Your prior sports cars
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Virginia
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your prior sports cars
In your prior sports car life what did you own and is there anything that beats the s2k for driving experience and reliability for the price?
Anything you miss about your old ride? I'm especially curious about former european car owners like older porsche 911, bmw(3,z,etc..), boxster...
thanks,
Anything you miss about your old ride? I'm especially curious about former european car owners like older porsche 911, bmw(3,z,etc..), boxster...
thanks,
#3
I haven't had the S2000 long enough to give it a fair comparison.
My prior to cars were a 2001 Mazda Miata SE and a 2004 Corvette Convertible.
The Miata was a fine little car, but was sprung a little too softly and didn't have much power. You could go fast, but you really had to flog it. It was the British Racing Green Special Edition, and I loved the way it looked.
The Corvette was a completely different animal. It was an automatic and was a great all-around car. Plenty of luggage space with the top up or down, very comfortable on the highway, plenty of interior room. The best thing about it was the torque. There was power available any time simply by pressing on the accelerator. It only had a couple of downsides. First, there are a couple of design problems that the C5 had since the beginning. Rocking seats, leaky rear ends, and a serious issue with the column lock that many owners experienced but GM never fixed. Second...it was expensive. The car itself was expensive, then all the accessories were ridiculously overpriced (a la Harley Davidson). Also, replacing the crappy run-flat tires is a $1200+ expense.
Even with the automatic, the Vette got about the same gas mileage as the S2000...about 21 MPG in mixed driving. Amazing.
I loved both those cars and I hope I have similar experience with my S2000. It's certainly the REDDEST car I've ever owned!
My prior to cars were a 2001 Mazda Miata SE and a 2004 Corvette Convertible.
The Miata was a fine little car, but was sprung a little too softly and didn't have much power. You could go fast, but you really had to flog it. It was the British Racing Green Special Edition, and I loved the way it looked.
The Corvette was a completely different animal. It was an automatic and was a great all-around car. Plenty of luggage space with the top up or down, very comfortable on the highway, plenty of interior room. The best thing about it was the torque. There was power available any time simply by pressing on the accelerator. It only had a couple of downsides. First, there are a couple of design problems that the C5 had since the beginning. Rocking seats, leaky rear ends, and a serious issue with the column lock that many owners experienced but GM never fixed. Second...it was expensive. The car itself was expensive, then all the accessories were ridiculously overpriced (a la Harley Davidson). Also, replacing the crappy run-flat tires is a $1200+ expense.
Even with the automatic, the Vette got about the same gas mileage as the S2000...about 21 MPG in mixed driving. Amazing.
I loved both those cars and I hope I have similar experience with my S2000. It's certainly the REDDEST car I've ever owned!
#4
I used to have an Alfa Romeo GTV6. It handled GREAT, and had decent power, but it was VERY unreliable.
I currently have an '04 Z06 and a '97 Trans Am:
Both of which I have tracked. I also took my S2000 on the track once.
The Z06 is only a year old or so, but I have had no problems with it (except burning through my brakes once at a track event.) It is reported to be very reliable. Handleing, power, accelleration, braking are ALL better than the S2000. It is SUCH a blast on the track. Of course. It's a lot more expensive than the S. there are plenty of cars out there more expensive than the S that cannot lay claim to (in some cases) ANY of these qualifications. The Trans Am has almost 70k mi on it now (I bought it around 65k mi) I put in a new clutch, springs, shocks, water pump, and did some suspension upgrades and it is a decent track car. It's actally a decent highway cruiser and has some fun to drive. There was a pretty signigicant redesgn on the F-Body cars in 1998, and mine is a 1997. The Brakes are terrible, and the horsepower to weight is really not anything to write home about. It's fun to drive, but the S is WAY more fun to drive.
There is a reason I kept the S2000 when I got the Z06. I love the S2000. It's not as fast, but I don't care. There is more to the equasion than that. I just love the car. So I track the Z, and show the S (Still driving it pretty hard on the street.) I like the combination. If I could only have one, it would be a tough call between the S and the Z. The edge would probably go to the S though.
I currently have an '04 Z06 and a '97 Trans Am:
Both of which I have tracked. I also took my S2000 on the track once.
The Z06 is only a year old or so, but I have had no problems with it (except burning through my brakes once at a track event.) It is reported to be very reliable. Handleing, power, accelleration, braking are ALL better than the S2000. It is SUCH a blast on the track. Of course. It's a lot more expensive than the S. there are plenty of cars out there more expensive than the S that cannot lay claim to (in some cases) ANY of these qualifications. The Trans Am has almost 70k mi on it now (I bought it around 65k mi) I put in a new clutch, springs, shocks, water pump, and did some suspension upgrades and it is a decent track car. It's actally a decent highway cruiser and has some fun to drive. There was a pretty signigicant redesgn on the F-Body cars in 1998, and mine is a 1997. The Brakes are terrible, and the horsepower to weight is really not anything to write home about. It's fun to drive, but the S is WAY more fun to drive.
