Another S2000 thread, can you help please? Elise owner......
Discussion
I'm currently thinking of getting an S2000. Maybe a 1 or 2 year old example. I particularly like the new dark blue metallic colour and the revised wheels.
However, I was also looking at Nissan 350Z's, but I'm unsure as it's a bit lardy compared to what I'm use too driving. I currently have a Series 2 Lotus Elise 111s (with optional hard top) and before that a Series 1 Elise 111s. Six years of Elise ownership in total, and I think I fancy a change.
I test drove an S2000 back in 2003 (before getting the S2 Elise) and became frustrated with the lack of torque low down in the rev range. But I understand that in recent times a revised ecu has been introduced? Has this helped? Is there really a 'pick up' issue?
Being a Top Gear fan, I'm well aware of Mr Clarkson's views on the car and the JD power survey results. But I'm use to the Elise accelerating when I put my foot down in most of the gears, regardless of speed. This is obviously helped by weighing some 400KG's less than the S2000.
I realise they'll be some biased veiws in this particular forum, but hat's it like to live with? Do you have to rag it to get anything from it?
What sports zaust and induction kit would I be needing (The Elise has an Induction kit, Sports Zaust with de-cat)
I feel another test drive coming on.
However, I was also looking at Nissan 350Z's, but I'm unsure as it's a bit lardy compared to what I'm use too driving. I currently have a Series 2 Lotus Elise 111s (with optional hard top) and before that a Series 1 Elise 111s. Six years of Elise ownership in total, and I think I fancy a change.
I test drove an S2000 back in 2003 (before getting the S2 Elise) and became frustrated with the lack of torque low down in the rev range. But I understand that in recent times a revised ecu has been introduced? Has this helped? Is there really a 'pick up' issue?
Being a Top Gear fan, I'm well aware of Mr Clarkson's views on the car and the JD power survey results. But I'm use to the Elise accelerating when I put my foot down in most of the gears, regardless of speed. This is obviously helped by weighing some 400KG's less than the S2000.
I realise they'll be some biased veiws in this particular forum, but hat's it like to live with? Do you have to rag it to get anything from it?
What sports zaust and induction kit would I be needing (The Elise has an Induction kit, Sports Zaust with de-cat)
I feel another test drive coming on.
Yes, we screw the the TopGear results so that the car finishes top every year. 
This year, we decided to go one better
and enlisted the help of our kin at www.bluerinse.com and managed to get the Honda Jazz up to number two! 
The dark blue (Royal Navy Blue Pearl) was introduced in 2004. You'll have to drive one to see if you like it but I'm more than happy with mine.
This year, we decided to go one better
and enlisted the help of our kin at www.bluerinse.com and managed to get the Honda Jazz up to number two! The dark blue (Royal Navy Blue Pearl) was introduced in 2004. You'll have to drive one to see if you like it but I'm more than happy with mine.
Check out www.s2ki.co.uk the UK section of S2K International - plenty of stuff about modding the car there. Also www.s2kuk.com - the UK S2000 Owners club membership gets you discounts at many suppliers of kit 
I owned an S2000 for nearly 4 years and bought a 350Z 5 weeks ago. They are very different cars and are only really comparable purely on performance per £.
Good Points:
S2000:
Performance. Everyone knows what the engine is like. You need to change the way you drive to get the best from it.
Handling. Great in the dry. Bridgestone tyres are poor in wet and cold conditions though.
Gear change. Probably the best in the world, ever.
Build quality.
Costs (apart from insurance).
Its a drop top.
350Z
Torque - loads of it. Stomps all over an S2000 unless its right in the sweetspot on the power band.
Handling on smooth roads. More predictable than the S2000 (does not like broken surfaces though).
It growls enought to turn heads.
Costs. Seems more car for the money (even in GT guise).
ASC - you need it in the wet with all that torque. Not intrusive and allows tail slides before sorting things out nicely.
Larger and more comfortable cabin the s2000.
Bad Points:
S2000:
Space - cabin is tight, although at 6'2" and 16 stone I fitted - just. Boot is OK though.
Engine - heard it all before...you either like it or hate it.
