S2000 or 350Z?

[waypastfast]

Ok, i am considering buying a summer car for play and light drifting. So my 2 options are Honda S2000 or Nissan 350Z both will be used, 2003 models. Let me know what you think. And to add a little fun to the mix, i plan on a future upgrade on both cars of either supercharger on the S2K and twin turbo kit on 350Z. ON that note which would you choose as well!

Add: 1998 Porsche Boxster to the mix!

[Foreign1]

Ahhhh TOUGH decision, i've driven the crap out of a s2k and been giving a crazy ride in a 350Z.. id probably take the twin turbo 350z.


goodluck!:D

[spyce]

I would personally take the s2k if you are using it for 'play and light drifting'
it lacks torque...but the sound of that car at 9000rpms sure as hell makes up for it!:thumbsup:

[custommx]

350z drives like a mobile home go wit the s2k

[Fuji]

everyone wants to be drifting....:nut: lol


TT 350Z no questions about it :) only if it is TT tho

[andres_mt]

go with the 350Z if you are eventually going to put money into..stock 350Z's i can see not being as nimble or quick as a S2K but if you putting money into the car your buying go with the Z.

[Mitsu3000gt]

350z all the way. IMO cars with hardly any torque aren't much fun and the 3.5V6 has a hell of alot more modding potential than the S2000. The S2000 is also a slow car. I also don't like cars where the power comes on at 8000 or 9000 rpm, I guess some people like that but I can't see how thats fun. Just my 0.02.

Mark

[air_mikey]

S2000 all the way. Especially if you are going to supercharge it. Yeah you are going to lack in torque but its going to be worth it.

[Lex350]

Originally posted by spyce
I would personally take the s2k if you are using it for 'play and light drifting'
it lacks torque...but the sound of that car at 9000rpms sure as hell makes up for it!:thumbsup:

yup...plus the handling has a much lighter feel. I've driven both in the stock form and the S2K is a more fun car to drive. The Z350 although it has more power it feels like it weighs twice as much in comparison.

[khtm]

Depends on what you prefer: HP or HANDLING.

[Lex350]

Originally posted by khtm
Depends on what you prefer: HP or HANDLING.

or in your case:

none of the above!!!:D

[andres_mt]

^ Well he is putting money into it, so an upgrade in suspension will probably satisfy the handling part.

[glennc]

Even with major suspension upgrades an s2k will walk a 350Z on a course. s2k supercharged, hondata, and tune.

[JspecB16]

Originally posted by andres_mt
^ Well he is putting money into it, so an upgrade in suspension will probably satisfy the handling part.

doubt it

[andres_mt]

^ Well with the Z you get both after modding (handling and power), with the S2K you might get better handling in the end but for some just not enough power may be there to satisfy there needs. If your one of those guys thats doesn't care about having a lot of power or an excessive amount I should say, then I the S2K may be a better option.

[Cypresskilla]

Hey waypastfast how's the Speed Protege treating you. hope your taking care of it. I guess the new job must be going preety good huh. In case you forgot i'm the guy you bought the Mazda from.

[Lex350]

Originally posted by andres_mt
^ Well he is putting money into it, so an upgrade in suspension will probably satisfy the handling part.



no, no no...you misunderstand. That was directed at khtm.;)

[glennc]

s2000 handling is on another level compared to 350Z's. You could easily get 350 WHP out of an s2k with 3000 dollars in mods.

[waypastfast]

Mazda's great.......thanks for asking, just want something RWD now!

[andres_mt]

^ Yeah I know you posted just like a couple seconds before me. haha :nut:

[iceburns288]

Depends on if you want to carry more than a lunchbox with you at any time. I bought a Z because I needed the extra luggage space for work, and it's actually come in handy.

In terms of power, the Z won't feel fast as it is. When I dynod my car the torque was perfectly FLAT for most of the range. It makes the car go, and go it does, but it doesn't really feel like you're getting anywhere until 90mph. It's a weird feeling. The torque feels great, my car put down 230lb-ft stock. I can punch it in 5th gear at 2500-3000 and still get moving pretty quick. Torque is a nice feeling :).

The Z is a heavy car, I'm not gonna lie. It does feel like it at times, but it responds really well anyways. The problem is if you flick the wheel back and forth a few times, you'll notice the body roll (there's too much for me). The ride is real nice, even with my 19s.