There is a reason I kept the S2000 when I got the Z06. I love the S2000. It's not as fast, but I don't care. There is more to the equasion than that. I just love the car. So I track the Z, and show the S (Still driving it pretty hard on the street.) I like the combination. If I could only have one, it would be a tough call between the S and the Z. The edge would probably go to the S though.
#5
Originally Posted by IndyDaveS2K,Dec 7 2005, 03:00 PM
The Corvette was a completely different animal. It was an automatic and was a great all-around car. Plenty of luggage space with the top up or down, very comfortable on the highway, plenty of interior room. The best thing about it was the torque. There was power available any time simply by pressing on the accelerator. It only had a couple of downsides. First, there are a couple of design problems that the C5 had since the beginning. Rocking seats, leaky rear ends, and a serious issue with the column lock that many owners experienced but GM never fixed. Second...it was expensive. The car itself was expensive, then all the accessories were ridiculously overpriced (a la Harley Davidson). Also, replacing the crappy run-flat tires is a $1200+ expense.
Of course, overpriced parts are nothing new to S2000 owners.
OE Replacement rotors from Napa are $18 ea on the Z06. More than $50 for the S2000. So, it all depends.
#6
Originally Posted by ruexp67,Dec 7 2005, 03:09 PM
I used to have an Alfa Romeo GTV6. It handled GREAT, and had decent power, but it was VERY unreliable.
I currently have an '04 Z06 and a '97 Trans Am:
Both of which I have tracked. I also took my S2000 on the track once.
The Z06 is only a year old or so, but I have had no problems with it (except burning through my brakes once at a track event.) It is reported to be very reliable. Handleing, power, accelleration, braking are ALL better than the S2000. It is SUCH a blast on the track. Of course. It's a lot more expensive than the S. there are plenty of cars out there more expensive than the S that cannot lay claim to (in some cases) ANY of these qualifications. The Trans Am has almost 70k mi on it now (I bought it around 65k mi) I put in a new clutch, springs, shocks, water pump, and did some suspension upgrades and it is a decent track car. It's actally a decent highway cruiser and has some fun to drive. There was a pretty signigicant redesgn on the F-Body cars in 1998, and mine is a 1997. The Brakes are terrible, and the horsepower to weight is really not anything to write home about. It's fun to drive, but the S is WAY more fun to drive.
There is a reason I kept the S2000 when I got the Z06. I love the S2000. It's not as fast, but I don't care. There is more to the equasion than that. I just love the car. So I track the Z, and show the S (Still driving it pretty hard on the street.) I like the combination. If I could only have one, it would be a tough call between the S and the Z. The edge would probably go to the S though.
I currently have an '04 Z06 and a '97 Trans Am:
Both of which I have tracked. I also took my S2000 on the track once.
The Z06 is only a year old or so, but I have had no problems with it (except burning through my brakes once at a track event.) It is reported to be very reliable. Handleing, power, accelleration, braking are ALL better than the S2000. It is SUCH a blast on the track. Of course. It's a lot more expensive than the S. there are plenty of cars out there more expensive than the S that cannot lay claim to (in some cases) ANY of these qualifications. The Trans Am has almost 70k mi on it now (I bought it around 65k mi) I put in a new clutch, springs, shocks, water pump, and did some suspension upgrades and it is a decent track car. It's actally a decent highway cruiser and has some fun to drive. There was a pretty signigicant redesgn on the F-Body cars in 1998, and mine is a 1997. The Brakes are terrible, and the horsepower to weight is really not anything to write home about. It's fun to drive, but the S is WAY more fun to drive.
There is a reason I kept the S2000 when I got the Z06. I love the S2000. It's not as fast, but I don't care. There is more to the equasion than that. I just love the car. So I track the Z, and show the S (Still driving it pretty hard on the street.) I like the combination. If I could only have one, it would be a tough call between the S and the Z. The edge would probably go to the S though.
I find the GTV6 and S2000 to be built with the same thinking in mind: real sports cars for the everyday driver with the state of the art engineering in its day.
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Modjeska Canyon, CA
Posts: 1,887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had a 2nd-gen Rx7 Turbo. It makes the S look like a torque monster.
I do miss the Mazda's seats. It was the most comfortable car I've ever owned. I had no problems driving it for consecutive 14 hour days.
It was also nice having all of that room under the hatch. It had enough room for all of my camping gear.
I do miss the Mazda's seats. It was the most comfortable car I've ever owned. I had no problems driving it for consecutive 14 hour days.
It was also nice having all of that room under the hatch. It had enough room for all of my camping gear.
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
I owned a 97 bmw Z3 (1.9L). It was about as comfortable, maybe a bit more room, but not great. It's level of material quality was probably worse than the S2000. For instance the plastic arm rest was particularly low rent.
It was fun enough to drive, but completely lacked any balls. It has under 140hp and it weighed about the same as the S2000. So at stop lights, any V6 accord or Maxima etc.. was able to get the jump on me. And passing on 2-lanes was a wait and see (if it will work) proposition.
