LT1

I keep reading comparisons and they all seem to promote the Z3M or Z4M as the best roadster,
the Boxster S is even better except for that bearing problem.
Help convince me my S2k was the best choice, I love it but could I have done better? I see few Z3/4Ms or
Boxster S for sale, but dozens of S2k's. Im talking all used with comparable prices and mileage.
I mean, I have 157k '04 and have never had a problem, Im even on the same clutch, Im always told they think its brand new.

darcyw

is there always something better out there? you bet. I really like the Boxster (after they fixed the IMS issue), and the z4/3.

but is there anything better that's as reliable and relatively inexpensive to own?

​​​​​​​darcy

JonBoy

I had the Z4M coupe and loved the engine and solidity of the car. The S2000 is way more nimble and agile, has better turn in, and has better high-speed stability (Z4M understeers at low speeds, oversteers at high speeds). S2000 has a way better shifter and clutch. Z4M has a way better interior, more amenities and is way more rare. The Z4M is an order of magnitude faster in nearly every situation on the street - way quicker in a straight line and still has higher cornering limits. Z4M also has a better stability control / traction control system, in my opinion.

Different strokes for different folks. I loved the Z4M as a daily driver, compared to the S2000, but the S2000 was way better on the track. On the street, the Z4M is the better overall car by a long shot. Ultimately, for fun, the S2000 is the better car but if you drive in the real world regularly, the Z4M is hard to beat.

I'd imagine the Z4M roadster is less "solid" compared to my coupe but it's still a heck of a car. Ugly as a roadster, though.

mosesbotbol

Z4 is a gorgeous car IMO. M and late model hard top convertibles will be sought after in the future; similar to S2000's... More polished and grown up than the S2000.

Mr.E.G.

But in a world with the Cayman S...

TofuProductions

This- my neighbor has a z4M and while I'm not really a fan of german engineering, this thing is a true hoot to drive especially as a daily. What you said within this quote was pretty much spot on. Still wouldn't take one over the S just for the sheer "reliability" factor.

Spartarus

Watch that. Remember journalists don't have to own the car or live with the reality of keeping it on the road. Compare them by what you don't get from the comparable German cars... That's where the S2000 makes mileage.

With the S2000, you get a performance car that can trade blows with the best of German-engineered sports cars... AND the maintenance schedule, reliability, and durability of a Honda Civic. It's a cliche, but it's true. There aren't many cars out there like that.

The cars you mentioned do not age well. Your S is well over a decade old, and you can hop in and cross the country without a second thought. You can drive it like you hate it, and it will never stop rewarding you for that. You can fix it on the side of the road with swear words and a garden variety of cheap tools.

What do you do with that Z4M when the electrical gremlins inevitably move in? I guarantee you can't replace that entire engine wire harness for under $500 brand new.

JonBoy

Cayman S drives better but it looks worse than a Z4M, in my opinion. It's significantly lighter and you can feel that when you drive it. However, that weird bubble back end of the Cayman S is just....off. The new ones look a million times better (better than a 911, in my opinion).

I also feel that the Z4M has the better engine, overall. 8000 rpm redline in a straight six is pretty cool and it has great torque as well. I don't generally like the sound of the S54 motor (in the E46 M3), as it's quite raspy, but due to the header geometry changes on the Z4M coupe, it sounds deeper and has more of a snarl. Sounds great from inside the car, for sure.

Mike RT4

Before I bought the S2000, I was looking at Z4Ms and Porsche Boxsters, but when you factored in the running costs the Honda wins hands down. Since purchasing it this has been reinforced, as in the 12 months of ownership (and a joyful 9k miles), the costs (including a major service where I had the shims checked and adjusted by the main dealer) were peanuts compared to the same service cost on my M3 (which shares similarities with the Z4M)). Other than that, there have been no extra costs other than fuel and (rear) brake pads (the car gets hammered on track).

I personally think the S2000 is a better looking car than all bar the last of the NA Boxsters (which are more than triple the cost of the S2000 anyway), and is definitely nicer to look at than a Z4M, but appreciate that looks are subjective.

I also think the S2Ki community takes some beating, with there being an answer to any question you might have being but a few keystrokes away.

white98ls

First, this is not exactly apples to apples since a nice Z4M is $25-30k while a comparable S2k is around $20k, less if you prefer an AP1. I've driven a Z4M Roadster and loved it, but ultimately owned an S2k. Essentially the reason why is the Z4M is a lot like an S2k except it's just "more"... more performance and more performance/style, but also ~500lbs more weight, more reliability concerns, and a lot more cost - both upfront to purchase and ongoing.

To me it didn't seem worth it. I'd rather have a car that is simpler and costs far less, that I can beat to death at the track or wherever and have to do next to nothing to keep it happy. I definitely lust for a Z4M here and there, but I think an S2k is frankly just as much fun with a lot less cost and headache.