The Z is definitely a much better daily driver. It's bigger, comfier, and the AC is the coldest I've ever felt... not that it would help y'all out;) The S2000 is an agile little car, a fantastic one to drive, it just depends on whether you're willing to sacrifice a daily driving car to get that agility.

By the way, watch out turbocharging the VQ... they tend to blow... a lot. That's why I'm going to build a second turbo project car instead of turbocharging my Z.

[spyce]

Originally posted by glennc
s2000 handling is on another level compared to 350Z's. You could easily get 350 WHP out of an s2k with 3000 dollars in mods.

can you actually get 350whp out of an s2k for 3grand? :confused:

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by glennc
You could easily get 350 WHP out of an s2k with 3000 dollars in mods.
I really, really, really doubt that. In terms of power, every dollar you spend to get 1hp out of an S2000 will get you 1.5-2hp from a 350Z. So if you spend 5k to get 300whp from an S2000, you will get 400whp from a Z for the same money. At that price though, don't expect either to last a while.

You could get either car over 400whp, but it'll cost you plenty for either. A VQ could get you way past 500 if you build it up, which you'll need to do.

[andres_mt]

^ You forgot to consider the power-weight ratio. S2K is lighter than the Z.

[iceburns288]

What the hell does power to weight ratio have to do with the cost of building an engine?:rolleyes:

[SilverBoost]

350Z.

But that's only because I think the S2K is a chick car.


:eek: whoa did I just say that??!! Imagine my nerve on a honda fanboi forum. :D

[rc2002]

So much S2K love from people who have never even ridden in one. :drama:

You can't depend on what people say - most of these internet opinions are biased and not based on anything factual. Test drive both cars and see which you like better and which is more practical for you. I can tell you right now that handling between the two cars is comparable and isn't as different as people make it out to be. Especially for city driving - how hard are you going to drive your car in the city anyway? How often are you going to make it to the track?

For daily driveability, I'd go with the Z. You have power on tap without revving the piss out of your engine. It's much more roomy, and comes standard with VSA and Traction control - you won't see those until the later model S2k's. With the 350Z you have more options like tire pressure monitoring system, trip computer, etc.

I don't understand you people who like to compare cars with imaginary mods. Of course if you put enough money into any car, you can make it faster and handle better than another. But then you're not comparing apples to apples anymore. Why not put those imaginary mods aside, and put that money towards buying a nicer car in the first place. It's WAY more reliable, easier on your wallet, less down time on your car, and just more :bigpimp: . Then you don't have that need to prove anything - I could care less if your car is faster than mine if mine is nicer. :)

[4doorj]

Originally posted by glennc
s2000 handling is on another level compared to 350Z's. You could easily get 350 WHP out of an s2k with 3000 dollars in mods.

no man... with 3k you wont even come close to 350 whp....
in order to get that you need more then a supercharger too!
i think a supercharger / turbocharger kit is close to 10g...
bolt ons dont really do anything

[Fuji]

Originally posted by glennc
s2000 handling is on another level compared to 350Z's. You could easily get 350 WHP out of an s2k with 3000 dollars in mods.

really? Is it a 350whp that lasts for 25 minutes after teh engine blows :S a comptech SC is more than 3000.... a turbo kit is more than 3000... What would I have to do to get a s2k to 350whp. I'd seriously like to know cuz then I'd be interested in one now!!

[andres_mt]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
It's WAY more reliable, easier on your wallet, less down time on your car, and just more :bigpimp: .

Not all cases, not these days it seems like , maybe...but then again some enjoy a hobby like modding while they drive there beater, and a car's :bigpimp:-ness is in the eye of the beholder.

:thumbsup:

[msommers]

For power, drifting, the Z. For looks (not a fan of 350Z front end at all) and excellent handling, S2000 is a nice car. Good luck!

[rc2002]

Originally posted by andres_mt


Not all cases, not these days it seems like , maybe...but then again some enjoy a hobby like modding while they drive there beater, and a car's :bigpimp:-ness is in the eye of the beholder.

:thumbsup:

I would rather get to drive a :bigpimp: car all year round than a junker for 8 months out of the year and an unreliable garage queen for 4 months out of the year.

