Originally posted by 98CoupeV6
The S2000, in 2000, was a sports car that was faster around a track than anything this side of a 911 Carerra and had the reliability of a Civic. It was the first RWD Honda convertible since the Honda S800. Drive one and you'll see why people paid $10,000 over MSRP. Back when it came out, the only competition was a $28,000 weaksauce Z3 with a 4 banger or a $45,000 Porsche Boxster. Most people that can afford the S2000 can afford a winter rat. But this is a topic for another day, the topic at hand is the 2003 Accord.
The Accord is nothing close to an S2000. The Accord is a FWD midsize car built with a family of 4 in mind...please do not compare apples and watermelons. I'm kind of questioning why the hell you would want to compare the S2000 and Accord in the first place 
dude youre the one that brought the S2000 into this. i've driven an S2000 and i wasnt too impressed. it feels too heavy going through turns. i wouldnt spend $30k for one. maybe for $20k i would. i'll take my Accord anyway cause i can fit 4 people in it and still beat the S2000 in a race