jizzing myself about the 86 until i drove my friends s2k. The 86 was designed to be a car to be easy and fun to drive. The s2000 is no doubt a fun car but its much more challanging to drive it fast. Remember also its not fair comparing a roadster to coupe when the coupe obivously has more chasis rigidity. Also the deiciding factor for me to get a s2000 is its potential (in terms of modding) i know as time goes the 86 is going to get more parts and all but i just can't get over the fact the ASM s2000 being n/a was able to out run cars with much more power. Well thats just me i love both cars though

User Name		Remember Me?
Password