Call me bitter, tell me I don't belong on this enthusiast website, but I have 99.9% of the general population backing me on this.

[JAYMEZ]

Hrmm , I want to see a 350z in your parking spot hahaha!

I would go with the 350z dude , its an amazing car to run around in.. I dunno if the s2000 does it for me.. its an amazing car , but I dont think I would ever own one.

Just my 2 cents.

[andres_mt]

^ Well that's too bad your wasting your time posting on a site with that 0.01% lol.

[rc2002]

Not wasting my time. Beyond has been good to me - I've learned lots, met lots of awesome people, and the marketplace here is a god-send. haha. Plus I still help people with modding and advice from time to time. I'm still very much a part of this scene.


Anyway, I'll stop cluttering this thread. 350Z FTW. :)

[tentacles]

Well, if you had 100 grand under the hood of that S2K........

[rage2]

Originally posted by glennc
Even with major suspension upgrades an s2k will walk a 350Z on a course. s2k supercharged, hondata, and tune.
Theres no such thing as hondata for s2k. There's a reflash for 2006 models, and maybe in the future hondata programmable ECU with boost options.

[Slashin_]

s2k-light,agile,s/c makes up for torque cause no lag, and of course drift king loves the s2k

[eur0]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3816567149818723971

This thread is what I have been debating for the past couple weeks. I have been through 5 Honda's and I loved each one of them but I would like a change and the 350 is probably my next choice.

It has the power, style and performance that I want. But this all comes down to a test drive :).

[iceburns288]

Originally posted by eur0
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3816567149818723971
The end of that video is crazy! Tsuchiya is FLYIN :eek:

[A_Friend]

pick the s2k, the sound of the engine at 9000 rpm is almost heavenly

[C4S]

AS I post before .. if there is a Boxster on your list .. go for it ..

S2000 and 350 are nice .. I drove them .. and like them .. and .. cost 1/3 - 1/2 for service bill compare to Porsche ...

But hey .. drive a Porsche ... or just a "nice" asian car ... it is your call! :D

[TurboTEGRA]

I know the supercharged s2k from speedtech dynoed 230whp. S2k stock is only 190whp.

350z all the way. or get a g35

[Ek9Max]

Originally posted by TurboTEGRA
I know the supercharged s2k from speedtech dynoed 230whp. S2k stock is only 190whp.

350z all the way. or get a g35


230whp? That's it? mustang dyno?

[rc2002]

I believe Speedtech does all their dyno on a dynojet - that's probably dynojet numbers. So that'd be even less than 230whp.

[liquidboi69]

I vote for 350z. Better everyday car. S2000's too hyped up

[dudeman]

i say 350z, or a g35 coupe, those have come down in price a lot! Get the luxury, classier styling, same mod-ability!

BTW: Saw a project on the tube a while back, 600hp sr20det swapped into 350z, didntlook easy or cheap, but lighter, and a proven engine (know blowing on boost!)

As for s2000's, just not that interesting! Question: how much frame stiffening are you gonna need to do on that (a roadster) with a supercharger? Or are you gonna be a 3 wheeler after a few weeks of frame twistage

[dudeman]

oh, and i dont really like boxters, not really in the same catagory or comparable to the 350z, s2000
Maybe a seperate thread to compare, boxter, cayman, mr2, lotus, ferrari 328?

Personal opinion of course, completely unfounded in anyway by facts! :nut:

[max_boost]

350Z because it's going to be more useful than a S2000.

[Ek9Max]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
I believe Speedtech does all their dyno on a dynojet - that's probably dynojet numbers. So that'd be even less than 230whp.


Tha tis pretty low. I thoguht they dyno much higher than that....

[Slashin_]

depends on which sc....there some good one for s2k for 8grand i think it was 80 hp gain.

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
I believe Speedtech does all their dyno on a dynojet - that's probably dynojet numbers. So that'd be even less than 230whp.

Wow, 190HP to >230 Hp AFTER an expensive supercharger kit? No thanks.

Mark

[Aleks]

4psi pully = roughly 40whp gain. That is no different than any other 4cyl out there :dunno:

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by Aleks
4psi pully = roughly 40whp gain. That is no different than any other 4cyl out there :dunno:

Yup, your probably right, but for 40 whp I think $10,000 or whatever it would cost you to do it properly would be a pretty big waste of money IMO. A turbo could give way more but then you get lag because the motor is pretty small. I'm sure the 40whp is worth it to some people, but those people must really love the s2000 as 10 grand could give you 200+ more hp in other cars.

