I picked the S2000 over the 350Z

[dmw16]

Would you have bought an S2000 or a 350Z? I went with the S2000. Assuming they both offer the same warranty and are about the same price. What would you have done and why?

 

[swtethan]

s2000 all the way, more sleek, cool, sexy

 

[Mo0o]

s2k. 350Z is more common nowadays and i dont like the look as much

 

[tfinch2]

S2000 FTW.

Nothing like a 9000 rpm redline.

 

[Ktulu]

Originally posted by: Mo0o
s2k. 350Z is more common nowadays and i dont like the look as much

 

[Trikat]

For a daily driver I jsut might get the 350Z over the S2000.
Tough choice, but in the end it will be the S2000. I can then put it on a track.

 

[Mrvile]

I definately would've done the same.

 

[classy]

350Z for me.

 

[vi edit]

I would have got a used Boxster S.

But you didn't ask that.

 

[mdcrab]

Exactly the same.

 

[Pikachu]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
I would have got a used Boxter S.

But you didn't ask that.

Used FTW!

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

S2000 without a doubt, I like the characteristics of the car much more

 

[mugs]

I've never driven either, don't know their performance specs or how much they cost or how nice the interiors are, so based ENTIRELY on the exterior appearance I'd get the S2000. I don't like the back end of the 350Z.

Edit: But if I was going entirely based on exterior appearance, I'd get a Solstice

 

[BrokenVisage]

S2000 FTW, you have choosen... wisely!

 

[dbk]

stook for moi aussi

 

[InlineFour]

S2000.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Pikachu

Originally posted by: vi_edit
I would have got a used Boxter S.

But you didn't ask that.

Used FTW!

A C6 would work too!

 

[Chrono]

Used MR-S for 11k
Suspension upgrade for 2k
GTS Motorswap with other engine works 5k

 

[sniperruff]

i'd probably get a mustang GT if it has to be a coupe. more practical, drinks regular. for a bit more i'd go with the G35 coupe.

 

[0roo0roo]

s2k too small. i'd go for the 350z

 

[iotone]

s2k baybee

 

[AmdEmAll]

s2000

 

[BatmanNate]

Probably the Z since the torqueless cars aren't very fun to drive.

 

[Descartes]

I bought a Z, so I guess that answers that question. When I was looking I didn't even really consider the S2k. I think they're entirely different cars, and one who likes the Z won't like the S2k and vice versa. To me, the Z is...

1) Sexy. The S2k is cool/"cute" depending on how you look at it. I look at it like I look at a Miata. I like the car, but it never really hits a high point for me aesthetically. The Z does have some odd characteristics though, namely the backend. I don't care for it.
2) Power. Having driven both the Z, the S2k, and others in the same price to power range, the Z gave me the best feeling of power and control. I feel as connected in the Z as I do in E36 and older 3-series. The S2k has a lot of handling advantages though I believe.
3) Coupe. I don't like roadsters. I believe most destroy the aesthetic of a sports car.
4) Heritage. The Z heritage appealed to me to some degree.

The S2k has a lot of advantages too though:

1) Roadster. This is a huge plus for a lot of people obviously, but not me.
2) Honda. Honda delivers a better product than Nissan. I've had 1 Honda and 1 Acura over the past decade, and I loved both.
3) More responsive handling. The Z can sometimes feel bloated. The S2k isn't as tossable as a Miata, but it feels more capable than the Z in this respect. The numbers may disagree, but this was my impression in driving them.
4) Less boy racer than a Z I think. I think the S2k has a slightly more mature presence, but this might just be my impression.

In the end, it came down to how I felt when I looked at the Z and when I sat in it. Both are great cars as far as I'm concerned, and you can't go wrong with a Honda product.

 

[sniperruff]

Originally posted by: Descartes

4) Heritage. The Z heritage appealed to me to some degree.

if anything, the S2000 would be considered to be a throughbred.