I guess the Z3 was fun, but it's cost (near $30K) for it's performance was not good. But the straw that broke the camels back for me was it's utter lack of reliability. I was in the shop at least 6 times in 18 months for one thing or another having to do with electrical, some of which were never fixed. Also the condescending service dept was a shock. I was expecting to be treaded better than other brands, but was treated worse.
So I sold it after less than 2 years, and that's been 7 years ago now so I was without a sports car for 4 years. I'm a little against buying another BMW, but I think they make nice cars. However if Honda or Toyota will offer something similar to a BMW I'd most def go with the Japanese car.
It was fun enough to drive, but completely lacked any balls. It has under 140hp and it weighed about the same as the S2000. So at stop lights, any V6 accord or Maxima etc.. was able to get the jump on me. And passing on 2-lanes was a wait and see (if it will work) proposition.
I guess the Z3 was fun, but it's cost (near $30K) for it's performance was not good. But the straw that broke the camels back for me was it's utter lack of reliability. I was in the shop at least 6 times in 18 months for one thing or another having to do with electrical, some of which were never fixed. Also the condescending service dept was a shock. I was expecting to be treaded better than other brands, but was treated worse.
So I sold it after less than 2 years, and that's been 7 years ago now so I was without a sports car for 4 years. I'm a little against buying another BMW, but I think they make nice cars. However if Honda or Toyota will offer something similar to a BMW I'd most def go with the Japanese car.
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hubertus
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My first car that I would consider sporty was an '89 LX 5.0 Mustang that I bought 6 months old. The torque was fun, but everything else sucked....bad. The car was the antithesis of structural rigidity, and there was so much wind noise that it always felt like you were driving too fast, and this was when it wasn't being repaired.
Next was a '91 CRX si that I bought new. After the Mustang, I yearned for some road feel and handling, and a month away from a repair shop. The CRX turned out to be an excellent car - fun, cheap to run, and extremely reliable.
In fall of 2000, I sold the CRX, and purchased an '01 Celica GT-S. I really loved driving this car, and it taught me the beauty of 8000 RPM shifts! The chassis was extremely rigid, and the responses were excellent for a FWD. The 2500 pound weight was a bonus also.
Late in 2004, I traded the Celica for a Titan? (Yes, I know it's not a sports car, but bear with me!) At the time, I had a wife, 2-year old daughter, a Golden Retriever, and a boat to tow. I had considered the idea of keeping the Celica in addition to buying the truck, but I decided to trade it so that I could purchase my ultimate sports car sometime in the future, which did not need to double as practical transportation.
Which leads me to today. I have yet to purchase my toy, but the S2000 remains at the top of my list. The high-revving engine and rigid chassis are the main reasons why I am attracted to it. The '06 additions of VSA, passenger air bag sensing, and Laguna Blue continue to keep it on the top of my list.
Next was a '91 CRX si that I bought new. After the Mustang, I yearned for some road feel and handling, and a month away from a repair shop. The CRX turned out to be an excellent car - fun, cheap to run, and extremely reliable.
In fall of 2000, I sold the CRX, and purchased an '01 Celica GT-S. I really loved driving this car, and it taught me the beauty of 8000 RPM shifts! The chassis was extremely rigid, and the responses were excellent for a FWD. The 2500 pound weight was a bonus also.
Late in 2004, I traded the Celica for a Titan? (Yes, I know it's not a sports car, but bear with me!) At the time, I had a wife, 2-year old daughter, a Golden Retriever, and a boat to tow. I had considered the idea of keeping the Celica in addition to buying the truck, but I decided to trade it so that I could purchase my ultimate sports car sometime in the future, which did not need to double as practical transportation.
Which leads me to today. I have yet to purchase my toy, but the S2000 remains at the top of my list. The high-revving engine and rigid chassis are the main reasons why I am attracted to it. The '06 additions of VSA, passenger air bag sensing, and Laguna Blue continue to keep it on the top of my list.
#10
It could have just been my GTV6. But I had the bearing in the clutch go on me to the tune of $1200. The timing belt tensioner leaked oil and caused a timing belt failure (To the tune of about $1800 from a VERY friendly mechanic.) The lower radiator hose got eaten through by a rodent (not the cars fault of course.) Which caused some overheating problems to the tune of about $450. The hose that connects the filler neck to the gas tank cracked and dumped gasoline all over the trunk and the battery (Which was located in the trunk.) The passenger side window motor went out. (I never did get it fixed.) The brakes developed a pressure leak JUST before I finally got rid of it.
Through in the body rust that was developing in the wheel wells and I just had to get it gone. The car had about 40,000mi on it. I found out that the original owner had died and the car sat on his driveway for 8-9 years before a couple of short term owners had it before me. This could have easily been the source of my problems.
Through in the body rust that was developing in the wheel wells and I just had to get it gone. The car had about 40,000mi on it. I found out that the original owner had died and the car sat on his driveway for 8-9 years before a couple of short term owners had it before me. This could have easily been the source of my problems.