S2000 or 350Z
#3
for the money...id say neither...i dunno, both are gorgeous cars. for the money, id say go with a WRX or an EVO. I dunno, maybe it's because im young and stupid, and have a need for speed. Gimme the luxuries when im older. But for now, ill c you at the finish line.
#4
#CustomUserTitle
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: glass case of emotion
Posts: 63,854
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
350 for the same reasons as dubster
i was kinda disappointed by the new S2000. great motor, but the exterior wasn't changed enough for my tastes. after 4 years, i think a car should have more than bumpers replaced.
btw ... orange leather > red leather any day of the week
i was kinda disappointed by the new S2000. great motor, but the exterior wasn't changed enough for my tastes. after 4 years, i think a car should have more than bumpers replaced.
btw ... orange leather > red leather any day of the week
#5
Wannabe yuppie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've actually *driven* both unlike most of the other armchair racers who will post their comments.
In terms of initial impressions, I like the S2000 way more. Sure the Z's Brembos are nice on paper and it's got more grunt but it also has a 400 lb weight disadvantage.
The suspension is much more well sorted on the S2k and it is far more tossable. The shifter is way better, as is the pedal layout. It is quite possibly the easiest car to rev match and heel-toe I have ever driven. The Z is a bit more clumsy in this respect. Steering is no contest, S2k is hands-down better.
However the Z does ride better and the cockpit is less cramped than the S2k. Visibility and sight lines are still better on the S2k though. As a daily driver the Z is more liveable but in terms of precision and finesse the S2k kills it.
I could be happy with either but I go more for the lightweight tossable cars so I'd pick the S2k.
Oh and as for non-Track model Z's, don't bother. The stock wheels are so heavy they screw up the damping of the shocks and the brakes are pathetic. Blah.
That only comes on the bloated-ass Touring model with the crappy non Brembo brakes.
In terms of initial impressions, I like the S2000 way more. Sure the Z's Brembos are nice on paper and it's got more grunt but it also has a 400 lb weight disadvantage.
The suspension is much more well sorted on the S2k and it is far more tossable. The shifter is way better, as is the pedal layout. It is quite possibly the easiest car to rev match and heel-toe I have ever driven. The Z is a bit more clumsy in this respect. Steering is no contest, S2k is hands-down better.
However the Z does ride better and the cockpit is less cramped than the S2k. Visibility and sight lines are still better on the S2k though. As a daily driver the Z is more liveable but in terms of precision and finesse the S2k kills it.
I could be happy with either but I go more for the lightweight tossable cars so I'd pick the S2k.
Oh and as for non-Track model Z's, don't bother. The stock wheels are so heavy they screw up the damping of the shocks and the brakes are pathetic. Blah.
Originally posted by Eklypse39
btw ... orange leather > red leather any day of the week
btw ... orange leather > red leather any day of the week
#7
I
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Westside til I die
Posts: 56,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by MrFatbooty
Oh and as for non-Track model Z's, don't bother. The stock wheels are so heavy they screw up the damping of the shocks and the brakes are pathetic. Blah.
Oh and as for non-Track model Z's, don't bother. The stock wheels are so heavy they screw up the damping of the shocks and the brakes are pathetic. Blah.
And you could tell that just from driving it? You must have some gift that no one else does.
#9
I know! buy a S2000 but like add 200cc more displacement! :rick:
__________________
'00 Dakar Bus CRS Edition
LCD Squad #0001
'00 Dakar Bus CRS Edition
LCD Squad #0001
Originally Posted by WiLL
...I really wanna get out and shoot people.