Ekona Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 It's only gutless if you don't use it properly! Rag an S2K to 9K rpm and it's more than a match for a Zed, especially if you put it anywhere near a track. I tested an S2K before I bought the Zed, and I still bought the Zed. I drove an S2K on track after I bought the Zed, and vastly preferred it in that setting. Both great cars, whichever way you look at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ekona Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 It's only gutless if you don't use it properly! Rag an S2K to 9K rpm and it's more than a match for a Zed, especially if you put it anywhere near a track. I tested an S2K before I bought the Zed, and I still bought the Zed. I drove an S2K on track after I bought the Zed, and vastly preferred it in that setting. Both great cars, whichever way you look at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will370z Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 You forgot to say that you wouldn't have met such a frightfully nice bunch of chaps and chapesses I went through this thought process when buying my zed. Always liked the engine of the s2000 but when i took it out for a test drive and asked the salesman to try and shut the roof he nearly decapitated me. Not a car for tall people. Friend had one and never felt comfortale in it. Also felt i had to thrash it to get the most from it and didnt fancy doing that all the time. Z4 i really liked if it had one of the more powerful engines. Loved the look in the right colour, but again i couldnt fit in it as my knees were pinned into the dash. Also from the ones i looked at i didnt like the inside. For me the zed won because of 2 things. 1) i could actually fit in it 2) the noise. The salesman was absolutely right. He said "when i turn this key you will fall in love with the noise" ive not stopped smiling since. I dont think the other cars offer that but of course im totally and utterly biased. one of the added bonuses Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will370z Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 You forgot to say that you wouldn't have met such a frightfully nice bunch of chaps and chapesses I went through this thought process when buying my zed. Always liked the engine of the s2000 but when i took it out for a test drive and asked the salesman to try and shut the roof he nearly decapitated me. Not a car for tall people. Friend had one and never felt comfortale in it. Also felt i had to thrash it to get the most from it and didnt fancy doing that all the time. Z4 i really liked if it had one of the more powerful engines. Loved the look in the right colour, but again i couldnt fit in it as my knees were pinned into the dash. Also from the ones i looked at i didnt like the inside. For me the zed won because of 2 things. 1) i could actually fit in it 2) the noise. The salesman was absolutely right. He said "when i turn this key you will fall in love with the noise" ive not stopped smiling since. I dont think the other cars offer that but of course im totally and utterly biased. one of the added bonuses Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 The engine in a s2000 is sooooo gutless no Match for the 3.5 v6 in the 350z. Every car that's been mentioned has a reason not 2 buy 1 except the z. I suppose that's y I bought 1 i could give you many reasons why not to buy a zed, but i still bought 1, this isn't a which is the best car competition, its which is the most suitable the the OP. opinions are subjective whats the old saying "opinions are like arse holes; everyones got one" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 11, 2012 Share Posted January 11, 2012 The engine in a s2000 is sooooo gutless no Match for the 3.5 v6 in the 350z. Every car that's been mentioned has a reason not 2 buy 1 except the z. I suppose that's y I bought 1 i could give you many reasons why not to buy a zed, but i still bought 1, this isn't a which is the best car competition, its which is the most suitable the the OP. opinions are subjective whats the old saying "opinions are like arse holes; everyones got one" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I think we need a bot on the forum for automatic answers. "Which car is best?" - go drive them all and make your own mind up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I think we need a bot on the forum for automatic answers. "Which car is best?" - go drive them all and make your own mind up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9l3 Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 too be honest you all really swayin me to the s2k. which is very surprising but I appreciat the honesty.. by the sounds of it the s2k is a bit special where as the 350 is a nicer car to be in because the size. also sound wise I didn't think the z sounded that great also it didn't sound rubbish but the way everyone went on regarding the note of the engine I was not feeling it. in a way for a 2 litre na the s2k is a much better performer compared to the 350z needing a heavy v6 lump. also I always found v6 cars to be real thirsty compared to 4 pot or straight 6. I think after all what you lot have said I would go for the s2k aslong as I feel good in it and the way it drives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