Wet weather handling (LSD always felt a little unpredictable). Tyres are poor.
350Z
Weight - 1530 kilos (S2000 is 1260). You can feel it - this is a GT not a sportscar...
Tramlines on poor surfaces.
Paint quality (prone to stone chips).
Nissan dealers.
If I were to drive both again for the first time, I would have the S2000 - its much easier to drive due to lighter steering and a better transmission. Once used to the Nissan though, its a lot more difficult.
I think I would have the Nissan given the choice, but thats because its much easier to drive faster (a lot less frenetic) and I do love the V6 sound.
Have a look at my profile for the S2000's costs.
Good Points:
S2000:
Performance. Everyone knows what the engine is like. You need to change the way you drive to get the best from it.
Handling. Great in the dry. Bridgestone tyres are poor in wet and cold conditions though.
Gear change. Probably the best in the world, ever.
Build quality.
Costs (apart from insurance).
Its a drop top.
350Z
Torque - loads of it. Stomps all over an S2000 unless its right in the sweetspot on the power band.
Handling on smooth roads. More predictable than the S2000 (does not like broken surfaces though).
It growls enought to turn heads.
Costs. Seems more car for the money (even in GT guise).
ASC - you need it in the wet with all that torque. Not intrusive and allows tail slides before sorting things out nicely.
Larger and more comfortable cabin the s2000.
Bad Points:
S2000:
Space - cabin is tight, although at 6'2" and 16 stone I fitted - just. Boot is OK though.
Engine - heard it all before...you either like it or hate it.
Wet weather handling (LSD always felt a little unpredictable). Tyres are poor.
350Z
Weight - 1530 kilos (S2000 is 1260). You can feel it - this is a GT not a sportscar...
Tramlines on poor surfaces.
Paint quality (prone to stone chips).
Nissan dealers.
If I were to drive both again for the first time, I would have the S2000 - its much easier to drive due to lighter steering and a better transmission. Once used to the Nissan though, its a lot more difficult.
I think I would have the Nissan given the choice, but thats because its much easier to drive faster (a lot less frenetic) and I do love the V6 sound.
Have a look at my profile for the S2000's costs.
Edited by douglasr on Sunday 11th March 11:31
I've just come from a VX220 to a MY05 S2000.
I've only had it for 3days lol and I'm loving it!!
That banshee wail when it comes on cam at 6,000rpm and just keeps going to 9,000rpm.
Handling is pretty good, I was expecting it to be a little vague after the VX, but it's all good so far.
I've only had it for 3days lol and I'm loving it!!
That banshee wail when it comes on cam at 6,000rpm and just keeps going to 9,000rpm.
Handling is pretty good, I was expecting it to be a little vague after the VX, but it's all good so far.
Douglas' summary is pretty good.
Although I would suggest that an '04-onwards model (with RE050's) doesn't have any of the wet-weather issues that the '03 and before have on their OEM S02's. I've got an '03 and the S02's were at their worst when cold and with standing water - when warmed up on a 'damp' day they were OK. But I swapped to T1R's for a bit more all-round comfort, although these are a compromise as they're not as precise as the S02's. So I'm toying with getting a set of 04 rims...
I really like my S2000, although it's nowhere near as tactile and delicate a car as the Elise (but the Z is worse still). My two gripes vs a 'pure' car like the Elise are:-
- Steering feel. Had geo adjusted (adj. castor!!!) which helped, and have just fitted cross-braces to 3 of the 4 locations (left the boot unmolested) and that helped even more, but it's still not going to win awards. Found 350Z steering feel as bad as an unmodified S2000 though...
- Mid-range. Engine is very like the 111R engine - it's adequate (pre-VTEC will keep up with the diesel execs on the Motorway), then it goes absolutely bonkers. But if you like fluid B-road driving, it'd be nice to have a smoother progression through the mid-range, as it's hard to drive smoothly at 7,000-9,000rpm!
If you need the practicality, build quality/reliability, or 'luxury' (elec windows and hood, aircon, r/c/l), then get one. If you don't, then stick to an Elise.