Mark

[vietdood]

isn't the s2000 motor running at around 11.1-11.7 piston compression? keep in mind that most boosted cars have compressions around 8.0-9.0:1 and run at 7psi stock. they probably dyno'd at 4psi to play it safe rather then having the engine blow... 40whp does seem logical since it is a 2 litre at 4psi.

[Aleks]

HAHa i was just guessing the 4psi thing. I know they make pullies that small so that might be the case.

[Ek9Max]

I think both vortec and comptech blower kits are 5+ psi.

And usually dyno around 300whp on a dynojet.

[n1zm0]

honda reliability, but s/c it defeats that purpose.. handlings a definite +1 from what i remember when i drove one.

if i were you i'd get the 350, wait for HKS's TT kit to get to North America

:dunno:

[Ek9Max]

Originally posted by n1zm0
honda reliability, but s/c it defeats that purpose.. handlings a definite +1 from what i remember when i drove one.

if i were you i'd get the 350, wait for HKS's TT kit to get to North America

:dunno:

You'd think that reliabilty goes down. I have heard that the comptech blower with stock pulley is great, and is reliable.

It's when you run larger boost than 5 psi it gets alittle crazy.

That and I heard adding a supercharger takes the cars handling away.... throws the balance off.

That's ok, I'll still get the SC.

[Sunburst_Spec_V]

I like the Z the handling, toque, power and looks do it for me. I am sure the S2000 is a really nice car too.

[SilverStreak]

One is a scapel and one is a butcher knife. I'll take the scapel. personal taste and driving preferences.

[JordanEG6]

Originally posted by glennc
s2000 handling is on another level compared to 350Z's. You could easily get 350 WHP out of an s2k with 3000 dollars in mods.

i love the hondas and the s2k, but it takes more than 3 grand to make 350 whp, especially from a torqueless vehicle...i can justify what ive said because i have driven one of those and a g35, which is basically a Z with a longer wheelbase. . that being said, your money is worth it if you buy the 350Z, more power, its nicer and also has a wide array of after market parts.

JDM AE86 said it best "you can sprinkle powered suger on a piece of shit, but its still an s2000" :rofl: :rofl:

i love them tho, but i'd buy a Z over that any day.

[EK 2.0]

rolling in my 2.0 with my ragtop down so my hair can blow...


it's all stooky...

[Stoppie]

well do you want to drive it year round? because i think the s2k doesnt have any traction control, etc. and the i know the 350 does.

Don't get a boxter... i'm quite the porsche fanboy, and even i hate boxters.

[SilverStreak]

[
I drive mine all year and don't need any stinkin' traction control.
Although they came out with TC and Stability control for the 06' you don't need it, the 50/50 balance makes it fun to drive in the winter.


QUOTE]Originally posted by Stoppie
well do you want to drive it year round? because i think the s2k doesnt have any traction control, etc. and the i know the 350 does.

Don't get a boxter... i'm quite the porsche fanboy, and even i hate boxters. [/QUOTE]

[rc2002]

Originally posted by SilverStreak
I drive mine all year and don't need any stinkin' traction control.
Although they came out with TC and Stability control for the 06' you don't need it, the 50/50 balance makes it fun to drive in the winter.


Haha, the danger of not having traction control is offset by the lack of torque.

After driving with VSA in the winter, I would never go back. I avoided quite a few accidents last winter because of VSA.

[xviper]

Originally posted by richardchan2002


Haha, the danger of not having traction control is offset by the lack of torque.

After driving with VSA in the winter, I would never go back. I avoided quite a few accidents last winter because of VSA.
You don't have any real world experience with an S2000, do you? :rolleyes:
I have a Vortech supercharged S2000 with 4.44 FD gears. I drive mine all year round and I especially enjoy it in the winter. The worst the weather, the better I like it.
Maybe you're just ACCIDENT PRONE? Those of us who know how to drive in winter, don't need VSA. Our gas pedals have "mind" control.

[rc2002]

I'll admit it, I probably fall into the bad driver category. I've had lots of close calls - but still I like having the security of having something there to fall back on when I screw up.

[xviper]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
I'll admit it, I probably fall into the bad driver category. I've had lots of close calls - but still I like having the security of having something there to fall back on when I screw up.
Of course, that is your right and prerogative to insist on having VSA on any car you own. For people like yourself, this becomes a tool and a driving aid. I'm just saying don't assign a label of "danger" to a car for not having VSA. The danger comes from the ability and "misfortune" of those who drive them.
I used to drive a Vette ZR-1 through the winter. No VSA of any kind and you can't say that car had no torque. I would have driven my Viper all winter except for the fact that noone made snow tires that big.

[syeve]

Originally posted by xviper

For people like yourself, this becomes a tool and a driving aid.

Just like winter tires?


I have owned 4 honda/acura's and was deciding between these two cars.

Drove both, fell in love with the 350. I had a heavy bias towards the s2k when I started looking but after driving both, the 350 for me was the better car.

Like everyone SHOULD be saying - drive both, YOU will know which one YOU like better.

[munna1]

very hard desision to make there I realy like both cars S2000 I think

[Xtrema]

Z. S2k is only good @ track. It's just another Civic in city.

The lack of torque prompted Honda to add .2L in dispacement.

[blue Zed]

I think you should test drive both there more then just hearing their names.
you might not like one thing on one car or the other just think what you can live with 5 years before selling it.

[Ek9Max]

I was thinking about both. But I decided on an s2000!


I didn't drive the 350z though.....

[carzcraz]

I chose between an RX-8, Integra Type R, 350z and the S2000.

Went with the S2000 and have not regretted a day of owning it

:thumbsup:

[SilverStreak]

I've driven both and the 350Z doesn't have the same level of driving feel. The clutch and shifter and steering didn't feel up the the S2000 level. The low grunt was good but make the S2000's engine rev and you get the same result, still a drivers race in the end so it will come down to driving preferences.

[blue Zed]

with the s2000 i did not like the first gear. felt powerless and waiting to 9000 rpm to get any fun is not practical in city driving.
the 350z has a 3300 lbs weight that i did not like,compared to other cars with more power.
at the end i picked the Z. The torque is usable at any rpm and the extra lobe on the cam kicks in at 4000 rpms which sends you back in your
seats.

[SilverStreak]

Originally posted by blue Zed
with the s2000 i did not like the first gear. felt powerless and waiting to 9000 rpm to get any fun is not practical in city driving.
the 350z has a 3300 lbs weight that i did not like,compared to other cars with more power.
at the end i picked the Z. The torque is usable at any rpm and the extra lobe on the cam kicks in at 4000 rpms which sends you back in your
seats.

You don't need 9000rpm to get what you want. Things start to go just fine starting 4000, after 6000-9000 tthen it is another kick in the pants with a crotch rocket engine note.

If anyone wants to improve further the first two gears on an S, get some 4.44 or 4.77 final drive gear and you'll spank stock S2000s pretty easy. The killer combo would be an AP1 with 4.44 final drive match with an AP2 transmission. When talking about tq. people should understand gearing as well rather than listen to generalizations.


I would agree that the weight of the Z is a big hinderance, the Z cvonvertible is even worse at 3500lbs or so.

[rc2002]

Such a large final drive would have you revving at 4000rpm on the highway. Definitely not something you want to do for a daily driver.

You can argue for the S2000 all you want, but in the end Honda concedes some points and Nissan concedes some. There's a world of difference between Nissan and Honda. Try both of them and you'll know. Nissan is a torque factory, Honda is a screamer. That's all there is to it. 4000rpm on the F20C would probably be equivalent to 1500rpm on the VQ35.

Arguing is pointless. Test drive the cars and see. These types of threads should be banned. :closed:

[Ek9Max]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
Such a large final drive would have you revving at 4000rpm on the highway. Definitely not something you want to do for a daily driver.

You can argue for the S2000 all you want, but in the end Honda concedes some points and Nissan concedes some. There's a world of difference between Nissan and Honda. Try both of them and you'll know. Nissan is a torque factory, Honda is a screamer. That's all there is to it. 4000rpm on the F20C would probably be equivalent to 1500rpm on the VQ35.

Arguing is pointless. Test drive the cars and see. These types of threads should be banned. :closed:


I think I saw something before where a stock s2000 revs at about 3800 doing 120km/hr and doing gears makes it 4200....

So not a huge difference on teh highway.... However I've seen vids of the gears, and the speed difference it's pretty big in a drag race type scenario.

[iceburns288]

^Jesus! At 120 I'm doing 2700 and I think that's a ton! I wish I had an overdrive gear that put me at 1500rpm:(

[Ek9Max]

yea already it rev's high. Mayb eI should figure it out for sure. maybe it was higher km/h I'm not sure.


I just remember the 3800 to 4200 difference. I Forget what speed.

[SilverStreak]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
Such a large final drive would have you revving at 4000rpm on the highway. Definitely not something you want to do for a daily driver.

You can argue for the S2000 all you want, but in the end Honda concedes some points and Nissan concedes some. There's a world of difference between Nissan and Honda. Try both of them and you'll know. Nissan is a torque factory, Honda is a screamer. That's all there is to it. 4000rpm on the F20C would probably be equivalent to 1500rpm on the VQ35.

Arguing is pointless. Test drive the cars and see. These types of threads should be banned. :closed:

Why wouldn't gears be good for DD? If you are in the city most of the time why not? Or are people too lazy to shift up?

For the highway, that is why I say matched with an AP2 tranny would be perfect since gear 5 and 6 are taller so you will turn less rpm.

These generalizations that I see on here all the time only spread misinformation for people that don't know the inner workings.

BTW: I have not problem turning 4500rpm on the highway all day long. The engine is built for it and with oil analysis shows very little wear.

So yes ban these types of thread before more misinformation is spread. Drive the cars you want to consider and leave it at that.

[xviper]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
Such a large final drive would have you revving at 4000rpm on the highway. Definitely not something you want to do for a daily driver.

Arguing is pointless. Test drive the cars and see. These types of threads should be banned. :closed:
By your screen name, I won't rag on a fellow "countryman" too badly, however, this view (and some of the others you have displayed in this thread) is outdated and possibly based on a lack of knowledge of modern day engine mechanics.
An S2000 is designed to rev high as a natural way of things. It has Fiber Re-inforced Metal (read: Carbon Fiber) cylinder liners to withstand such high piston speeds. For it to run at 4000 rpm or even 5000 rpm all day long, every day, is not a stupendous feat. Afterall, it is running at only about 1/2 of it's redline limit.
Would you think it strange for an engine to run all day long at 2500 rpm when its designed redline was 5000 rpm? I think not. Everything is relative.
It may not be something "you" would want to do, but it makes no difference to an S2000 engine. Those who own them, do it all the time. Don't allow your knowledge and experience of other cars mislead you into making bad assumptions or statements about a car you seem to know very little about.

As for threads like this, you are right. They are pointless except to bring out statements by those who know little to nothing about the subject upon which they expound. What they "think" and what they've "heard" is a far cry from what is fact.

[xviper]

Originally posted by TurboTEGRA
I know the supercharged s2k from speedtech dynoed 230whp. S2k stock is only 190whp.

350z all the way. or get a g35
Oh Wow! I know of an elephant that got screwed by a rhinoceros but elephino what came out. :banghead:

So, you're going to base one unsubstantiated example of an unknown supercharger to make the ascertion that all S2000s make 230 whp from a blower? What's really cool, is that you got a couple of other guys buying into it. Keep up the good work.

A properly installed Comptech or Vortech aftercooled kit for an S2000 has been proven repeatedly to dyno between 280 to 310 whp right out of the box. Tuned, with AEM EMS and bigger injectors, they can punch out 350 whp and be perfectly reliable daily drivers.
I personally have ridden in a Vortech S2000 dynoed at 450 whp (from SoCal) that the guy has had for some years now and he drives it daily. Oh, that's with stock internals and an Alanis head.
I've been at the Comptech factory in Sacramento when a friend's S2000 dynoed at 280 whp on an otherwise stock car. I've driven it and with my 4.44 FD gears, mine is much stronger.
230 whp? What did the guy have in it? A Turbonator with a Black and Decker leaf blower?:rolleyes:

[rc2002]

Originally posted by xviper

By your screen name, I won't rag on a fellow "countryman" too badly, however, this view (and some of the others you have displayed in this thread) is outdated and possibly based on a lack of knowledge of modern day engine mechanics.
An S2000 is designed to rev high as a natural way of things. It has Fiber Re-inforced Metal (read: Carbon Fiber) cylinder liners to withstand such high piston speeds. For it to run at 4000 rpm or even 5000 rpm all day long, every day, is not a stupendous feat. Afterall, it is running at only about 1/2 of it's redline limit.
Would you think it strange for an engine to run all day long at 2500 rpm when its designed redline was 5000 rpm? I think not. Everything is relative.
It may not be something "you" would want to do, but it makes no difference to an S2000 engine. Those who own them, do it all the time. Don't allow your knowledge and experience of other cars mislead you into making bad assumptions or statements about a car you seem to know very little about.

As for threads like this, you are right. They are pointless except to bring out statements by those who know little to nothing about the subject upon which they expound. What they "think" and what they've "heard" is a far cry from what is fact.

Thanks :rolleyes: Did you even read what I posted? I never said that running a honda engine at 4000rpm or 5000rpm was harmful to the engine in anyway. I just said that's the outcome of changing the final drive ratio.

When I had the type-r engine in my CRX with the 4.4 final drive, I was revving at 4500rpm at 120km/h and it was fine. And the car hadn't even started to make any torque yet. The powerband was between 6500 and 9500. The car loved to rev, but wouldn't go anywhere unless you revved it to redline.

[SilverStreak]

"Such a large final drive would have you revving at 4000rpm on the highway. Definitely not something you want to do for a daily driver."

So why don't you explain why it wouldn't be good for daily driving if you're not suggesting that it isn't bad for the engine?





Originally posted by richardchan2002


Did you even read what I posted? I never said that running a honda engine at 4000rpm or 5000rpm was harmful to the engine in anyway. I just said that's the outcome of changing the final drive ratio.

When I had the type-r engine in my CRX with the 4.4 final drive, I was revving at 4500rpm at 120km/h and it was fine. And the car hadn't even started to make any torque yet. The powerband was between 6500 and 9500. The car was made to rev, I revved it to redline on a regular basis to make it go anywhere.

[rc2002]

It was annoying. The noise level was way different between 4500 and even 3500 rpm. Gas mileage was the pits revving so high at such a low speed. I noticed a huge change in gas mileage by just driving a bit slower on the highway.

[SilverStreak]

Did you have a 5sp matched with the Type R engine?
If it was a 6sp then it isn't a big deal to just shift up.

Did you also run a loud exhaust? :D


Originally posted by richardchan2002
It was annoying. The noise level was way different between 4500 and even 3500 rpm. Gas mileage was the pits revving so high at such a low speed. I noticed a huge change in gas mileage by just driving a bit slower on the highway.

[xviper]

Originally posted by richardchan2002


Thanks :rolleyes: Did you even read what I posted? I never said that running a honda engine at 4000rpm or 5000rpm was harmful to the engine in anyway. I just said that's the outcome of changing the final drive ratio.
Yes, I read every word you posted. In fact, Silverstreak quoted it again. Would you like me to quote it "again"?


Definitely not something you want to do for a daily driver.
Perhaps you should have said, "Definitely not something I want to do for a daily driver." Because this would be a function of "YOU", not necessarily anyone else or of the car itself.
FYI, When I had stock gearing, I was able to get 39.9 mpg hiway with the S2000. After the 4.44s and supercharger, my mileage went down to 35.9 mpg. I can live with it.
Oh, and torque was NEVER an issue. I know how and when to downshift when I need to get up and go.

I'm pretty much done with this thread. There are so many pre-conceived dumb ideas about S2000s here and so little time to set them straight. It's not my problem.
http://smiley.smileycentral.com/download/talking_preview.jhtml?i=F/0/240&partner=ZSzeb075_ZNxdm799IGCA

[blue Zed]

Originally posted by SilverStreak


So yes ban these types of thread before more misinformation is spread. Drive the cars you want to consider and leave it at that.

I don't think so,i appreciate your opinion....with a grain of salt .thats what these boards are all about if you know the information is wrong say somthing so that right information is out there.
My post earlier was a personal experience and should be also taken with a grain of salt. my taste may not be the same as yours.
The topic was"s2000 or 350z"and was open to any opinions and i believe thats what the original poster wanted.