k9l3 Posted January 12, 2012 Author Share Posted January 12, 2012 too be honest you all really swayin me to the s2k. which is very surprising but I appreciat the honesty.. by the sounds of it the s2k is a bit special where as the 350 is a nicer car to be in because the size. also sound wise I didn't think the z sounded that great also it didn't sound rubbish but the way everyone went on regarding the note of the engine I was not feeling it. in a way for a 2 litre na the s2k is a much better performer compared to the 350z needing a heavy v6 lump. also I always found v6 cars to be real thirsty compared to 4 pot or straight 6. I think after all what you lot have said I would go for the s2k aslong as I feel good in it and the way it drives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINKJ Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 350z!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WINKJ Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 350z!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds2000 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 too be honest you all really swayin me to the s2k. which is very surprising but I appreciat the honesty.. by the sounds of it the s2k is a bit special where as the 350 is a nicer car to be in because the size. also sound wise I didn't think the z sounded that great also it didn't sound rubbish but the way everyone went on regarding the note of the engine I was not feeling it. in a way for a 2 litre na the s2k is a much better performer compared to the 350z needing a heavy v6 lump. also I always found v6 cars to be real thirsty compared to 4 pot or straight 6. I think after all what you lot have said I would go for the s2k aslong as I feel good in it and the way it drives. That's why I liked this forum so much, not many blinkers amongst owners saying the Z is the best. As everyone has said, take them out for a blast. I miss my S2000 massively, having the roof down on a nice day adds a bit more to the experience and it is such a nimble beast! You'll not lose with either car. The 350 definitely has more "wow" factor to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds2000 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 too be honest you all really swayin me to the s2k. which is very surprising but I appreciat the honesty.. by the sounds of it the s2k is a bit special where as the 350 is a nicer car to be in because the size. also sound wise I didn't think the z sounded that great also it didn't sound rubbish but the way everyone went on regarding the note of the engine I was not feeling it. in a way for a 2 litre na the s2k is a much better performer compared to the 350z needing a heavy v6 lump. also I always found v6 cars to be real thirsty compared to 4 pot or straight 6. I think after all what you lot have said I would go for the s2k aslong as I feel good in it and the way it drives. That's why I liked this forum so much, not many blinkers amongst owners saying the Z is the best. As everyone has said, take them out for a blast. I miss my S2000 massively, having the roof down on a nice day adds a bit more to the experience and it is such a nimble beast! You'll not lose with either car. The 350 definitely has more "wow" factor to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docwra Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 S2K's are NOT better on fuel, I dont know why people keep saying this. My brother went to an Evo8 and found it better another mate went to a Monaro and found it much better, Im sure at 56mph and 2000rpm its good but you dont drive one at 56 anmd 200rpm. Real world I found the 350 to be somewhere between 8-10mpg better than my brothers 2K. The noise from an S2K with the airbox lid off is every bit as good as well, and there is a noticable difference between a 2K and a Zed in a straight line, with the Zed being a fair amount quicker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docwra Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 S2K's are NOT better on fuel, I dont know why people keep saying this. My brother went to an Evo8 and found it better another mate went to a Monaro and found it much better, Im sure at 56mph and 2000rpm its good but you dont drive one at 56 anmd 200rpm. Real world I found the 350 to be somewhere between 8-10mpg better than my brothers 2K. The noise from an S2K with the airbox lid off is every bit as good as well, and there is a noticable difference between a 2K and a Zed in a straight line, with the Zed being a fair amount quicker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds2000 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 My 2000 JDM S2000 was better on fuel, on the motorway at 80ish it'd be mid to high 30's and never dropped below 25mpg in town. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds2000 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 My 2000 JDM S2000 was better on fuel, on the motorway at 80ish it'd be mid to high 30's and never dropped below 25mpg in town. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I havent owned an s2000 but if you are revving it regularly to 9500rpm it must gulp fuel down like you wouldnt believe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldel Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I havent owned an s2000 but if you are revving it regularly to 9500rpm it must gulp fuel down like you wouldnt believe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds2000 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I havent owned an s2000 but if you are revving it regularly to 9500rpm it must gulp fuel down like you wouldnt believe 100%, but with spirited driving it'll still hit 30mpg and make good progress, thrash it and it drops, be boring with it and it'll get near on 40mpg. I'm not besmirching the Zed as I love it but in my experience the S2000 costs less to own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ds2000 Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 I havent owned an s2000 but if you are revving it regularly to 9500rpm it must gulp fuel down like you wouldnt believe 100%, but with spirited driving it'll still hit 30mpg and make good progress, thrash it and it drops, be boring with it and it'll get near on 40mpg. I'm not besmirching the Zed as I love it but in my experience the S2000 costs less to own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 My 2000 JDM S2000 was better on fuel, on the motorway at 80ish it'd be mid to high 30's and never dropped below 25mpg in town. same here, i also recorded all my fuel fill ups for all my cars working out my average MPG etc and the S2K was about 8 mpg better, but then my drive to work wasn't one you could drive on the limit with. £60 filled the s2k tank and on a long drive i could get 320 miles out of it. zed cost £90 to fill up and i'd only get about 400 ish miles for the same drive. straight line yes the zed has the edge with the torque, but stick it on twistie B roads and the lighter S2K brings it right back being the better handling car and a good bit lighter. but as has been said its swings and roundabouts. where one is better in some aspects its worse than others. on a long drive in the S2k by the end of 5 hours in the car with my wife i wanted to throttle her (partly as i like the roof down even in -2 weather nad she doesn't) but the same drive in the zed and we were fine. the zed is at the end of the day a GT cruiser. it eats big miles comfortably, with a good torquey engine for over taking with ease. I love my XKR it has the power that both the zed and the S2k were missing, but it lacks the feel of the zed on the road and the nimbleness that the S2k had. but then it has 2 more seats for work stuff and a far nicer intierior with sooooooo much more gadgets on it. but then i'm always fixing it where as the honda was faultless. i found the seats in the zed played havoc with my hip, but the S2000 seats were fine, but neither match the sheer sofa like comfyness of the Jag. but then the jag seat doesn't give the grip that the zed or honda seat gave. but then i'm not throwing the car around as much as i did with the other 2 because i used them for track days. there are pro's and cons to every car, things you gain and things you lose. you just need to find the one that suits you best. i had to leave the honda behind as my knee has got so bad i needed an auto and its really improved my enjoyment of driving again. but my next car i want paddle shifters to return back some of the manual feel. both are great cars in their own rights but achieve different things in different ways. you need to work out which one suits you best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtbiscuit Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 My 2000 JDM S2000 was better on fuel, on the motorway at 80ish it'd be mid to high 30's and never dropped below 25mpg in town. same here, i also recorded all my fuel fill ups for all my cars working out my average MPG etc and the S2K was about 8 mpg better, but then my drive to work wasn't one you could drive on the limit with. £60 filled the s2k tank and on a long drive i could get 320 miles out of it. zed cost £90 to fill up and i'd only get about 400 ish miles for the same drive. straight line yes the zed has the edge with the torque, but stick it on twistie B roads and the lighter S2K brings it right back being the better handling car and a good bit lighter. but as has been said its swings and roundabouts. where one is better in some aspects its worse than others. on a long drive in the S2k by the end of 5 hours in the car with my wife i wanted to throttle her (partly as i like the roof down even in -2 weather nad she doesn't) but the same drive in the zed and we were fine. the zed is at the end of the day a GT cruiser. it eats big miles comfortably, with a good torquey engine for over taking with ease. I love my XKR it has the power that both the zed and the S2k were missing, but it lacks the feel of the zed on the road and the nimbleness that the S2k had. but then it has 2 more seats for work stuff and a far nicer intierior with sooooooo much more gadgets on it. but then i'm always fixing it where as the honda was faultless. i found the seats in the zed played havoc with my hip, but the S2000 seats were fine, but neither match the sheer sofa like comfyness of the Jag. but then the jag seat doesn't give the grip that the zed or honda seat gave. but then i'm not throwing the car around as much as i did with the other 2 because i used them for track days. there are pro's and cons to every car, things you gain and things you lose. you just need to find the one that suits you best. i had to leave the honda behind as my knee has got so bad i needed an auto and its really improved my enjoyment of driving again. but my next car i want paddle shifters to return back some of the manual feel. both are great cars in their own rights but achieve different things in different ways. you need to work out which one suits you best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris`I Posted January 12, 2012 Share Posted January 12, 2012 By the sounds of all that (bar the rear seats) you should have got a 370z Rich Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.