Although I would suggest that an '04-onwards model (with RE050's) doesn't have any of the wet-weather issues that the '03 and before have on their OEM S02's. I've got an '03 and the S02's were at their worst when cold and with standing water - when warmed up on a 'damp' day they were OK. But I swapped to T1R's for a bit more all-round comfort, although these are a compromise as they're not as precise as the S02's. So I'm toying with getting a set of 04 rims...
I really like my S2000, although it's nowhere near as tactile and delicate a car as the Elise (but the Z is worse still). My two gripes vs a 'pure' car like the Elise are:-
- Steering feel. Had geo adjusted (adj. castor!!!) which helped, and have just fitted cross-braces to 3 of the 4 locations (left the boot unmolested) and that helped even more, but it's still not going to win awards. Found 350Z steering feel as bad as an unmodified S2000 though...
- Mid-range. Engine is very like the 111R engine - it's adequate (pre-VTEC will keep up with the diesel execs on the Motorway), then it goes absolutely bonkers. But if you like fluid B-road driving, it'd be nice to have a smoother progression through the mid-range, as it's hard to drive smoothly at 7,000-9,000rpm!
If you need the practicality, build quality/reliability, or 'luxury' (elec windows and hood, aircon, r/c/l), then get one. If you don't, then stick to an Elise.
I had a similar choice - there was also the Boxster S in the equasion - but the lack of any real performance gain I couldn't justify the extra outlay.
I just found that the S2000 was sharper in every aspect. I wanted a sports car and the Z isn't at all. Still a good motor though. I also love the S2000's engine - that alone is worth owning one for a while. I doubt outside of supercar territory there will be another mass market engine like it.
I just found that the S2000 was sharper in every aspect. I wanted a sports car and the Z isn't at all. Still a good motor though. I also love the S2000's engine - that alone is worth owning one for a while. I doubt outside of supercar territory there will be another mass market engine like it.
My first car was an S2000 which I kept for fifteen months. Fantastic car but you have to treat it right - keep the revs in the vtec zone (about 5500rpm and above) and it's great, below that and it's pretty pedestrian. Build quality is immaculate. Be very careful when purchasing to check for crash damage that has not been repaired to dealer standards - pretty much every S2000 ends up in a ditch, hedge or worse at some point...
Enjoy!
Enjoy!
gemini said:
Thats what I thought - then coming home on the A59 from Harrogate today - theres one on the verge with mud up the side and a recovery vehicle attending!
And I saw a VW Polo upside down up a verge on the side of a M-way last year...but that doesn't make VW Polo's dangerous, it just says that either that car had a blowout or the driver was a complete twit.
If the S2000 was a dangerous car don't you think something would have been said/done by now?!? Quit peddling the stereotypes!
havoc said:
gemini said:
Thats what I thought - then coming home on the A59 from Harrogate today - theres one on the verge with mud up the side and a recovery vehicle attending!
And I saw a VW Polo upside down up a verge on the side of a M-way last year...but that doesn't make VW Polo's dangerous, it just says that either that car had a blowout or the driver was a complete twit.
If the S2000 was a dangerous car don't you think something would have been said/done by now?!? Quit peddling the stereotypes!
No no no!!
ITS A MAJOR KILLER DO NOT BUY ONE!!!!
The only reason I have one is because I have arms and legs like Arnie to control it and I am a hero. Did I tell you how large my **** is too?
(shhhhh keep the secret and less people will buy them!! ;-)
In response, I did not say that the S2000 is a dangerous car - just that most of them end up in a ditch or a hedge. Why? Because it's very powerful and light and the point at which physics takes over from talent is quite easy to reach for most drivers. As far as I know it's not intrinsically unsafe in some kind of sense of the way the car is designed or engineered, it's just that the drivers tend to be a bit too eager to drive fast.
I would also say that the standard tyres on the 55 plate models ( I cannot remember what they were) would never really get hot and while fine once warmed up they could be a bit tricky when cold. But overall the car is fantastic - I liked it enough to buy one and after I sold it I picked up a 992 C2S. A different kind of car but one where the physics talent equation is more safely tipped in favour of the driver by the amazing chassis and driver aids.