[iceburns288]

I would think the 4000rpm cruise would be more of a noise issue than a reliability issue, which it might be, who knows?:dunno: Elise owners are also pretty annoyed with the cruising sound of their Toyota 4-cyls with short gears, more than a few keep earplugs in their car for highway trips. Of course, an S2000 has more deadening than an Elise.

Richard's point is that it's annoying to have to take a car past 6000rpm to really get anywhere. My car as it is now has more than 300lb-ft of torque starting at 2200rpm and going to 5000rpm. I can hit the gas and get up and go from almost any speed in any gear. It's really quite fantastic.:)

[heavyD]

Originally posted by xviper

By your screen name, I won't rag on a fellow "countryman" too badly

Aren't we all Canadian with the exception of a couple of Americans on this site?:dunno:

[iceburns288]

I think he's saying something about the Chan family name:dunno:

I posted above and then when the page loaded to view it you had already posted. Weird.

[rc2002]

Originally posted by SilverStreak
Did you have a 5sp matched with the Type R engine?
If it was a 6sp then it isn't a big deal to just shift up.

Did you also run a loud exhaust? :D



It was a 5spd and I had a good sized resonator plus a catalytic converter. The exhaust wasn't that loud, but even in a stock car there'll be more vibration and more noise as rpm climbs.



Originally posted by xviper

Perhaps you should have said, "Definitely not something I want to do for a daily driver." Because this would be a function of "YOU", not necessarily anyone else or of the car itself.
FYI, When I had stock gearing, I was able to get 39.9 mpg hiway with the S2000. After the 4.44s and supercharger, my mileage went down to 35.9 mpg. I can live with it.
Oh, and torque was NEVER an issue. I know how and when to downshift when I need to get up and go.

Like blue_Zed said, this is a forum and it's inherent that any posts are to be taken as opinions and nothing more. I'll reword it: For MY daily driver I would want it quiet and comfortable with the best ride quality possible. Any additonal vibration or noise wouldn't sit well with me. Plus at these gas prices, I'd want to squeeze every last mile out of my car.




Originally posted by iceburns288

Richard's point is that it's annoying to have to take a car past 6000rpm to really get anywhere. My car as it is now has more than 300lb-ft of torque starting at 2200rpm and going to 5000rpm. I can hit the gas and get up and go from almost any speed in any gear. It's really quite fantastic.:)

Exactly. My point from the get-go was that you can mash the throttle in any gear and go. You don't have to downshift in a 350Z. But at the same time, you give up the high end that you get with an S2000. So it's more of a luxurious feel than a sporty feel.






Don't get me wrong - even after all this arguing I'm an S2000 fan too, I was looking at buying an S2000 for the longest time, and I'm still tempted to buy one.

[teknical]

350z, better choice over the S2k and the G35c. The G35c has a slightly wider wheel base, but its a boat! I'd suggest the 350z, but think about a supercharger kit as well before jumping into the TT kit. The Stillen S/C kit will still put out quiet a bit of hp (probably around 375-400bhp) on a stock 350z. But it would be your choice, I know if I had a 350z I'd definately go with the Twin setup, but some people perfer a supercharger

[blue Zed]

Originally posted by richardchan2002







Don't get me wrong - even after all this arguing I'm an S2000 fan too, I was looking at buying an S2000 for the longest time, and I'm still tempted to buy one.

same here it's definitely a different beast(to me anyways) from the Z.

[sl888]

Originally posted by richardchan2002
It was annoying.
What you said reminds me of something I read on s2ki.com. It was about a guy who sold his s2000 because everytime he revved his car over 6000rpm it sounded like it was gonna blow up. :D

[aram1000]

It depends on what you want, I have driven an S2K before, and this one was turbo charged, and its fast, and was a blast to drive, but i mean it is loud and you have to rev it rather high, the S2K i found did not have much room, but I am not a big guy so for me its not a big deal, after driving the S2K i would definately consider getting one, tho i would like to drive a stock one too. As for the 350 Z, I have never driven it, so i don't know much about the car, on paper it looks to be a better daily driver, but then again i am not sure, your best bet is to test drive both and see which you like better, both nissan and honda have good reputations, so i am sure you will be happy with either one, good luck on the search

[Ferrari owner]

You guys with your concerns with low torque and high engine RPM's: you haven't ridden a crotch-rocket motorcycle have you??