Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Honda S2000 vs. Nissan 350Z



  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    so expect an extremely fast Z next year!

    I probably have a different definition than you of "extremely fast". Using 0-60 as the basis (only because that's what everybody quotes, but I prefer 0-100 as the metric) here are my definitions and a few examples I've driven:

    "Extremely Fast": under 3.7 seconds. Porsche 911 Turbo, Ferrari 430.
    "Very Fast": 3.8-4.2 seconds. 911S, Corvette, AMG E63, Ferrari 360.
    "Fast": 4.3-4.7 seconds. M5, M3, 911 (base).
    "Very Quick": 4.8 to 5.2 seconds. 335i, Cayman S, Boxster S.
    "Quick": 5.3 to 5.7 seconds. S2000, 350Z, Z4.

    By my definition, the 350Z might go from "Quick" to "Very Quick" next year, but I will doubt it will make it to "Fast", let only "Very" or "Extremely".

    Please note, thaqt I don't consider acceleration the most important metric of a sports car. Give me an S2000, and I'll have more fun driving it than an E63 - at least after I get one or two drag races out of my system. ;)
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    Oh, the 0-100k means a lot more than 0-60mph. Is that like saying you prefer fags over cigarettes? Don't get me wrong, I am all for finally going to the metric system, but you are just sounding extremely pompous, what with your 100k Porches and Beemers, etc.

    BTW, the 07 350Z would rank in your "very quick" class now, CD just tested a model without limited slip at 5.2 sec, 13.7 in the quarter. Next year with roughly 30 more horses we should see that figure easily slip below 5 sec, which is commendable for a vehicle that rings in at a price below anything you mentioned (maybe getting into your fast cat). And of course I agree accel alone does not make a sporting car. Example all the midsize sedans that are nearly as quick as some sports cars these days. And to those people comparing the Z to a barge in driving precision, how do you explain the 06 Z winning the balls to the wall track competetion in CD last year, beating out the STI, EVO, S2000, RX8, etc. That must have been difficult with a car that had the precision of, what was it, a butter knife or something?
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    I should clarify, these Dunlops are pretty [non-permissible content removed] tires, but for the price they are hard to beat for street use. The sidewalls are a bit weak. Otherwise they have decent grip, even wear and pretty quiet on the road.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Here is the Car and Driver actual test results for the automatic: Read and weep!!!

    Zero to 60 mph: 5.2 sec
    Zero to 100 mph: 14.7 sec
    Zero to 130 mph: 37.4 sec
    Street start, 5-60 mph: 5.9 sec
    Top speed (drag limited): 141 mph NICE!!

    What am I supposed to weep about? According to a road test from your Car and Driver gurus, the 2002 model S2000 I had clocked a 0-60 of 5.4, 0-100 of 13.9 and a top speed of 155 mph.

    Good for Pontiac to gear the Solstice to achieve a 0-60 time of 5.2 seconds, but that's exactly why 0-100 mph, with a couple more gear changes and less dependent upon "launching" is a more relevent test. I'm sure someone as knowledgeable as you knows those C&D guys hold the brake while flooring an automatic transmission. Clearly, after you've mashed your foot to the floor in the slushbox Solstice and done your 0-60 sprint, it's all downhill from there. I think you need to get out the hankies for the tears you'll shed if drag racing is your gig.

    By the way, my 5-passenger 1995 Maxima SE 5-speed with 155,000 miles has a top speed of 142 mph. "NICE"?

    As far as a manual transmission vs. slushbox in a sports car, if you don't get it, you don't get it. Although fedlawman is correct in pointing out that GM's manual transmissions are not exactly the cat's meow.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Oh, the 0-100k means a lot more than 0-60mph.

    I was referring to 0-100 MPH (not KPH). By "metric" I meant standard of measurment, not the metric system. I should have been clearer.
  • dadszdadsz Posts: 14
    Is it me or does TrickTrucks come off like a GM employee or one from their advertising agency? First he successfully hijacked the thread away from the SC vs. Z conversations, then continues with the comparisons to the GM car over and over. Guess he's trying to build brand awareness, but enough already mate... ;)
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    Sorry for attacking you last night, not sure what got into me anyway. However, for a bit of fun take a look at CAR magazine from the UK, and in the back where they have quick rundowns of a lot of cars, take a look at the "Zed" read, where they prefer the Z over a Boxster and that is their recommendation!
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    No worries. I'll check the Car magazine article out if I get a chance. Not sure what their recommendation was based upon, but I also picked an S2000 over a base Boxster on performance and a Boxster S on price back in 2002. The 350Z coupe gives you a lot of performance for a minimum of $10-15k less than the 2007 base Boxster.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,173
    Yeah, I noticed that too. The logic was a bit off as well, but anyways...

    Only thing worth commenting on was this:

    Now add to this the weight difference and what you have is the automatic equipped GXP driver smiling as he whizzes by the S2000.

    Per Edmunds:
    2007 S2000: 2855 lbs
    2007 Solstice GXP: 2976 lbs

    link title

    So no. ;)

    Comaprably, the Lotus Elise comes in at a featherweight 1984 lbs.
  • biancarbiancar Posts: 913
    Dat2, can you post a link?
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    Hey, I looked on their website and I didn't find the giant rundown section. If you stop by one of the big bookstores like Borders, etc, just pick up any issue of CAR magazine, and turn toward the back. They have every new car back there and that is where they say pick the Z over a Boxster any day. It's pretty cool...
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    The C/D track comparo was in one of the issues last fall I believe, they used VIR and said it was the closest thing in the US to a Nuremborge like track. They then sorted out cars into different categories, 30-40k, 40-50k and 50k+ or something, the Z won the 30-40 group and outgunned some of the cars in the 40-50 group running around VIR. It was a very detailed article and a lot of fun, and they said they would benchmark all sports cars with that track run in the future. (although I haven't seen anything else from there again!)
  • acceleratoraccelerator Posts: 136
    I read that article, too. That was a great comparo! :shades:
  • ClairesClaires Chicago areaPosts: 974
    We have an existing discussion for comparing the
    S2000 vs. Sky/Saturn, and we have several discussions about the merits of GM vehicles vs. those of German/Japanese makes in several topics over in News & Views.

    Need help getting around? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    Since we are pasting CD results, thought I would paste this from the 07 350Z test. It should be noted that they had a model w/o limited slip and still posted 0-60 in 5.2. So accel times with a limited slip should be a few ticks better than that!
    1/4 mi: 13.7 @ 104 is nothing to sneeze at!

    PS- habitat1, loved your remark about the '95 Max topend of 142!! That gen of Max is definitely a classic, I also liked the 02-03 model with a 6 spd, even though it weighed a couple hundred pounds more, the vq35 more than made up for it!
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    2008 Honda S2000 CR - Auto Shows

    Honda builds a track toy as a retirement gift to its most revered engineer, and you can buy a copy.
    April 2007

    2008 Honda S2000 CR Video >>>

    What’s your idea of retirement planning? At Car and Driver, our scribblers spend their golden years counting their air miles and grousing about the web interns. If you’re Shigeru Uehara, Honda R&D’s Executive Chief Engineer, you spend your last year on the job building a track-ready special-edition version of the S2000.

    Lots of engineers build track toys, but not many get their cars approved for production. Uehara isn’t just any engineer, though; he’s credited as the father of the Honda S2000 and the Acura NSX and Integra Type R, the trio that convinced a generation of American tuners and enthusiasts that Honda is a legitimate performance car company. Uehara’s legacy is solid, so he doesn’t need to work on the NSX’s successor—he said through an interpreter that he’s leaving that to the next generation. Instead, his final gift to the enthusiast world is the S2000 CR.
    Suspension and steering modifications

    The S2000 CR has the same 237-hp, 2.2-liter engine as other S2000s, but don’t let that fool you into thinking it’s just a dress-up job. The most dramatic changes involve springs and shocks that Honda calls “significantly stiffer.” Although no figures are available, our experience with Uehara’s other creations like the Acura Integra Type R tells us that he knows the meaning of “significant.” Thicker anti-roll bars round out the suspension changes. A quicker steering ratio will allow drivers to avoid shuffling hands in tight corners. A limited slip differential and defeatable electronic stability control carry over from the regular S2000.

    The S2000 CR’s biggest handling gain over the regular S2000 may come from gumball Bridgestone Potenza RE070 tires similar to those used on the former Japanese-market NSX-R. The 215/45R-17 front and 255/40R-17 rear tires have a treadwear rating of 140, which means they’re barely able to be called conventional street tires.
    Front and rear spoilers

    A ludicrously large body kit and a rear cowl fairing behind the seats are claimed to smooth airflow over the S2000 CR. But the most over-the-top aerodynamic modification is the massive rear spoiler. The wing has three distinct horizontal surfaces: the upturned outside sections produce downforce while a flatter center section smoothes airflow over the car. The whole affair is affixed with black supports that look more like a back yard racer’s weekend concoction than factory pieces, but who are we to argue if it works? Honda claims overall downforce on the rear axle at speed, a rare trait for a street car.
    Weight savings and chassis

    Air conditioning and the sound system are jettisoned in the name of weight savings, but you can add them back in as options. The S2000 CR also loses its power folding softtop to shed a few pounds, and in its place it gains a beefy rear strut tower brace with four mounting points. This is said to enhance the already stellar rigidity of the S2000’s shell so it won’t flex when cornering. A removable aluminum hardtop provides shelter from the elements and admission to tracks where open-top cars aren’t allowed. With the top off, the S2000 CR will weigh approximately 2765 pounds, almost 90 pounds less than the regular S2000.
    It’s significantly faster on a track, according to Honda

    The result of these changes is a claimed two-second reduction in the S2000 CR’s lap time around Honda’s Tochigi test track. That’s a huge difference; you could add 50 horsepower to a regular S2000 and you might not see your lap time drop that much.
    Interior modifications

    Every special edition needs to look unique, so the S2000 CR has a bunch of dress up features that distinguish it. The most obvious is the Apex Blue paint, which is a pearlescent bright blue evocative of Audi’s Sprint Blue. Black badges and gunmetal gray five-spoke wheels round out the exterior mods. Abundant yellow stitching on the doors, steering wheel, seats, and shifter (which has shorter throws than the already insanely short ones in the regular S2000) complements yellow woven seat inserts. Faux-suede seat bolsters and door panels replace the leather items on the regular S2000 in the name of grip, and they’ll also broaden the S2000 CR’s appeal to PETA members. Faux carbon fiber trim is a slavishly trendy addition, but we can forgive anything in a car this raw.

    The S2000 CR goes on sale in the fall of 2007 as a 2008 model. The car shown at the New York show isn’t 100 percent production correct, but the body kit, spoiler, and wheels are accurate renditions of what you’ll see in dealers. Pricing isn’t confirmed, but it will certainly be more than the regular S2000’s $35k base price and probably less than $40k. Given the expected production volume of less than 2000 units (no limit was confirmed), Honda will lose money on the deal, a fact that company representatives actually admit. Such corporate honesty is rare, but Honda can afford it. The S2000 CR is a fitting tribute to the man who put “Honda” and “performance” together in the popular lexicon. Let’s hope it’s a harbinger of more great things to come and not a last hurrah.

    Related Content:
    Spied: 2010 Acura NSX
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    Please explain how a LSD makes a car faster in a straight-line.
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    because you get more power to the ground with both wheels spinning at launch, revving quicker into the peak power band. the street start shouldn't make a diff though, hence the quarter is better than the g35 sedan with the same motor and 300 lbs more weight. But with a limited slip the 0-60 should be another couple tenths quicker
  • fedlawmanfedlawman Posts: 3,118
    A LSD does nothing (acts like an open differential) when both wheels are gripping equally (either spinning or gripping). Only when there is a difference in traction between the right and left driven wheels does the LSD transfer torque from one side to the other.

    So, unless you are drag racing with the left wheel on the road and the right wheel on gravel, a LSD will do nothing in straight line acceleration.
  • dat2dat2 Posts: 242
    i thought once a wheel was spinning with an open diff it send more power to the spinning wheel because there is less friction (resistance) at that wheel. that is why you usually only get one stripe on the ground with an open diff.
This discussion has been closed.