I would also say that the standard tyres on the 55 plate models ( I cannot remember what they were) would never really get hot and while fine once warmed up they could be a bit tricky when cold. But overall the car is fantastic - I liked it enough to buy one and after I sold it I picked up a 992 C2S. A different kind of car but one where the physics talent equation is more safely tipped in favour of the driver by the amazing chassis and driver aids.
johng1 said:
...992 C2S. A different kind of car but one where the physics talent equation is more safely tipped in favour of the driver by the amazing chassis and driver aids.
Sorry, but some crap in the first part of your post re: S2000. It's got a very well set-up chassis, it just happens to be higher than some of the competition in accident stats because:-
1) It's cheaper or more powerful, depending on which car you look at. Therefore it's more like to be a 'my first rwd sports car' than the Z4/Boxster/SLK, and it can break traction a lot easier than the MX5/MR2.
2) It has no traction control.
...the two combined mean the driver needs to pay attention and drive appropriately. I'd suggest driver error (overconfidence / misreading road / rough inputs) are responsible for most of the accidents.
Oh...and I assume you mean 993? And can I emphasise the 'driver aids' part of that sentence - turn the TC and whatever other elec-gubbins was fitted off and your average driver would be backwards in a hedge quicker in the 993 than in an S2000, due to simple physics. Why people assume that Porsches are the be-all and end-all I don't know...
Sorry, but some crap in the first part of your post re: S2000. It's got a very well set-up chassis, it just happens to be higher than some of the competition in accident stats because:-
1) It's cheaper or more powerful, depending on which car you look at. Therefore it's more like to be a 'my first rwd sports car' than the Z4/Boxster/SLK, and it can break traction a lot easier than the MX5/MR2.
2) It has no traction control.
...the two combined mean the driver needs to pay attention and drive appropriately. I'd suggest driver error (overconfidence / misreading road / rough inputs) are responsible for most of the accidents.
Oh...and I assume you mean 993? And can I emphasise the 'driver aids' part of that sentence - turn the TC and whatever other elec-gubbins was fitted off and your average driver would be backwards in a hedge quicker in the 993 than in an S2000, due to simple physics. Why people assume that Porsches are the be-all and end-all I don't know...
I know the S2000 has a well set - up chassis - I drove one for 15 months. I'm not anti-S2000 - I loved it! Your points 1 & 2 are spot on - it has high crash stats as it's "my first RWD sports car" and has no traction control.
No, I don't mean a 993. I have a 997. And I'm not Nigel Mansell - I am not a good enough driver to really push it with the PSM switched off.
I don't assume that a Porsche is the be-all and end-all - I am selling the 997 for a 360 Modena later this year. I just like cars. I loved the S2000 and I've already posted that I'd sell the 997 and buy an S4000 if Honda had the balls to build one.
No need to call an opinion/view "crap", we just differ.
1) It's cheaper or more powerful, depending on which car you look at. Therefore it's more like to be a 'my first rwd sports car' than the Z4/Boxster/SLK, and it can break traction a lot easier than the MX5/MR2.
2) It has no traction control.
...the two combined mean the driver needs to pay attention and drive appropriately. I'd suggest driver error (overconfidence / misreading road / rough inputs) are responsible for most of the accidents.
Oh...and I assume you mean 993? And can I emphasise the 'driver aids' part of that sentence - turn the TC and whatever other elec-gubbins was fitted off and your average driver would be backwards in a hedge quicker in the 993 than in an S2000, due to simple physics. Why people assume that Porsches are the be-all and end-all I don't know...
I know the S2000 has a well set - up chassis - I drove one for 15 months. I'm not anti-S2000 - I loved it! Your points 1 & 2 are spot on - it has high crash stats as it's "my first RWD sports car" and has no traction control.
No, I don't mean a 993. I have a 997. And I'm not Nigel Mansell - I am not a good enough driver to really push it with the PSM switched off.
I don't assume that a Porsche is the be-all and end-all - I am selling the 997 for a 360 Modena later this year. I just like cars. I loved the S2000 and I've already posted that I'd sell the 997 and buy an S4000 if Honda had the balls to build one.
No need to call an opinion/view "crap", we just differ.
Gassing Station | Honda | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff