BRZ vs. Prelude Si vs. S2000. . . Initial Thoughts

[iceman666]

Hi All,

I just picked up my BRZ Limited (sterling silver) as a replacement for my daily driver 1993 Honda Prelude Si (retired with 391K miles).

The BRZ will be my daily driver with my 2001 Honda S2000 for weekends / track use.

After a week of driving, here are my initial thoughts:

Handling:

Simlar to most of the prior reviews, I believe the BRZ handles well (better than the Prelude Si when it was new - which at the time was one of the best handling cars under $30K). That said, the BRZ does not handle better than my S2000 (only modification is an underbody X-brace). I believe the primary issue with respect to the handling is the tires. The S02s on the S2000 have significantly more grip and provides a lot more confidence in the corners.

Exterior:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. . . In my opinion, the BRZ looks great . The dimensions are almost spot to those of the Prelude Si (only down side, gas tank is 2 gallons smaller). That said, I still think the S2000 is the best looking of the group.

Interior:

Once again, I think the BRZ looks great. The dimensions are virtually a carbon copy of the Prelude Si. The seats are more comfortable than the S2000 and even the Prelude Si (when it was new). Only drawbacks: The stock radio / navigation system (needs a few more buttons) and not having radio controls either on the steering wheel or nest to the driver's left hand (i.e., S2000) is a mis-step ; the inability to see the overall mileage (odometer) and trip A or B mileage at the same time is annoying ; the placement of the emergency brake is not ideal (should be further to the right); the center console cupholder insert isn't well designed (that said, my Prelude never had a cupholder and the S2000's cupholder cannot be used when driving).

Overall, I give total ergonmics to the Prelude (which had almost perfectly laid out controls), the S2000 is second and BRZ is third. Total interior, Prelude, then BRZ, followed by the S2000 (which is as sparce as they come).

Performance:

As I am still breaking the car in, I have not taken it to redline. That said, the power (while lower than ideal - should be 220 to 230 minimum given the engine) is okay for a daily driver (and upgrade over the Prelude's 160 original HP and 170 HP at retirement) that weighs less than 2800 lbs. Acceleration is clearly not as good as the S2000 (240 HP), but that was to be expected.

Subaru's "close ratio" 6-speed does not measure up to the S2000 (period). But, it isn't awful. The primary drawback: The location of the reverse gear seems weird (but not a deal breaker).

Bottomline:

The BRZ is a solid daily driver, an ideal replacement for the Prelude, and if I can get anywhere close to half as many miles on the BRZ as I did with my Prelude then all will be good. That said, the BRZ is no S2000, and I am glad that I still have that for track use and weekends

[MikeM5]

Fair review and congrats on the purchase!

I'm sure you'll be dealing with the BRZ's shortcomings now that you're a member of the forum, haha. Interesting that you find the reverse gear in a strange location. It's towards + up in my M3 (and all of my previous cars) - was it away + down given the 5 speed in the Prelude?

I still would love to add an S2000 to my garage one day, but I'm flush out of space.

[CSG Mike]

The BRZ will outhandle the s2k once you equalize the tires

[ayau]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

The BRZ will outhandle the s2k once you equalize the tires

Is this your aero theory again?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by ayau

Is this your aero theory again?

Among other things...

[iceman666]

I will be installing a number of the chassis stiffeners / braces later this month, and will upgrade tires next year. I suspect that will help the handling (and improve the confidence going hard into corners).

The Prelude and the S2000 have reverse in a push down / far right configuration. . . That said, I'll be used to the revised configuration in a few days.

One thing I left out in my initial post was the engine sound. As a former owner of an '88 Accord coupe, then upgrade to the Prelude and S2000, I've gotten used to the high-revving whine of Honda's inline 4 cylinder. Subaru's flat 4 has a cool "growl" and is a really nice change of pace (still wish that growl has 30 more HPs of bite though).

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by CSG Mike

The BRZ will outhandle the s2k once you equalize the tires

do you think that stays true as the cars move away from stock?

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by fatoni

do you think that stays true as the cars move away from stock?

At a simple bolt-on level, yes. At a heavy level of bolt-ons and gutting, I think the S2k is faster. At an unlimited budget level, I think the BRZ takes the lead again.

Speculation on the higher levels of modification of course...

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Jawnathin

I find it interesting that without revving it out, thus in the lower revs, you find the BRZ to be inadequate relative towards the S2000.

Torque/power of the FA20 is greater than the F20C up to 6k rpm and similar between 6-7k or so. Beyond 7k, the F20C the soars away.

Since you're still in break in, I assume you're under 4k or so. The BRZ should feel a little more peppy than the S2000 does. It has a pretty healthy torque advantage, even with the torque dip.

That's because your equation is incomplete.

The S2000 has more aggressive gearing than the BRZ, so in reality, it has more power at any given SPEED. Sure, the BRZ may be outputting slightly more torque from the engine at lower RPMs, but the S2000's mechanical torque multiplication makes it so that the total torque (or thrust) at the wheels is greater.

[ZDan]

Huge FR-s fan, but don't see it handling as well as an s2k stock v stock on the same make/model tires due to limited camber. Also, despite weighing a little more, the s2k has less weight per tire width overall, and particularly up front (frs puts about 100 lb more weight on the fronts). Overall grip advantage: s2k. And the s2k has a shorter wheelbase and a lower polar moment of inertia, making it feel a bit more nimble (at lower speeds anyway).

Real world, the fr-s handling feel is about as good, which is saying a lot!

[DAEMANO]

The twins are forever compared to cars costing far more when they were new (Cayman, S2k, RX-8, Elise, 370Z, etc.). These cars simply do not fit in the same price range and shouldn't be compared. It's great that OP has had such good taste in cars, but price is a critical factor that shouldn't be ignored when discussing dynamics, fit and finish.

• OP your BRZ runs $26-$28k MSRP in 2013
• Your S2000 had an MSRP of $32,300 in 2001. Now adjust that to 2013 dollars and you get $42,621 (2.34% inflation).

That's a $17-19k difference in real buying power straight up. Put even half that amount into your BRZ and it will FLY (on the track or street). Put $17 - $19k into it and you can have whatever kind of car you want (ultra-light track beast, show queen, GT or some combination of all 3). The S2K and BRZ are apples to oranges because they never existed in the same price category until your Honda aged 12 years.

• Now OP your Prelude Si's MSRP was $17,136 in 1993. That translates to $27,726 worth of buying power in 2013 which is right inline with your BRZ. By your own account your BRZ dynamically trounces your Prelude even when it was new.

2+2 sports coupes in the same actual price range were the early 240SX, Celica, Talon, Eclipse, and Prelude, later the Gen Coupe, etc. Rarely however are the triplets compared to these cars. Why? MotorTrend's Johnnie Liberman & Scott Mortara put it this way...

MotorTrend's Best Driver's Car 2012
"With the exception of Mazda's Miata, has any car ever punched above its weight like this? Mortara, for one, doesn't think so. "If price were a factor, the BRZ would win this competition hands-down."

The triplets are dynamically so good, and so much fun that people naturally tend to compare them not against their true class rivals, but instead, to the best cars they've ever driven or at minimum cars costing thousands more. High profit, low volume niche sports cars instead of 2+2s in the same range.

Yes the interior is spartan. That's because the car isn't even pretending to be a GT (grand turismo or touring coupe). Notice the lack of sound deadening? Yes, it has a back seat, but that helps to lower import/export tariffs and insurance rates as non-specialty vehicle (which btw bolts out in just a few minutes (ever wonder why?)).

This is also why the '86 is considered likely to be an instant classic. The triplets are accessible, fun and fairly pure. Toyobaru/Subuyota will sell a ton, and you got in early. Enjoy the drive and watch every other mfg jump on the bandwagon afterwards.

[ZDan]

Regarding acceleration in general, the s2k has better power/weight, so it's quicker. You can study gearing and "power under the curve" but in the end it is down to power/weight (note that 237hp vs 200hp captures the gearing advantage that the slightly-lower-torque-but-higher-revving s2k has).

[slates74]

I owned an AP1 myself previous to my BRZ now, I can definitely agree that stock for stock the s2000 definitely handled better. Now that I installed KW V3 coils with a proper corner balance and alignment along with a better wheel and tire setup (BBS RGR + BFG KDW2) I can definitely say I much prefer the handling of the BRZ over the S2K. It's very stable and corners extremely "flat", also the BRZ is much more predictable at the grip limits compared to how tail happy the s2k was with it's famous snap-oversteer. I feel like I always have an extra second to think of the proper input to control the BRZ if that makes any sense.

I see your from NJ too! Feel free to hit me up if you'd like to take a test drive in my car to feel the differences after some suspension and tire upgrades!

I totally agree that the power difference is very noticeable though, luckily the new innovative supercharger is fairly inexpensive and helps to even out the deficit. That'll be my next mod if I progress that far.

[CSG Mike]

Originally Posted by Jawnathin

I did think of gearing, I just didn't think the S2000s was as short or at least short enough to cancel the delta in torque. I knew they hit mid 60s in 2nd and the BRZ doesn't even get to 60 in 2nd.

I did look it up and with the exception of 1st and 6th gears, the BRZ actually has shorter gearing than an AP1 (like the OP has). An AP2 is a different story.


BRZ S2000 (AP1)
Gear ratio 1st 3.626 3.133
Gear ratio 2nd 2.188 2.045
Gear ratio 3rd 1.541 1.481
Gear ratio 4th 1.213 1.161
Gear ratio 5th 1.000 0.971
Gear ratio 6th 0.767 0.811
Final reduction gear ratio 4.100 4.100


So unless I'm missing something (please share if I am) my thought about the power under the curve between the two cars is still indeed correct.

You missed the secondary gear reduction of 1.16 in the S2000. 16% is gonna make a pretty big difference right? It would almost be like swapping the 4.1 to a 4.77 final drive in the BRZ.